Global Village :  The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
For good-natured and mutually-respectful discussions of politics and current affairs. Soap-boxing and the promotion of extremist causes motivated by hate will not be tolerated by our moderators. 
Welcome! Log InRegister
It’s literally the exact same thing.

Quote
Malcolm Nance
In 1972, President Richard Nixon, through his proxies in the White House called “The Plumbers” and in coordination with the Committee to Reelect the President (aka CREEP), sent five men into the offices of the Democratic National Committee in the offices at the luxurious Watergate Hotel in Washington, DC. The burglars had orders to install wiretaps, break into safes, and copy files to find out exactly what opposition research the Democrats had on Nixon in the months before the election. Although he won the presidential election, by August of 1973, the political scandal of covering up the crime led to Nixon being the first president to resign in disgrace.
The 2016 DNC hack conducted forty-four years later—almost to the day—was the exact same operation. However, this time there would be no security guard to detect the intrusion, and the burglars would not be caught wearing latex gloves and planting microphones. They would copy the information in a matter of seconds, their digital fingerprints would emerge long after the break-in, and discovery would occur well after the damage had been done to Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign...

I know you’re still in denial. But the DNC hacks are crimes. They were committed by Russian hackers. And since you’re avoiding reality altogether on this, you’ve missed the actual target of the hack:

Quote

If an advocate of the Republican Party, a citizen hacktivist, or a malicious “Black Hat” hacker anarchist had perpetrated the intrusion, it would have been a much sloppier operation. Additionally, the perpetrators would likely have taken or destroyed the dossiers of every Republican Party candidate in a cyber version of a bonfire. Hacktivists love the anarchy of letting systems administrators know that they have been violated. On the other hand, “White Hat” hackers, internet security specialists who often win contracts by illegally entering systems, usually leave notes so they can be contacted and help fix security flaws. They generally let the administrators know by leaving “I told you that you were vulnerable” messages in high-value files. All of this would have been old hat for the DNC computer administrators and CrowdStrike protection analysts, but the target of this second hacking was peculiar. It ignored everything and everyone except one set of files: The opposition research folders on New York City billionaire Donald J. Trump. This 2016 intrusion could arguably be called Watergate 2.0, but unlike the original Watergate, this time the materials would be used in a political process to damaging effect.
[itunes.apple.com]

The DNC had lots of dirt on Trump. And they could have used it during the campaign. But Russia had the same dirt (theft), and they used it first. At some point you’re going to have to accept that there is no one in the world more susceptible to blackmail and extortion than Trump.

