DNC Email Leak

[PennySycamore]

This whole Wikileaks thing stinks to high heaven and not because of what it says about the DNC.  This may sound like conspiracy theory territory, but  this is a diary on Daily Kos which explains it better than I can. 

http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/7/24/1551715/-WikiLeaks-on-doxxing-Democratic-Party-donors-Just-to-be-clear-It-wasn-t-an-error

Basically, Vladimir Putin has been behind a lot of the resurgence of the right-wing in Europe and would love to see Trump be elected.  Check out the links in the diary.

[Alicja]

Some of you are forgetting that Sanders caucused with the Democrats for a majority of his career in the Senate and that he, like the Democratic Party, leans left on a wide variety of issues.

Political parties shouldn't operate like high school cliques. I don't care if he was a registered independent. He ran as a Democrat, and the DNC should have done their job and remained impartial until after a nominee is chosen.

Anyways, the hacker should do the RNC next. That would be entertaining.

[PennySycamore]

Here is another link to a DailyKos diary about Trump and Putin complete with some great links to articles in the Washington Post, the Atlantic as well as TalkingPointsMemo.

Trump's Putin love is beginning to look like a defining aspect of his presidential run

[RoseWilder]

1 hour ago, Alicja said:

Anyways, the hacker should do the RNC next. That would be entertaining.

 

It's being speculated that Russia is behind the hack because they want to influence the election in favor of Trump. If that's the case, they probably won't be hacking the RNC. 

Of course, I don't really know how accurate that speculation is. I've heard so many wild theories floated this election cycle that it's getting hard to sort out rumor from fact. 

[notfundy]

So Hillary has named Wasserman Schultz as honorary campaign chair and surrogate, esp in Florida. HRC Press release praised the former DNC head etc. Etc. While I don't think the DNC email hack revealed anything that surprising I do think it's exceptionally tone deaf of Clinton to have a love-fest with Wasserman Schultz. If I were a die-hard Bernie supporter I would super super pissed off.

Why do this? Not gonna help unify the party.

I am a Hillary supporter. But this "cozy up even more" announcement has made me very sad and equally angry.

Gotta get off Twitter or I'll bring my ulcer back again. #NeverTrump

Oh...and FBI is investigating the hack. It's been documented that things went thru a Russian server before the hack was complete. Wow. Joy Reid (MSNBC) said yesterday that this (Russia) would be the real story.

[Florita]

4 hours ago, Alicja said:

Anyways, the hacker should do the RNC next. That would be entertaining.

 

Agreed! Let's read how the RNC tried to stop Trump (and Cruz and Carson etc.) and promote Bush and failed miserably.

I bet they are purging their email accounts as we speak. Just in case.

[Alicja]

It's being speculated that Russia is behind the hack because they want to influence the election in favor of Trump. If that's the case, they probably won't be hacking the RNC. 

Of course, I don't really know how accurate that speculation is. I've heard so many wild theories floated this election cycle that it's getting hard to sort out rumor from fact. 

I've heard that too. Wikileaks has denied any official Russian involvement, but ya never know.

So Hillary has named Wasserman Schultz as honorary campaign chair and surrogate, esp in Florida. HRC Press release praised the former DNC head etc. Etc. While I don't think the DNC email hack revealed anything that surprising I do think it's exceptionally tone deaf of Clinton to have a love-fest with Wasserman Schultz. If I were a die-hard Bernie supporter I would super super pissed off.

Why do this? Not gonna help unify the party.

I am a Hillary supporter. But this "cozy up even more" announcement has made me very sad and equally angry.

Gotta get off Twitter or I'll bring my ulcer back again. #NeverTrump



Oh...and FBI is investigating the hack. It's been documented that things went thru a Russian server before the hack was complete. Wow. Joy Reid (MSNBC) said yesterday that this (Russia) would be the real story.

Maybe the hacker was using a proxy? Would make sense. I don't know how exactly proxies work, maybe someone with more knowledge could explain.

[iweartanktops]

On 7/24/2016 at 0:24 AM, Maggie Mae said:

Eh, it's fine if people don't want to vote for the big money.  Even if there's a chance that Trump might be a one term (or less) president. He's racist and obnoxious,  he's terrible.  But he's not that different from what ever shitty candidate the "democratic party" pushed. Vote for who you want and don't fall for scare tactics. 

 

 

 

18 hours ago, Imagine20 said:

You may not be part of one of the groups Trump explicitly targets. Being part of one, he scares the shit out of me.  

 

[bashfulpixie]

That reminds me of the poem by Martin Niemöller.  It's sad that it's so very appropriate for what we're currently facing as a country.

[RoseWilder]

I've had a few days to think about this, and I've revised my position. I originally thought Bernie Sanders supporters had a right to be upset, but I've changed my mind. 

The DNC is supposed to remain neutral in the sense that they don't deny either candidate funding, etc. The DNC fulfilled their obligations there. But being politically neutral and having a preference are two different things. The emails proved they had a preference, there is no proof anywhere that they denied Sanders funding or in any way tried to prevent his candidacy. If anything, I think the DNC was overly generous to Sanders, considering he only became a Democrat to get funding. 

It's the DNC's job to push candidates into office. And they have every right to prefer the candidate they think has a better chance of winning. Preferring that person and hoping they win is not the same as rigging things. They provided him the funds he needed, despite the fact he did no fundraising for other Democrats (a sharp contrast to all the fundraising Clinton has done for fellow Democrats.) 

And there is definitely no proof anywhere that anything was rigged. It's much ado about nothing. 

 

[Alicja]

I've had a few days to think about this, and I've revised my position. I originally thought Bernie Sanders supporters had a right to be upset, but I've changed my mind. 

The DNC is supposed to remain neutral in the sense that they don't deny either candidate funding, etc. The DNC fulfilled their obligations there. But being politically neutral and having a preference are two different things. The emails proved they had a preference, there is no proof anywhere that they denied Sanders funding or in any way tried to prevent his candidacy. If anything, I think the DNC was overly generous to Sanders, considering he only became a Democrat to get funding. 

It's the DNC's job to push candidates into office. And they have every right to prefer the candidate they think has a better chance of winning. Preferring that person and hoping they win is not the same as rigging things. They provided him the funds he needed, despite the fact he did no fundraising for other Democrats (a sharp contrast to all the fundraising Clinton has done for fellow Democrats.) 

And there is definitely no proof anywhere that anything was rigged. It's much ado about nothing. 

 

No one said the primaries were rigged.

I disagree that it's "much ado about nothing" given that the emails suggest that the DNC not only had a preference, but were actively trying to undermine his campaign (the key word here is suggest), one email from the CFO of the DNC suggesting to attack Sanders for his religion.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/07/24/here-are-the-latest-most-damaging-things-in-the-dncs-leaked-emails/

[RoseWilder]

@Alicja: I've seen Bernie Sanders supporters all over the Internet claim the primaries were rigged. And on page 3 of The Democratic National Convention thread, someone said the primaries were rigged. 

And no, the emails didn't suggest that they were actively trying to undermine the campaign. The emails showed that they discussed possibly doing that. But then they didn't. There was no proof anywhere in the emails that they actually did anything to undermine Bernie. Even the Bernie Sanders campaign acknowledges that no rigging and no interference happened.