Deranged Rhino Posted July 13, 2018 Posted July 13, 2018 Yup. Just now, Buffalo_Gal said: I had to cut down the quote as it was fairly long (sorry DR!!) I do not get the idea he was not bright. He seems quite intelligent to me. He did remind me of someone who is so smug, so full of hubris that he borders on pathological. Whether or not he is a functioning nut is open to debate (he's functioning, but is he really nuts would be the debate). As far as Lisa Page being a honeypot... ummm do men really have such low standards? The woman is unattractive. (Maybe he likes brains and personality!?) That is why the "handler" idea resonated with me. She doesn't appear at first glance (or second glance or fiftieth glance to be honest) to be the honeypot-type. No worries, I'm long winded. Always cut the quotes down when possible. No offense taken ever there. Completely agree on Strzok being pathoogical. His rage issues were clear in the hearing. When they hit him on his integrity, laziness, and judgement he lashed out. His micro-expressions were off the chart in terms of narcissistic/psychopathy (just my armchair opinion on that). I hear you on Page. And not to be that guy but have you seen Strzok's wife (who just happens to be in government herself?)... (ducks and runs) 1
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted July 13, 2018 Posted July 13, 2018 4 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Yup. No worries, I'm long winded. Always cut the quotes down when possible. No offense taken ever there. Completely agree on Strzok being pathoogical. His rage issues were clear in the hearing. When they hit him on his integrity, laziness, and judgement he lashed out. His micro-expressions were off the chart in terms of narcissistic/psychopathy (just my armchair opinion on that). I hear you on Page. And not to be that guy but have you seen Strzok's wife (who just happens to be in government herself?)... (ducks and runs) The cankles are real. Some things you just can't unsee. 1
TakeYouToTasker Posted July 13, 2018 Posted July 13, 2018 8 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said: I had to cut down the quote as it was fairly long (sorry DR!!) I do not get the idea he was not bright. He seems quite intelligent to me. He did remind me of someone who is so smug, so full of hubris that he borders on pathological. Whether or not he is a functioning nut is open to debate (he's functioning, but is he really nuts would be the debate). As far as Lisa Page being a honeypot... ummm do men really have such low standards? The woman is unattractive. (Maybe he likes brains and personality!?) That is why the "handler" idea resonated with me. She doesn't appear at first glance (or second glance or fiftieth glance to be honest) to be the honeypot-type. For someone like Strzok, opportunity was likely enough. The path of least resistance is a viable option for many men seeking sexual relationships. 2
Deranged Rhino Posted July 13, 2018 Posted July 13, 2018 Called it. That was the point of today's announcement. Why don't they want Putin and Trump to sit down together? Here's dense but important stuff on Gucifer 2.0 (who is NOT GRU): http://g-2.space/ 1
Foxx Posted July 13, 2018 Posted July 13, 2018 (edited) 22 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said: I had to cut down the quote as it was fairly long (sorry DR!!) I do not get the idea he was not bright. He seems quite intelligent to me. He did remind me of someone who is so smug, so full of hubris that he borders on pathological. Whether or not he is a functioning nut is open to debate (he's functioning, but is he really nuts would be the debate). As far as Lisa Page being a honeypot... ummm do men really have such low standards? The woman is unattractive. (Maybe he likes brains and personality!?) That is why the "handler" idea resonated with me. She doesn't appear at first glance (or second glance or fiftieth glance to be honest) to be the honeypot-type. the question is, why is the honeypot being questioned behind close doors today and Monday? 14 hours ago, Thirdborn said: James woods is a dick. always has been. Don't quote him. please were you confounded? Edited July 13, 2018 by Foxx
njbuff Posted July 13, 2018 Posted July 13, 2018 8 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Called it. That was the point of today's announcement. Why don't they want Putin and Trump to sit down together? Trump and Putin are going to plot to rig the 2020 election too.................. according to the swamp creatures and their braindead constituents. 2
CommonCents Posted July 13, 2018 Posted July 13, 2018 31 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Yup. No worries, I'm long winded. Always cut the quotes down when possible. No offense taken ever there. Completely agree on Strzok being pathoogical. His rage issues were clear in the hearing. When they hit him on his integrity, laziness, and judgement he lashed out. His micro-expressions were off the chart in terms of narcissistic/psychopathy (just my armchair opinion on that). I hear you on Page. And not to be that guy but have you seen Strzok's wife (who just happens to be in government herself?)... (ducks and runs) Poor shoes. 1
row_33 Posted July 13, 2018 Posted July 13, 2018 16 minutes ago, Commonsense said: Poor shoes. pour concrete
Thirdborn Posted July 13, 2018 Posted July 13, 2018 50 minutes ago, Foxx said: the question is, why is the honeypot being questioned behind close doors today and Monday? were you confounded? HA 1
njbuff Posted July 13, 2018 Posted July 13, 2018 1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said: Yup. No worries, I'm long winded. Always cut the quotes down when possible. No offense taken ever there. Completely agree on Strzok being pathoogical. His rage issues were clear in the hearing. When they hit him on his integrity, laziness, and judgement he lashed out. His micro-expressions were off the chart in terms of narcissistic/psychopathy (just my armchair opinion on that). I hear you on Page. And not to be that guy but have you seen Strzok's wife (who just happens to be in government herself?)... (ducks and runs) Ugly women need loving too. But.......... YIKES. Even I am too good for her. ?
