NPR breaks story about DOGE

[Anonymous]

The link is not easy reading because it's a transcript of an interview rather than an article and, at least for me, because it discusses computer technology/programing stuff that may not be understandable to everybody. But it is important because of red flags that it raises like this:

"Within 15 minutes of DOGE engineers creating accounts, years, names and passwords within internal systems within DOGE, within 15 minutes of the creation of those accounts, somebody or something from Russia tried to log in with all of our credentials, meaning they had the right usernames and right passwords. And the question is, how do they get that and why?

The second question that I have is that why is it that from what Dan has seen, as well as others, because we have spoken to other individuals who are able to corroborate this, which is that some of the data is also using Starlink as a backdoor. And that's another way to get data out of internal databases within agencies. And Starlink has now direct access where information is likely, we believe is funneled directly into Russia."

[Anonymous]

NPR is a pathetic joke.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NPR is a pathetic joke.

You're a pathetic joke. This isn't about NPR.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it so difficult to give a synopsis of links you post.

Is it so difficult for you to go to the link and read a few sentences?

I don’t like blindly clicking on sites unless I have an idea what and why.

You're afraid of clicking on NPR.org?

new Poster

Jeez just stop. Common courtesy to give a short synopsis when you were posting something instead of just making people go do all the work. Not everyone has all the time in the world.

There's a whole lot more to it than that. There's a poster here who's desperately flailing trying to discredit NPR, without any genuinely sound rationale for doing so, other than "waah, NPR didn't hype the Hunter laptop non-story and didn't tell the salacious lies about the laptop that I wanted them to tell, like my wonderful Newsmax and NY Post did!"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NPR is a pathetic joke.

I think you're confusing it with Fox News, which admitted in court that it is "entertainment."

Fox News also lies. It settled a defamation lawsuit with Dominion Voting Systems for $787.5 million, which centered on false claims aired by Fox News suggesting Dominion's involvement in election fraud during the 2020 U.S. presidential election. Internal communications revealed that several Fox News hosts and executives, including Rupert Murdoch, were aware that these claims were unfounded but continued to broadcast them. Murdoch admitted under oath that some hosts "endorsed" lies about the election.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it so difficult to give a synopsis of links you post.

Is it so difficult for you to go to the link and read a few sentences?

If you think it's important for people to know something, it's in your interest to make it as easy possible for them to learn the information.

[Anonymous]

Thank you to NPR, and the few courageous investigative journalists out there.

I am going to send this to all the highly educated wealthy, anti-big-government people I know, who voted for Trump.

[Anonymous]

"Within 15 minutes of DOGE engineers creating accounts, years, names and passwords within internal systems within DOGE, within 15 minutes of the creation of those accounts, somebody or something from Russia tried to log in with all of our credentials, meaning they had the right usernames and right passwords. And the question is, how do they get that and why?

The second question that I have is that why is it that from what Dan has seen, as well as others, because we have spoken to other individuals who are able to corroborate this, which is that some of the data is also using Starlink as a backdoor. And that's another way to get data out of internal databases within agencies. And Starlink has now direct access where information is likely, we believe is funneled directly into Russia."

Holy crap. That is a MAJOR red flag.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it so difficult to give a synopsis of links you post.

Is it so difficult for you to go to the link and read a few sentences?

I don’t like blindly clicking on sites unless I have an idea what and why.

You're afraid of clicking on NPR.org?

new Poster

Jeez just stop. Common courtesy to give a short synopsis when you were posting something instead of just making people go do all the work. Not everyone has all the time in the world.

There's a whole lot more to it than that. There's a poster here who's desperately flailing trying to discredit NPR, without any genuinely sound rationale for doing so, other than "waah, NPR didn't hype the Hunter laptop non-story and didn't tell the salacious lies about the laptop that I wanted them to tell, like my wonderful Newsmax and NY Post did!"

Omg, I almost forgot about the Hunter laptop nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Thanks, OP. Just listened. The whole time I was thinking, this exactly what we were afraid was happening!

I don't understand why this makes Congress just "call for an investigation." Why isn't Congress apoplectic??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I feel like maga has succeeded when they have convinced people that NPR isn’t to be trusted. So sad.

I saw on here someone cited NPR for a story and it was all lies. I think it was about Trump is firing Hegseth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Seems that NPR is trying desperately to stay relevant. Do I believe their reporting? Heck no. They have given me no reason to trust their reporting.

Wasn’t NPR the media group that refused to report on HB’s laptop? Why should we believe them now?

Hmm. Let me guess, you believed that “they were eating the cats and dogs in Ohio.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Thanks, OP. Just listened. The whole time I was thinking, this exactly what we were afraid was happening!

I don't understand why this makes Congress just "call for an investigation." Why isn't Congress apoplectic??

Probably because they either don't understand it, or care, or Russia has something on them, too.

Disgusting. The party of law and order, my a$$.

-former R

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it so difficult to give a synopsis of links you post.

Is it so difficult for you to go to the link and read a few sentences?

I don’t like blindly clicking on sites unless I have an idea what and why.

No one cares and no they don't need to give you a synopsis.

[Anonymous]

Oh, so we're anti-doxing and pro-privacy again this week.