Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Trump should buy them, spending $500K probably won't hurt him at all.

Then he can threaten to release the info but never do, just like he did with all the Obama birther stuff his people apparently turned up.

It's a slippery slope now though. If people felt the Ashley Madison hackers had no right to do what they did they will especially feel this way about this.

But still: you know sooner or later someone is going to cough up that cash.

Whatever is on those emails apparently is worth a lot of money.

I sure hope this is not a hoax/scam.


Better have some legit shit in it. Put this debate/argument to rest.


However, copies of these e-mails will not address a repudiation argument. Unless there is a chain of custody, associated hash, bit locking, encryption, and maintained authentication mechanisms, Hillary can deny all of it. The content of the e-mail would have to reveal enough specific information so that it can be corroborated to real world activities. In other words, an e-mail says she will go to place Y and meet person 1. Then we have documented proof that this happened. But the e-mail would have to confirm information that cannot be derived from aggregation from already available information.

This is a steep steep slope of burden of proof.

Edit - Figured out a path of non-repudiation: the recipients of those e-mails. If even a single e-mail (of the bad ones) can be found on a recipient's storage (and that storage is reasonably secure/has high integrity), then she cannot repudiate the content.

Considering the amount of money (millions) Clinton's emails would be worth to media outlets and wealthy Rightwingers, this seems like a scam to sucker someone into giving up a relatively small amount of money.

It's like that wealthy Nigerian Prince who only needs $500.00 USD from you to solve his troubles and then he'll pay you back tenfold. He will, seriously.

That is if this story itself just isn't a hoax and there is no legitimate attempt to cash-grab.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3221277/Hillary-s-emails-sale-open-market-Obama-administration-didn-t-says-intelligence-official.html

No hoax

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3221277/Hillary-s-emails-sale-open-market-Obama-administration-didn-t-says-intelligence-official.html

No hoax

Dude, in the sub-headline of your very link: "Revelation is separate from debunked claims that a hacker had put Clinton's entire email collection on the market for $500,000 " ... that would be the debunked claim you made when making this thread.

As new details come out I post them, are you slow and or retarded, or do you think I intentionally try and hide stuff but then update new info coming out.

You do know a thing called "new details" right?

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
As new details come out I post them, are you slow and or retarded, or do you think I intentionally try and hide stuff but then update new info coming out.

You do know a thing called "new details" right?

I think you believe anything that confirms your biases whole heartedly, even if it comes from extremely questionable or easily debunked sources. And because of that often seem foolish and clueless.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I think you believe anything that confirms your biases whole heartedly, even if it comes from extremely questionable or easily debunked sources. And because of that often seem foolish and clueless.

Well your wrong, as new details come out I read them, so get off it.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Well your wrong, as new details come out I read them, so get off it.

Well, you don't though. You fell for the hoax completely, and to support that it wasn't a hoax you posted an article that in the very headline pointed out that what you had previously posted is a hoax. You are disingenuous and uninformed.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Well, you don't though. You fell for the hoax completely, and to support that it wasn't a hoax you posted an article that in the very headline pointed out that what you had previously posted is a hoax. You are disingenuous and uninformed.

The article is real, you are downplaying.

What is stupid about you is you can't shift your opinion, you think because I opened with one link, thats the line I have to follow.

Sorry to burst you fat bubble but I don't.

So this whole hacker/email/$500k thing is a hoax as I questioned?

Mrs. Hillary Rodham Clinton, you have now been vindicated of all allegations

Originally posted by Robtard
So this whole hacker/email/$500k thing is a hoax as I questioned?

Mrs. Hillary Rodham Clinton, you have now been vindicated of all allegations

http://images.killermovies.com/forums/user_sigs/7/1/customsig_73571_al.gif

Originally posted by Robtard
Considering the amount of money (millions) Clinton's emails would be worth to media outlets and wealthy Rightwingers, this seems like a scam to sucker someone into giving up a relatively small amount of money.

They...


They wouldn't be worth millions. Wikileaks major leaks and Snowden's leaks didn't seem to have that much value and I assure you Clinton's leaks wouldn't be anything close to as "shocking" or "revealing" as those others.

Originally posted by dadudemon
They...


They wouldn't be worth millions. Wikileaks major leaks and Snowden's leaks didn't seem to have that much value and I assure you Clinton's leaks wouldn't be anything close to as "shocking" or "revealing" as those others.

Right. This wasn't her e-mail account for super-important stuff to begin with.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3221277/Hillary-s-emails-sale-open-market-Obama-administration-didn-t-says-intelligence-official.html

No hoax Originally posted by Bardock42
Dude, in the sub-headline of your very link: "Revelation is separate from debunked claims that a hacker had put Clinton's entire email collection on the market for $500,000 " ... that would be the debunked claim you made when making this thread. Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
As new details come out I post them, are you slow and or retarded, or do you think I intentionally try and hide stuff but then update new info coming out.

You do know a thing called "new details" right? Originally posted by Bardock42
I think you believe anything that confirms your biases whole heartedly, even if it comes from extremely questionable or easily debunked sources. And because of that often seem foolish and clueless. Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Well your wrong, as new details come out I read them, so get off it. Originally posted by Bardock42
Well, you don't though. You fell for the hoax completely, and to support that it wasn't a hoax you posted an article that in the very headline pointed out that what you had previously posted is a hoax. You are disingenuous and uninformed.
You know, TI, if you'd just admitted you were wrong it would have been fine and everyone would have just moved on.