• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Wikileaks DNC leak proves primary was rigged /DNC planned to use Sanders' religion ag

Skeptic Ginger said:
Weaver's on now claiming they (DNC) spread stories and attacked Sanders' religion. Funny, I thought they only talked about it.

He's also on saying DWS is the problem. Get rid of her and move on. Unify the Party.

The goat has scaped.
Click to expand...

Personally, as an atheist but not a Sanders supporter, I think Brad Marshall's mail was inexcusable, whether they actually acted on it or not. He should be fired. Also the person who replied "Amen".
 
newyorkguy said:
Many questions about Julian Assange. Is he trying to destroy Hillary Clinton or the U.S.?
Click to expand...

I think there's a good chance Assange has chosen to do this to hurt USA the worst way possible: by getting Trump into the White House and let it self-destruct.

Clinton is just a means to an end.
 
Assange is like the people here who won't state whether they support Trump but continue to trash Hillary Clinton. In fact in many ways he's no different, he's a person of the Internet. The biggest difference is, Assange is also a hacker. The German journalist Jochen Bittner wondered why Assange never hacks Russian systems, never releases anything that would embarrass Putin. I wonder why Assange doesn't hack the RNC or Donald Trump's emails, try and embarrass them.

I think the answer to why Assange doesn't release Russian or RNC or Trump emails is pretty clear.
newyorkguy said:
...In 2010, Daniel Domscheit-Berg, one of Assange's closest Wikileaks partners, bailed out on WikiLeaks. He said in part it was because of Julian Assange's "one-dimensional confrontation with the U.S.A."
Click to expand...

Assange appears to be a man on a mission. That mission is to be, "the man who brought down the United States." If you want to damage the U.S. right now, the most obvious way to do that would be to try and get Donald Trump elected president. It looks like that's exactly what Assange is trying to do. It's even been alleged Assange got most of the hacked emails from the Russian government. Whether that's true or not I don't know, I don't think anyone does. But it is very troubling.

Yet you have Americans, who are so caught up in partisan politics that they are blind to this. Exactly what Assange is counting on. Very scary.
 
I think the question should be, "Is Assange still online?" And I think the answer is yes.
 
newyorkguy said:
Assange is like the people here who won't state whether they support Trump but continue to trash Hillary Clinton. In fact in many ways he's no different, he's a person of the Internet. The biggest difference is, Assange is also a hacker. The German journalist Jochen Bittner wondered why Assange never hacks Russian systems, never releases anything that would embarrass Putin. I wonder why Assange doesn't hack the RNC or Donald Trump's emails, try and embarrass them.

I think the answer to why Assange doesn't release Russian or RNC or Trump emails is pretty clear.


Assange appears to be a man on a mission. That mission is to be, "the man who brought down the United States." If you want to damage the U.S. right now, the most obvious way to do that would be to try and get Donald Trump elected president. It looks like that's exactly what Assange is trying to do. It's even been alleged Assange got most of the hacked emails from the Russian government. Whether that's true or not I don't know, I don't think anyone does. But it is very troubling.

Yet you have Americans, who are so caught up in partisan politics that they are blind to this. Exactly what Assange is counting on. Very scary.
Click to expand...

His motive is irrelevant if the emails are real.
 
BobTheCoward said:
His motive is irrelevant if the emails are real.
Click to expand...

His motive is irrelevant regarding the facts of what the DNC was doing and whether there was corruption, favoritism, or unwise choices; however, his motive (and Russian involvement) could be very relevant to how it plays out with the electorate. If the story really catches on that it's all part of an attempt by Russia to get Trump elected, I can see it hurting Trump as much as it hurts Clinton, and I bet the DNC would like to play up that angle in the media (assuming they can't make the story just melt away altogether.)
 
BobTheCoward said:
His motive is irrelevant if the emails are real.
Click to expand...

To make sure I understand what you are saying, your claim is that presenting only one skewed, cherry-picked, worst of the worst version of one side of the story in order to bias the message still presents an accurate version of the entire story?
 
Tony Stark said:
Donald is a complete *********** moron who has proven he has no idea what the Constitution says (he said there are 12 articles), not that he would care if he did. Hillary is a Yale Law grad that disagrees with a couple of 5-4 decisions.
Click to expand...

Don't know if it applies here, but my mother used to paly piano in a jazz trio at a strip club (no, I am not joklng) and occasionally would pass on jokes from the snappier comics. One of my favorites was from a guy who interspersed his act with songs one of which included the wonderful line: "but mother's only half a word!!!" Our asterisk censor thing sometimes reminds me of that!!!
 
