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 811 WhoWeird 18-Feb-19 20:45
Re: Roger Stone Is Done 220 Audrey 18-Feb-19 21:16
Re: Roger Stone Is Done 190 Aine 18-Feb-19 21:49
Re: Roger Stone Is Done 173 WhoWeird 18-Feb-19 21:57
Re: Roger Stone Is Done 175 Aine 18-Feb-19 21:58
Re: Roger Stone Is Done 178 WhoWeird 19-Feb-19 00:17
Re: Roger Stone Is Done 164 Aine 19-Feb-19 15:42
Re: Roger Stone Is Done 161 WhoWeird 19-Feb-19 16:12
Just Shiny Objects 225 adequatedane 19-Feb-19 12:00
No evidence of collusion 200 drrayeye 19-Feb-19 17:14
Re: No evidence of collusion 183 WhoWeird 19-Feb-19 17:33
Re: No evidence of collusion 162 drrayeye 19-Feb-19 17:57
Re: No evidence of collusion 180 Aine 19-Feb-19 18:06
Re: No evidence of collusion 163 WhoWeird 19-Feb-19 18:27
Re: No evidence of collusion 179 Aine 19-Feb-19 18:30
Re: No evidence of collusion 157 WhoWeird 19-Feb-19 18:55
Re: No evidence of collusion 165 Aine 19-Feb-19 19:15
Re: No evidence of collusion 178 WhoWeird 19-Feb-19 19:32
Re: No evidence of collusion 178 Aine 19-Feb-19 19:35
Re: No evidence of collusion 176 WhoWeird 19-Feb-19 19:47
Hahahahaha 240 WhoWeird 04-Mar-19 19:39
Re: No evidence of collusion 164 adequatedane 20-Feb-19 12:18
Re: No evidence of collusion 187 Aine 20-Feb-19 12:24
Re: No evidence of collusion 170 adequatedane 20-Feb-19 23:10
Re: No evidence of collusion 337 Aine 20-Feb-19 23:22
Re: No evidence of collusion 223 adequatedane 21-Feb-19 15:19
Re: No evidence of collusion 186 Aine 21-Feb-19 15:26
Re: No evidence of collusion 180 WhoWeird 21-Feb-19 17:03
Re: No evidence of collusion 170 Warwick 21-Feb-19 17:10
Re: No evidence of collusion 160 Aine 21-Feb-19 17:12
Re: No evidence of collusion 175 WhoWeird 21-Feb-19 17:15
Re: No evidence of collusion 200 adequatedane 22-Feb-19 14:15
Re: No evidence of collusion 177 drrayeye 23-Feb-19 10:04
Re: No evidence of collusion 166 adequatedane 24-Feb-19 14:39
Re: No evidence of collusion 191 WhoWeird 24-Feb-19 18:33
Re: No evidence of collusion 260 adequatedane 25-Feb-19 08:46
Sorry dane 180 WhoWeird 20-Feb-19 12:46
No its not the same 163 adequatedane 20-Feb-19 23:11
Re: No its not the same 206 WhoWeird 20-Feb-19 23:20
Re: No its not the same 146 adequatedane 21-Feb-19 15:20
Never the same, but 180 drrayeye 20-Feb-19 21:54
Re: Never the same, but 155 adequatedane 20-Feb-19 23:31
Re: Never the same, but 109 drrayeye 21-Feb-19 06:19
Re: Just Shiny Objects 195 Warwick 19-Feb-19 17:53
Re: Just Shiny Objects 108 adequatedane 20-Feb-19 12:31
Re: Just Shiny Objects 103 Aine 20-Feb-19 12:51
Re: Just Shiny Objects 132 Warwick 20-Feb-19 16:49
Re: Just Shiny Objects 124 adequatedane 20-Feb-19 23:38
Re: Just Shiny Objects 116 Aine 20-Feb-19 23:45
Re: Just Shiny Objects 100 Warwick 21-Feb-19 21:37
Re: Roger Stone Is Done 188 Warwick 19-Feb-19 17:47
The Lulz 128 WhoWeird 19-Feb-19 23:57
Re: The Lulz 114 Aine 20-Feb-19 00:23
Re: The Lulz 254 adequatedane 20-Feb-19 12:33
Re: The Lulz 127 WhoWeird 20-Feb-19 12:54
Jangle jangle Jangle 104 adequatedane 20-Feb-19 23:32
Re: Jangle jangle Jangle 113 WhoWeird 20-Feb-19 23:37
Re: Jangle jangle Jangle 132 adequatedane 21-Feb-19 15:55
Re: Jangle jangle Jangle 127 WhoWeird 21-Feb-19 16:09
Re: Jangle jangle Jangle 108 Aine 21-Feb-19 16:42
Re: Jangle jangle Jangle 114 adequatedane 22-Feb-19 14:25
Pressure 113 Race Jackson 25-Feb-19 04:54
Neocons 99 drrayeye 25-Feb-19 05:56
Re: Pressure 116 WhoWeird 25-Feb-19 08:11
Re: Roger Stone Is Done 116 WhoWeird 21-Feb-19 21:20
OMG 132 WhoWeird 21-Feb-19 21:29
Couldn't Be Happier 126 WhoWeird 21-Feb-19 22:25
Re: Couldn't Be Happier 102 Aine 22-Feb-19 02:17
Re: Couldn't Be Happier 112 WhoWeird 22-Feb-19 02:33
If I may repeat myself 200 Jock 22-Feb-19 09:09
Jangle jangle Jangle 162 adequatedane 22-Feb-19 14:28


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.