Forum thread: TRUMP HACKED

hahahahahaha

2020-12-16 19:12

lmao

2020-12-16 19:13

xDD

2020-12-16 19:13

lmfao

2020-12-16 19:14

expected by puppet potus

2020-12-16 19:14

Imfaoooo

2020-12-16 19:14

you would think that the military would force him to make his password super strong, but no.

2020-12-16 19:16

please setup your password "maga" your password is too short, please use a longer password "maga2020" your password needs to include at least 1 capital letter and 1 special character "MAGA2020!"

2020-12-16 19:16

2 replies

Ur password is not strong enough ;)

2020-12-16 19:36

pretty much

2020-12-16 19:36

At least he changes his password frequently. Can't imagine him using MAGA2020 in 2016.

2020-12-16 19:18

2 replies

Jan 24th 2017 it was changed

2020-12-16 19:22

Apparently in 2016 it was "yourefired" "Earlier this year, Mr Gevers also claimed he and other security researchers had logged in to Mr Trump's Twitter account in 2016 using a password - "yourefired" - linked to another of his social-network accounts in a previous data breach."

2020-12-16 19:33

Next Gary Mckinnon

2020-12-16 19:21

XAXAXAXAXAXAXAXAXAXA

2020-12-16 19:23

making fun of trump with fakenews xdddddd very original dems

2020-12-16 19:25

17 replies

whats fakenews about this?

2020-12-16 19:26

13 replies

his password wasn't MAGA2020 this is shit bbc added to make Trump look stupid

2020-12-16 19:31

12 replies

prove it

2020-12-16 19:31

11 replies

the proof is on bbc not on me

2020-12-16 19:31

10 replies

What was the real password he guessed?

2020-12-16 19:34

proof is on you. bbc has provided proof. putin.

2020-12-16 19:35

1 reply

sure

2020-12-16 19:41

You claimed that the BBC story was fake news. The burden of proof for that claim is on you.

2020-12-16 19:37

6 replies

The clearest proof is that they got no piece of evidence of what's been said on this tweet. "God is fake news" "Prove it!!!!!"

2020-12-16 19:40

Also, Twitter staff debunked that bullshit

2020-12-16 19:46

I'm not a Trump fan at all, but that's factually wrong. The burden of proof is on the person for whom it is easiest to prove it. When someone says "the Loch Ness monster doesn't exist", it is up to the one who believes in it to prove that it exists, because it is simpler: he only has to show it. While the one who doesn't believe in it, if he wanted to prove its non-existence, he would have to probe the whole lake, and even with such an effort, excuses would be found.

2020-12-16 20:07

3 replies

no, dude. you haven't come close summing up the related body of theory, and to be honest the level of oversimplification is borderline offensive.

2020-12-16 22:45

2 replies

Talking about simplification when all you think is "you say you prove". Wow, what complexity in your thinking... You have a lot to learn about the scientific method and zetetism.

2020-12-17 16:19

1 reply

i think more than i say. feel free to teach, i am an eternal student.

2020-12-17 17:10