Last edited:
newyorkguy said:
Many questions about Julian Assange. Is he trying to destroy Hillary Clinton or the U.S.? From a February New York Times op-ed piece by German journalist Jochen Bittner:


In 2010, Daniel Domscheit-Berg, one of Assange's closest Wikileaks partners, bailed out on WikiLeaks. He said in part it was because of Julian Assange's "one-dimensional confrontation with the U.S.A."
Click to expand...

newyorkguy said:
Assange is like the people here who won't state whether they support Trump but continue to trash Hillary Clinton. In fact in many ways he's no different, he's a person of the Internet. The biggest difference is, Assange is also a hacker. The German journalist Jochen Bittner wondered why Assange never hacks Russian systems, never releases anything that would embarrass Putin. I wonder why Assange doesn't hack the RNC or Donald Trump's emails, try and embarrass them.

I think the answer to why Assange doesn't release Russian or RNC or Trump emails is pretty clear.


Assange appears to be a man on a mission. That mission is to be, "the man who brought down the United States." If you want to damage the U.S. right now, the most obvious way to do that would be to try and get Donald Trump elected president. It looks like that's exactly what Assange is trying to do. It's even been alleged Assange got most of the hacked emails from the Russian government. Whether that's true or not I don't know, I don't think anyone does. But it is very troubling.

Yet you have Americans, who are so caught up in partisan politics that they are blind to this. Exactly what Assange is counting on. Very scary.
Click to expand...

I think there needs to be much more focus on this.

Why only the DNC, for example, and not the RNC ?? As pointed out, this is a selective release from a person with an agenda.

I'm saddened at the lack of outrage over the privacy violations. The DNC isn't the government, it's a private entity. No matter how much "fun" it might be, I can't condone this massive privacy breach. One assumes Assange public PGP key is on wikileaks because he values his privacy, just not other peoples privacy. Presumably becuase he's a hypocritical *******.

If you value your privacy and yet you're here reading these emails and endorsing this privacy breach, you too may be a hypocritical *******.
 
wareyin said:
To make sure I understand what you are saying, your claim is that presenting only one skewed, cherry-picked, worst of the worst version of one side of the story in order to bias the message still presents an accurate version of the entire story?
Click to expand...

An accurate enough version. If the email is true, it needs very little context.
 
newyorkguy said:
...Assange appears to be a man on a mission. That mission is to be, "the man who brought down the United States." If you want to damage the U.S. right now, the most obvious way to do that would be to try and get Donald Trump elected president. It looks like that's exactly what Assange is trying to do. It's even been alleged Assange got most of the hacked emails from the Russian government. Whether that's true or not I don't know, I don't think anyone does. But it is very troubling.
Click to expand...

Then there's this incident that took place over the weekend:

"Perhaps lost in the brouhaha, though, was the fact that over the weekend WikiLeaks—an organization that claims to be devoted to radical transparency—sent out an anti-Semitic tweet and then deleted it."
Click to expand...

The excuse WikiLeaks gave is laughable:

"The account then deleted both of these tweets, claiming it did so because the original tweet had 'been intentionally miscomprehended by pro-Clinton hacks and by Neo-Nazis.'"
Click to expand...
 
carlvs said:
Then there's this incident that took place over the weekend:



The excuse WikiLeaks gave is laughable:
Click to expand...

There was also the Erdogan leaks where they again they released sensitive private information of thousands of people for discernable purpose.
Yes — this “leak” actually contains spreadsheets of private, sensitive information of what appears to be every female voter in 79 out of 81 provinces in Turkey, including their home addresses and other private information, sometimes including their cellphone numbers. If these women are members of Erdogan’s ruling Justice and Development Party (known as the AKP), the dumped files also contain their Turkish citizenship ID, which increases the risk to them as the ID is used in practicing a range of basic rights and accessing services. I’ve gone through the files myself. The Istanbul file alone contains more than a million women’s private information, and there are 79 files, with most including information of many hundreds of thousands of women.
Click to expand...
 
Wrapped link in spoiler tags because there might be NSFW ads on the page, depending on where you work:

Leaked DNC Documents Show Plans To Reward Big Donors With Federal Appointments

Democratic National Committee documents recently released by WikiLeaks include spreadsheets and emails that appear to show party officials planning which donors and prominent fundraisers to provide with appointments to federal boards and commissions.
Click to expand...



I'm wondering if anyone has an opinion on the article. I know the Daily Caller has a strong bias to the right, but I don't know enough about them to know if they would just make stuff up.

Looking at the emails and spreadsheet I don't see the quid pro quo smoking gun. I imagine it would be common to ask for recommendations for minor positions from members of the DNC. I don't expect Hillary, or any candidate, to have people in mind for, say, the Migratory Bird Conservation Commission, and so would rely on the party. Is there something here that I'm missing?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom