Shryke Posted July 23, 2016 Share Posted July 23, 2016 25 minutes ago, Inigima said: I mean, that's bad enough, isn't it? The DNC isn't really supposed to have its thumb on the scale. Having an opinion is different then having a thumb on the scale. Everyone already knew the people at the DNC preferred Sanders to Clinton. There's no suggestion or evidence anyone actually did anything. Most of the things you see labelled as "shocking" or whatever are things like "DNC people planning what to do now that Sanders is done for, but in April!" or the like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DunderMifflin Posted July 23, 2016 Share Posted July 23, 2016 48 minutes ago, Inigima said: I mean, that's bad enough, isn't it? The DNC isn't really supposed to have its thumb on the scale. For me personally yes but this sort of scumbaggery just looks like business as usual politics for both parties to me, and nobody has ever seemed to care much about it. Most ppl are already in too deep with their agendas and ideologies to sincerely acknowledge any fuckery going on by the time they find out about Lord Xenu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Altherion Posted July 23, 2016 Share Posted July 23, 2016 52 minutes ago, Inigima said: I mean, that's bad enough, isn't it? The DNC isn't really supposed to have its thumb on the scale. Bad enough for what? It certainly proves what almost everybody suspected all along, but thus far there has been no evidence of any activities that call the results of any primaries or caucuses into question. That the DNC circulated anti-Sanders propaganda without attribution to itself and set traps for Sanders in the debates is unethical, but it is not illegal and I doubt it will change anyone's opinion ("unethical, but not illegal" might as well be a slogan of the Clinton campaign). Of course, if it turns out that there is evidence of genuine election fraud (e.g. of deliberately purging the party voter rolls in states with closed primaries), that would be an entirely different matter, but as it stands, this won't do much for Sanders or against Clinton. Indeed, the only emails that might stop Clinton are the unredacted, classified ones from her server. It would be very interesting if somebody posted those to Wikileaks, but of course, even if anyone has them, the time to post them with maximum impact would be mid-to-late October. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commodore Posted July 23, 2016 Share Posted July 23, 2016 this should remove any doubt that Putin has every communication from Hillary's server he is feeding the DNC emails to Wikileaks (which strangely, doesn't ever leak damaging Russian stuff!) to help Trump Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commodore Posted July 23, 2016 Share Posted July 23, 2016 also, Politico's Ken Vogel giving the DNC his articles to review before he even sends it to his editors confirms what we already know about lefty media bias don't think he's responded to the revelation yet, and I doubt he had any such "agreements" with the other side Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mexal Posted July 23, 2016 Share Posted July 23, 2016 9 minutes ago, Commodore said: this should remove any doubt that Putin has every communication from Hillary's server he is feeding the DNC emails to Wikileaks (which strangely, doesn't ever leak damaging Russian stuff!) to help Trump I didn't think any of these emails were from Hillary's server? I thought these were from top DNC people? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commodore Posted July 23, 2016 Share Posted July 23, 2016 Just now, Mexal said: I didn't think any of these emails were from Hillary's server? I thought these were from top DNC people? point being, one is just as easy to hack as the other, and he has an obvious incentive/motive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted July 23, 2016 Share Posted July 23, 2016 1 minute ago, Mexal said: I didn't think any of these emails were from Hillary's server? I thought these were from top DNC people? They are. The rest about the Russian government using Wikileaks is pretty much spot on though. Also, there's this too: Wikileaks deliberately left the personal information in the info dump. Cause of course they did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted July 23, 2016 Share Posted July 23, 2016 Just now, Commodore said: point being, one is just as easy to hack as the other, and he has an obvious incentive/motive ie - baseless insinuation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commodore Posted July 23, 2016 Share Posted July 23, 2016 2 minutes ago, Shryke said: ie - baseless insinuation baseless? how about "safe to assume" then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Altherion Posted July 23, 2016 Share Posted July 23, 2016 I think it is a plausible assumption that foreign powers have the Clinton emails. We know from previous leaks that our own agencies spy on the personal communication of foreign leaders -- even supposedly allied ones like Merkel. If our rivals from across the oceans do the same thing, they may have become aware of the Clinton server at which point considerable resources would have been devoted to hacking it (how often do you see such tasty fruit on a low branch?). Of course, there is no proof so far and there