Slashdot Mirror
'The Hillary Leaks' - Wikileaks Releases 19,252 Previously Unseen DNC Emails (zerohedge.com)
Reader schwit1 writes: The state department's release of Hillary emails may be over, but that of Wikileaks is just starting. Moments ago, Julian Assange's whistleblower organization released over 19,000 emails and more than 8,000 attachments from the Democratic National Committee. This is part one of their new Hillary Leaks series, Wikileaks said in press release.:"Today, Friday 22 July 2016 at 10:30am EDT, WikiLeaks releases 19,252 emails and 8,034 attachments from the top of the US Democratic National Committee -- part one of our new Hillary Leaks series. The leaks come from the accounts of seven key figures in the DNC: Communications Director Luis Miranda (10770 emails), National Finance Director Jordon Kaplan (3797 emails), Finance Chief of Staff Scott Comer (3095 emails), Finance Director of Data & Strategic Initiatives Daniel Parrish (1472 emails), Finance Director Allen Zachary (1611 emails), Senior Advisor Andrew Wright (938 emails) and Northern California Finance Director Robert (Erik) Stowe (751 emails). The emails cover the period from January last year until 25 May this year."
The emails released Friday cover a period from January 2015 to May 2016. They purportedly come from the accounts of seven key DNC staffers: Andrew Wright, Jordon Kaplan, Scott Comer, Luis Miranda, Robert Stowe, Daniel Parrish and Allen Zachary.
A quick scan of the emails focus on Bernie Sanders and dealing with the fallout of many Democrats opposing Hillary Clinton and calling the system "rigged." Many of the emails exchanged between top DNC officials are simply the text of news articles concerning how establishment democrats can "deal" with the insurgent left-winger. Update: 07/22 17:41 GMT by M :Guccifer 2.0 has claimed responsibility for the leak.
The emails released Friday cover a period from January 2015 to May 2016. They purportedly come from the accounts of seven key DNC staffers: Andrew Wright, Jordon Kaplan, Scott Comer, Luis Miranda, Robert Stowe, Daniel Parrish and Allen Zachary.
A quick scan of the emails focus on Bernie Sanders and dealing with the fallout of many Democrats opposing Hillary Clinton and calling the system "rigged." Many of the emails exchanged between top DNC officials are simply the text of news articles concerning how establishment democrats can "deal" with the insurgent left-winger. Update: 07/22 17:41 GMT by M :Guccifer 2.0 has claimed responsibility for the leak.
When Assange previously was given front-page status on slashdot for having a cache of Hillary emails to release, I said I figured he was going to do it to help Bernie Sanders win the election. After all, if Hillary were to actually fall out somehow before November, Sanders would be the only choice the party could present. Being as every poll that ever asked voters about Sanders vs Trump showed Sanders completely wiping the floor with Trump, this strongly suggests that Assange has a favorite here.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
I was going to ask the same thing. To be a "whistleblower" organization (as described in the summary) is to call attention to illegal activities that have been suppressed. If there is no evidence of wrongdoing here, all Wikileaks is doing is violating people's privacy. While it might be interesting to read the internal e-mails of politicians, executives or celebrities, if there is nothing illegal going on then it's ultimately just voyeurism that doesn't justify distribution from a dodgily (probably illegally) obtained source.
"95% of all Slashdot
Hmm. If you could be honest with yourself for a minute you'd accept the truth that everyone in America wants it for free. The only difference is that democrats want a safety net that they can't afford, whereas Republicans simply want their roads, their military, and their Medicare and want to live tax-free, apparently paying for the programs with manna from the sky.
They haven't nominated Hillary yet. Her coronation is next week at the Democratic National Convention. Which means it's still conceptually possible that they could nominate someone else.
They won't, of course. But it's still theoretically possible. In some other universe where criminals get charged for their crimes.
You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
story explaining how she approved the sale of 20% of US uranium to Russia in return for massive bribes. Bribes she said she would not take while secretary of state, on a decision that she refused to recuse herself and department from because of the bribes, failed to disclose said bribes as she had promised before taking position, and failed to report them to the IRS meaning she had to amend her tax returns years later or be convicted of tax fraud (something you would have gone to jail for)
Not sure why you are being ignorant. She also funneled $55 million to Laurite university and got Bill $16.5 million of that taxpayer money in the process. Wonder why Trump University left the news so quickly? Its because of that story that he brought up for them mentioning his possible problem, and they aborted all news to prevent their outright illegal activity from becoming too public.