Tiberius Posted July 13, 2018 Posted July 13, 2018 Quote The indictment also describes how the officials, posing as Guccifer 2.0, had “communicated with U.S. persons about the release of stolen documents,” including “regular contact with senior members of the presidential campaign of Donald J. Trump.” Guccifer 2.0 allegedly wrote messages asking how he could be of help to them and if they found “anything interesting” in the documents posted. CNN reported that prosecutors from Mueller's office and the Justice Department's National Security Division gave a grand jury indictment to a D.C. federal magistrate judge on Thursday morning. This latest Russia-related indictment comes just one day before President Trump is set to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki for their first official summit. https://www.thedailybeast.com/mueller-indicts-12-russian-officers-for-hacking-dems-in-2016?ref=home And yes this was a hack, malware was used
Deranged Rhino Posted July 13, 2018 Posted July 13, 2018 That's not hacking. That's phishing. Entirely different legal definition.
Tiberius Posted July 13, 2018 Posted July 13, 2018 2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: That's not hacking. That's phishing. Entirely different legal definition. It's not? So now malware is ok?!? Anyway: Quote We also learn from the indictments that “On or about August 15, 2016, the Conspirators, posing as Guccifer 2.0, received a request for stolen documents from a candidate for the U.S. Congress. The Conspirators responded using the Guccifer 2.0 persona and sent the candidate stolen documents related to the candidate’s opponent.” The candidate isn’t identified, but it sure will be interesting to learn who it was. This helps explain Republicans going to Moscow and lack of caring about treasonous accusation. Just wow. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2018/07/13/if-this-is-a-witch-hunt-it-sure-is-finding-a-lot-of-witches/?utm_term=.695dce91c627
Deranged Rhino Posted July 13, 2018 Posted July 13, 2018 Words and details matter. Especially when discussing the most "important political scandal" in modern time. And you just keep proving you don't care about the facts or the details because yours is a wholly political crusade devoid of patriotic principle. Gucifer 2.0 = CrowdStrike. Always has.
/dev/null Posted July 13, 2018 Posted July 13, 2018 26 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: That's not hacking. That's phishing. Entirely different legal definition. But hacking sounds so much more nefarious. Phishing just sounds like something a bunch of stoners do 1
Tiberius Posted July 13, 2018 Posted July 13, 2018 1 minute ago, /dev/null said: But hacking sounds so much more nefarious. Phishing just sounds like something a bunch of stoners do It is hacking, it's stealing it is bad, but go play and laugh, it's all good
Tiberius Posted July 13, 2018 Posted July 13, 2018 1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said: It's not hacking by definition. Play word games, whatever, your goal is clear. Quote One of those defendants, and a twelfth Russian officer, are charged with conspiring to infiltrate computers of organizations involved with administering elections, including state boards of election, secretaries of state, and companies that supply software used to administer elections. http://time.com/5338451/rod-rosenstein-russian-indictment-transcript/ Its not hacking though! Just hijacking our democracy....oh ya, I mean our republic
Deranged Rhino Posted July 13, 2018 Posted July 13, 2018 My goal has always been to find the truth, wherever it lies. You have made it clear you are only interested in truth that leads you to a partisan and preformed conclusion. That makes you weak. That makes you sad. That's why you're losing so badly. This is why you're fighting a battle that you cannot win. Hacking is not phishing. They're not synonymous in any way. Trying to say they are, or passing off the difference as unimportant, betrays your agenda, Tibs. You're bad at this. 2 1
Recommended Posts