probably will not be any unless they do have the emails and decide to release them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commodore Posted July 23, 2016 Share Posted July 23, 2016 it Putin has them and thinks it will help Trump, gotta think Wikileaks will release them at some point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Altherion Posted July 23, 2016 Share Posted July 23, 2016 16 minutes ago, Commodore said: it Putin has them and thinks it will help Trump, gotta think Wikileaks will release them at some point Maybe and maybe not. Trump is unpredictable. He speaks as though he'll be friendlier to Russia than Clinton, but it could be that he's angling for precisely such a release and if they do release the emails and he's elected, they have no hold on him anymore. It might make more sense to make a deal with Clinton about some specific issue (e.g. Ukraine) as she'll still have an incentive to follow through on it even after the election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inigima Posted July 23, 2016 Share Posted July 23, 2016 Yeah storing unencrypted CC info is beyond inexcusable. Kind of par for the course for political orgs though, they don't know shit about shit. 2 hours ago, Altherion said: Bad enough for what? It certainly proves what almost everybody suspected all along, but thus far there has been no evidence of any activities that call the results of any primaries or caucuses into question. That the DNC circulated anti-Sanders propaganda without attribution to itself and set traps for Sanders in the debates is unethical, but it is not illegal and I doubt it will change anyone's opinion ("unethical, but not illegal" might as well be a slogan of the Clinton campaign). Of course, if it turns out that there is evidence of genuine election fraud (e.g. of deliberately purging the party voter rolls in states with closed primaries), that would be an entirely different matter, but as it stands, this won't do much for Sanders or against Clinton. Indeed, the only emails that might stop Clinton are the unredacted, classified ones from her server. It would be very interesting if somebody posted those to Wikileaks, but of course, even if anyone has them, the time to post them with maximum impact would be mid-to-late October. I'm not saying it's illegal -- but the DNC has no business trying to force a particular outcome. It may not be illegal, but it's a real bad look. The DNC should not be in the tank for a candidate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BloodRider Posted July 23, 2016 Share Posted July 23, 2016 8 hours ago, Inigima said: So, does anything in this DNC email leak actually matter? Reddit is in a tizzy, but that doesn't mean much. Major "real" papers or news sites don't seem to be reporting on it. The problem now is people are data mining the emails for where they quoted GOP contender's speeches about Bernie, and claiming the that was the DNC's words. I don't care for DWS, but this is really headed off into lala land. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted July 23, 2016 Share Posted July 23, 2016 19 minutes ago, Inigima said: I'm not saying it's illegal -- but the DNC has no business trying to force a particular outcome. It may not be illegal, but it's a real bad look. The DNC should not be in the tank for a candidate. Why not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Altherion Posted July 23, 2016 Share Posted July 23, 2016 It looks like the email leaks are slowly seeping into the mainstream media. The Miami Herald has an instance of a Clinton lawyer telling the DNC what to do: Quote Another, from a lawyer for the Clinton campaign, suggests a response the DNC should use to refute claims by Sanders that the Clinton campaign was improperly using a joint fundraising committee with the party to raise money that provided benefits to Clinton during the primary season. "The DNC should push back DIRECTLY at Sanders and say that what he is saying is false and harmful the the [sic] Democratic party," attorney Marc Elias wrote in a note to Miranda on May 3. Elias did not respond to a request for comment late Friday. Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/article91454287.html#storylink=cpy Let's see if this makes it to the national media before the Democratic convention is over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lancerman Posted July 23, 2016 Share Posted July 23, 2016 1 hour ago, Shryke said: ie - baseless insinuation Idk. According to the FBI director Clinton's server was less secure than a free gmail account. Hard to think they got their hands on DNC emails and not hers. Very bad look Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DunderMifflin Posted July 23, 2016 Share Posted July 23, 2016 25 minutes ago, Dickwad Poster #3784 said: Why not? Because it shouldn't be like Wrestlemania? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Altherion Posted July 23, 2016 Share Posted July 23, 2016 Here's another interesting one: it shows a Politico reporter vetting his story with the DNC. Combine that with the anti-Sanders bias and certain facts about the coverage of the election become less puzzling, at least for lesser media (I don't think they could get such an agreement with the New York Times or Washington Post). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.