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Views Written By Posted
Roger Stone Is Done 732 WhoWeird 18-Feb-19 20:45
Re: Roger Stone Is Done 145 Audrey 18-Feb-19 21:16
Re: Roger Stone Is Done 139 Aine 18-Feb-19 21:49
Re: Roger Stone Is Done 116 WhoWeird 18-Feb-19 21:57
Re: Roger Stone Is Done 124 Aine 18-Feb-19 21:58
Re: Roger Stone Is Done 124 WhoWeird 19-Feb-19 00:17
Re: Roger Stone Is Done 119 Aine 19-Feb-19 15:42
Re: Roger Stone Is Done 114 WhoWeird 19-Feb-19 16:12
Just Shiny Objects 139 adequatedane 19-Feb-19 12:00
No evidence of collusion 131 drrayeye 19-Feb-19 17:14
Re: No evidence of collusion 116 WhoWeird 19-Feb-19 17:33
Re: No evidence of collusion 117 drrayeye 19-Feb-19 17:57
Re: No evidence of collusion 134 Aine 19-Feb-19 18:06
Re: No evidence of collusion 108 WhoWeird 19-Feb-19 18:27
Re: No evidence of collusion 114 Aine 19-Feb-19 18:30
Re: No evidence of collusion 116 WhoWeird 19-Feb-19 18:55
Re: No evidence of collusion 101 Aine 19-Feb-19 19:15
Re: No evidence of collusion 127 WhoWeird 19-Feb-19 19:32
Re: No evidence of collusion 115 Aine 19-Feb-19 19:35
Re: No evidence of collusion 136 WhoWeird 19-Feb-19 19:47
Hahahahaha 141 WhoWeird 04-Mar-19 19:39
Re: No evidence of collusion 126 adequatedane 20-Feb-19 12:18
Re: No evidence of collusion 146 Aine 20-Feb-19 12:24
Re: No evidence of collusion 123 adequatedane 20-Feb-19 23:10
Re: No evidence of collusion 157 Aine 20-Feb-19 23:22
Re: No evidence of collusion 99 adequatedane 21-Feb-19 15:19
Re: No evidence of collusion 122 Aine 21-Feb-19 15:26
Re: No evidence of collusion 118 WhoWeird 21-Feb-19 17:03
Re: No evidence of collusion 121 Warwick 21-Feb-19 17:10
Re: No evidence of collusion 121 Aine 21-Feb-19 17:12
Re: No evidence of collusion 128 WhoWeird 21-Feb-19 17:15
Re: No evidence of collusion 130 adequatedane 22-Feb-19 14:15
Re: No evidence of collusion 128 drrayeye 23-Feb-19 10:04
Re: No evidence of collusion 118 adequatedane 24-Feb-19 14:39
Re: No evidence of collusion 128 WhoWeird 24-Feb-19 18:33
Re: No evidence of collusion 118 adequatedane 25-Feb-19 08:46
Sorry dane 124 WhoWeird 20-Feb-19 12:46
No its not the same 117 adequatedane 20-Feb-19 23:11
Re: No its not the same 126 WhoWeird 20-Feb-19 23:20
Re: No its not the same 105 adequatedane 21-Feb-19 15:20
Never the same, but 129 drrayeye 20-Feb-19 21:54
Re: Never the same, but 104 adequatedane 20-Feb-19 23:31
Re: Never the same, but 74 drrayeye 21-Feb-19 06:19
Re: Just Shiny Objects 151 Warwick 19-Feb-19 17:53
Re: Just Shiny Objects 87 adequatedane 20-Feb-19 12:31
Re: Just Shiny Objects 78 Aine 20-Feb-19 12:51
Re: Just Shiny Objects 88 Warwick 20-Feb-19 16:49
Re: Just Shiny Objects 85 adequatedane 20-Feb-19 23:38
Re: Just Shiny Objects 85 Aine 20-Feb-19 23:45
Re: Just Shiny Objects 70 Warwick 21-Feb-19 21:37
Re: Roger Stone Is Done 138 Warwick 19-Feb-19 17:47
The Lulz 99 WhoWeird 19-Feb-19 23:57
Re: The Lulz 85 Aine 20-Feb-19 00:23
Re: The Lulz 94 adequatedane 20-Feb-19 12:33
Re: The Lulz 93 WhoWeird 20-Feb-19 12:54
Jangle jangle Jangle 79 adequatedane 20-Feb-19 23:32
Re: Jangle jangle Jangle 79 WhoWeird 20-Feb-19 23:37
Re: Jangle jangle Jangle 82 adequatedane 21-Feb-19 15:55
Re: Jangle jangle Jangle 93 WhoWeird 21-Feb-19 16:09
Re: Jangle jangle Jangle 85 Aine 21-Feb-19 16:42
Re: Jangle jangle Jangle 77 adequatedane 22-Feb-19 14:25
Pressure 81 Race Jackson 25-Feb-19 04:54
Neocons 73 drrayeye 25-Feb-19 05:56
Re: Pressure 84 WhoWeird 25-Feb-19 08:11
Re: Roger Stone Is Done 83 WhoWeird 21-Feb-19 21:20
OMG 80 WhoWeird 21-Feb-19 21:29
Couldn't Be Happier 93 WhoWeird 21-Feb-19 22:25
Re: Couldn't Be Happier 80 Aine 22-Feb-19 02:17
Re: Couldn't Be Happier 83 WhoWeird 22-Feb-19 02:33
If I may repeat myself 123 Jock 22-Feb-19 09:09
Jangle jangle Jangle 122 adequatedane 22-Feb-19 14:28


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.