Top DNC Staffers Leave Following WikiLeaks Email Scandal (usatoday.com)

An anonymous reader writes from a report via USA Today: Following the leak of nearly 20,000 Democratic National Committee emails and the resignation of DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, several more staffers are leaving their positions. USA Today reports Amy Dacey, the chief executive officer of the DNC, Luis Miranda, the party's communications director, and Brad Marshall, chief financial officer, are all leaving the DNC. The statement announcing the staff changes praises the outgoing aides and makes no mention of the email issue. "Thanks in part to the hard work of Amy, Luis, and Brad, the Democratic Party has adopted the most progressive platform in history, has put itself in financial position to win in November, and has begun the important work of investing in state party partnerships. I'm so grateful for their commitment to this cause, and I wish them continued success in the next chapter of their career," said Donna Brazile, the party's interim chairwoman. Some of the leaked emails from party staffers depicted officials favoring now-Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton over Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders during their primary campaign.

Comments

No chance they'll be indicted

[Anonymous Coward]

"Thanks in part to the hard work of Amy, Luis, and Brad, the Democratic Party has adopted the most progressive platform in history, has put itself in financial position to win in November, and has begun the important work of investing in state party partnerships."

You mean the money left over after they gave all the donations to Hillary's campaign, violating FEC rules?

Now they'll suffer the humiliation...

[Nova Express]

...of being forced to take high-paying jobs with the Hillary campaign, the Clinton Foundation, or being hired as big-money lobbyists for the numerous Fortune 500 companies and foreign potentates who have donated to Clinton.

What a rough fate...

Clinton Foundation

[ebonum]

The real reason to have the Clinton Foundation: Give these people USD500K a year jobs while they wait for this to blow over.

And this just in

[Okian Warrior]

And this just came in.

Apparently the Clinton foundation took in tons of donation money in return for letting the Russians get access to advanced technology.

From that article:

“The Clintons, they get their donations and speaking fees in the millions of dollars. The Russians get access to advanced US technology. The tech companies [that participated in the reset, including Cisco, Intel, Microsoft] get special access to the Russian market and workforce.

“But the American people get nothing. In fact, we get a rival — Russia — with enhanced technological capabilities. At best, that makes them a tougher competitor [in legitimate commerce],” Schweizer said.

“At worst, they get a more robust military, with technologies that we helped develop, and that can be sold to our enemies.”

Sad.

Re:And this just in

[110010001000]

Oh lets see who made those allegations:

"Peter Franz Schweizer (November 24, 1964) is an American author and right wing political consultant. He is the president of the Government Accountability Institute (GAI) and a former William J. Casey Research Fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution.[1] He is also Breitbart News Senior Editor-at-Large.[2]"

Oh and lets see what he found:

"Schweizer concedes he found no “smoking gun” evidence that any of the donors who poured cash into the Clinton coffers actually were promised, or received, any State Department favors in return."

Trump supporters are abject morons.

Not so much the email hack, but what it revealed

[dfenstrate]

.... such as a sham primary, extensive money laundering to get around contribution limits, racist commentary on various groups, condescension towards unions, and so on.

Re:Not so much the email hack, but what it reveale

[Uberbah]

He lost in absolute numbers

Because the primary was rigged. A laughable number of debates compared to 2008, and scheduled to air at times guaranteed to have few viewers. A primary schedule front-loaded with conservative southern states (most of which would never vote for Hillary in the general) to give the conservative candidate an early claim to "frontrunner" status. And that was right out in the open, before any of the DNC's outright ratfucking was revealed.

No, there was no chance. There never was

That's what Hillbots said in 2008, too. Sanders has a solid record and his positions are popular with far more voters than Hillary. Whereas Hillary's record is solid shit, and her positions are unpopular with voters. But hey, waddya know - when you start with the Mt. Everest of name recognition, have the banks/media/neocons/party bosses all lined up behind you - it is possible to beat a senator that most Americans had never heard of eight months ago!

At least Bernie was big enough to realize that however much he might personally dislike Clinton, she remains by a wide margin a better presidential candidate than Trump.

Hillbots keep saying that too, but the Dem candidate is no lesser evil, not this time. Trump attacks the Iraq war as a stupid idea; Hillary replicated it in Syria and Libya. Hillary loves the TPP, Trump does not.

And every attack that can be made against Trump can be thrown right back in Hillbot faces. He's a racist? So is she - superpredators and deporting children - to the country she helped overthrow - to "send a message to their parents". He's corrupt? Cattle futures, pay-to-play with the Clinton Foundation, Goldman Sachs speeches, and so on.

Re:Dig for the truth!

[Mashiki]

Well keep in mind that it looks like their son was at least a pro-constitutionalist as well. His father? Not so much. Khizr Khan also openly supported sharia law, and wrote several papers on how to subvert american jurisprudence and legal code to replace it was sharia as well.

Re:Too little, too late

[DarkOx]

2007/8 was politically a long time ago. A great deal of the landscape has changed even since 2012. Hillary has changed her position on pretty much every major policy point under debate this cycle since that time.

Hillary herself has made lots of missteps and been embroiled in multiple scandals since then. She has been forced to take accountable policy position as Sec of State many people in both parties disagree with, unlike being able to duck votes in the Senate. She was not especially successful at state. I think most Americans feel our foreign policy at least where the middle east is concerned and that is what is most visible to most people has been lacking. Finally I don't think she is as sharp as she used to be. She handled Sanders in the debates pretty well but he was probably a soft opponent everywhere except on certain economic issues where he was very passionate and his ideas more thoroughly developed; all said she won but without a lot of really good lines. You see that because non of the footage made it to political ads.

Frankly I don't think the Hillary of today would stand a chance against the Obama of 2008. I would actually expect it to be a blow out.

Re:Too little, too late

[tomhath]

She ran basically unopposed for NY Senator... and had to cheat to win this year

She cheated in the Senate election the same way she cheated this year. Only difference was nobody called her out that time.