No, she is the most corrupt politician.
In some other universe where wealthy and/or powerful criminals get charged for their crimes.
FTFY
Dunno, I went through them, and the only emails I saw that looked kinda shady were between her and an apparent long time friend with a pseudonym of "yugedeal@hotmail.com" where she appeared to be orchestrating some attempt to hijack the Republican nomination by having her friend win the nomination. Apparently "Yugedeal" would spout a lot of the kinda racist, sexist, what-liberals-think-Republicans-like crap before the nomination, insulting most of the party's big wigs (leaving them in disarray) while attracting support from the grassroots, and then reveal it was all a hoax the day before the election.
Not sure what came of the plan. The last email in the thread was just a "Good luck today Don!" sent June 16, 2015. I assume from the silence since that nothing came of it.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
It's quite possible to hold a disfavourable view of Hillary Clinton without ascribing any integrity or awareness to Trump. I think her cozy relationship with Wall Street is at best an appearance of impropriety, and she should be more circumspect about such things. I also think she ran a private email server to circumvent FOIA, and I really like FOIA, so I tend to frown upon non-compliance. I also agree with Comey's assessment of her recklessness. Not everyone shares these views, but I do think most people consider them defensible positions, as opposed to most of the garbage that comes out of Trump's mouth.
What goods are you talking about?
You have an odd idea of what Democrats are trying to convince voters of especially when you compare to Republicans which are offering much of the same just in different places. Think about what it would take to enforce the retarded Muslim ban idea? The only positive for building the wall to Mexico is that it would employ a lot of people for a lot of years and cost tax payers untold billions and be foiled with a simple tunnel.
I'm unsure why you think you should have to "earn" healthcare. I'm also unsure why you think people should "earn" paying for education when it used to be free in this country. We just wanted to provide adequate funding so that it is free again or at least lower cost. Maybe you should stop listening to conservative pundits that are anything but conservative these days. The amount government expansion required to deport 11 million illegal immigrants would make creation of the DHS seem small in comparison. Republicans these days are all about expanding government reach, not reducing it like you seem to think.
The reason Bernie was/is so disruptive is that he actually wants to hold people accountable for their actions which should be something a lot of Republicans could get behind. The $15/hr minimum is obviously unattainable but the idea is that you have to increase minimum wage because it has stagnated and doesn't mean anything anymore. Certain regions could absolutely go to there but some places that would prompt massive unemployment if done all at once. Of course none of the options say to do it overnight either.
When you look at Bernie's platform as a mandate, or as a direction to go in then it is not nearly as scary. It doesn't have to happen over night but it is hard to argue that all people deserve to survive and illness we have the ability to treat. That people shouldn't have to go bankrupt because they had a heart attack especially since they were probably ensured. We have a whole new insurance industry around supplemental insurance now to cover things that used to be covered by normal insurance.
This race is really about how bad a two party system is. Trump and Bernie made massive inroads because neither party is delivering on their promises. The scary prospect is that people think governing is at all like running a business. They are very different skillsets. You can argue about Trump's ability to run a business but you can't argue that he has no experience governing and is going for the biggest governing job there is right off the bat. That would be a person skipping all the training to be an electrician and immediately working on high voltage transmission lines! You need to learn how it all works, as you gain experience you become qualified for higher and higher end projects. A person off the street isn't going to suddenly start developing AI. They are going to learn to code first, then they will learn a few other languages, then they'll be really good at math and then finally they'll be building neural nets. You can't just skip to the end.
Think wider.
The Democratic National Committee is an organization of and for the Democratic Party (aka, the voters), and should be neutral until the party members have selected their candidate. I think a lot of Sanders supporters are going to be disgusted to see how "their" party plotted and schemed to defeat their candidate, and also how "their" party stole their money and handed it to Hillary. Well, now that Bernie has ripped his mask off, I'm not so sure. But they should be pissed.
Also, did you see how the allegedly objective and neutral news organizations colluded with Hillary? I didn't think it was possible for the approval ratings of the mainstream media to get any lower, but they are working hard to shed those last few percent.
How about the soft bribery of the delegates going on? Think any of them are going to have some explaining to do after this?
See that "Preview" button?