Slashdot Mirror
Guccifer 2.0 Releases More DNC Documents (politico.com)
For the past several months, the hacker who calls himself "Guccifer 2.0" has been releasing documents about the Democratic National Committee. Today, he has released a new hoard of documents. Politico reports: The hacker persona Guccifer 2.0 has released a new trove of documents that allegedly reveal more information about the Democratic National Committee's finances and personal information on Democratic donors, as well as details about the DNC's network infrastructure. The cache also includes purported memos on tech initiatives from Democratic vice presidential nominee Tim Kaine's time as governor of Virginia, and some years-old missives on redistricting efforts and DNC donor outreach strategy. Most notable among Tuesday's documents may be the detailed spreadsheets allegedly about DNC fundraising efforts, including lists of DNC donors with names, addresses, emails, phone numbers and other sensitive details. Tuesday's documents regarding the DNC's information technology setup include several reports from 2010 purporting to show that the committee's network passed multiple security scans. In total, the latest dump contains more than 600 megabytes of documents. It is the first Guccifer 2.0 release to not come from the hacker's WordPress account. Instead, it was given out via a link to the small group of security experts attending [a London cybersecurity conference].
What about the large number of donors who, immediately after their hefty donations, received cushy ambassadorships?
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
The last set of documents showed that the DNC broke campaign finance laws and yet absolutely nothing was done about it.
Since any damning evidence in documents from democrats will be ignored, why do they even try? It won't make any difference.
Now, if a similar trove of documents from the RNC was dumped, you can bet the DOJ would be all over it. Under Obama's administration political considerations trump the law every time.
COUGH...
FTFY
Since when did Hillary supporters decide to bury their head in the sand over anything she does, while screaming the pepe the frog is a racist meme(never mind that they were masterfully trolled over it), and went so far as to write up hit pieces on it.
From an outsiders perspective on Clinton, she's managed to pull both a "How do you do fellow kids" and "I'm batshit insane" all in one week.
Om, nomnomnom...
What are you talking about? Every media outlet except FOX is sucking at Hillary's big toes, and even at times FOX is sucking her toes and licking them. Whether it be in the US or Canada or the bloody UK. Hell NBC deleted a segment from a broadcast last night when Bill Clinton said Hillary "Frequently fainted" sorry I mean "occasionally fainted" that of course saved them all of 1.5 seconds from their 1hr broadcast time limit, which was their excuse. Nearly every site is sucking at her toes. Even on reddit from /r/politics to /r/news to /r/worldnews is deleting anti-Hillary stories, even when they use the exact title.
Om, nomnomnom...
BS. The majority of the media is left leaning. They would love to pan the RNC.
Surprise! I've submitted this news and slashdot refuses to run it. Just one more example of blatant pro-Trump bias on slashdot.
Because your submission didn't involve, you know, hackers... because this happens to be a, you know, tech site.
Dunno who modded your post up, but they're apparently just as unable to grasp that concept as you are.
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
Shh. Don't tell the partisan hacks that. They'll get upset when you show that only 7% of the US media identifies as republican. And nearly 30% identify as democrats, which is less then 1992 when nearly 45% of the media self-identified as democrats. Or that democrats get more positive press. Or that90% of reporters in the DC area AKA beltway reporters either are declared democrats or vote democrat.
Om, nomnomnom...
Because "alt-right" is racist, because ... democrats say so?
But Hillary's "Super Predators" and "Bring them to heel" comments aren't. Her (and her husband's) use of Confederate Flags wasn't racist. "Make America Great Again" is racist, except when Bill used it for his campaign.
Here is the problem, as I see it. The most racist thing out there, is the whole DNC platform that expects black people to continue to vote DNC candidates, without so much as even pandering, simply by tossing out the race card over every little thing.
It is obvious that crying Racism is the ONLY thing left the Democrats have with respect to Hillary's campaign. And that is, by itself racist. And the black community is starting to wake up to the pure racism of low expectations that the DNC has of them.
Can't have voter ID laws, because the DNC says Black people can't figure out how to get a free voter ID. But that isn't racist.
Can't have single day voting, because DNC says Black People can't figure out how to fill out an absentee ballot or get to the polls on time. But that isn't racist.
IF you simply look at the excuses being made on behalf of black people, they are all telling black people that they are incapable of doing normal activities, simply because ... they are black.And I find that extremely distasteful and as fucking racist as anything.
Black people aren't as stupid, lazy, incapable as the DNC is making them out to be. But I am a racist for pointing out how stupid the DNC position is for these people.
NO - I am not voting for Trump, this isn't about Trump, this is about racist DNC positions on how they actually treat black people as a "group" of incapable lazy idiots, who need special treatment and help to do normal things.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Or perhaps the RNC is simply not quite as corrupt as the DNC.
It is like when the talking heads on one news program (CNN I believe) described New York City on Sunday as "Sweltering", when it was 78 Degrees out, in an attempt to make Hillary's lie about dehydration seem more legitimate. Obviously they are "pro-Trump".
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Perhaps we need some sort of affirmative action program to ensure that conservative journalists aren't blackballed like that.
Literally nobody has argued that in the history of Voter Suppression Laws. What has been argued is:
1. Minority voters are disproportionately unlikely to have an existing photo ID (say, a driver's license.)
2. Once enacted, states with Voter ID laws have a habit of erecting roadblocks to make it harder to get them if you live in areas with high minority populations. For example, closing offices that issue driver's licenses.
3. If you've never had ID, it can be - depending on your situation - difficult to meet the criteria for obtaining ID, requiring the gathering of paperwork that most people don't actually keep, and in some cases is - in practice - impossible to obtain.
There's also been at least one court case where a Voter ID law was thrown out specifically because the Republicans that created it fashioned it knowing that Voter ID laws would disproportionately impact legitimate Democratic voters. I actually heard a Republican pundit argue that they weren't being racist, because, uh, yeah blacks were disproportionately affected, but they overwhelmingly vote Democratic, and attempts to suppress their vote were based upon the fact they were Democrats, not because they were black as such.
Yeah, right.
You're basically making stuff up in order to justify the "But Democrats are the TRUE racists" spin. Have you considered listening to what the big bad Democrats are saying, rather than inventing absurd caricatures? You'll look less ridiculous.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Have you considered listening to what the big bad Democrats are saying, rather than inventing absurd caricatures? You'll look less ridiculous.
With Black Panthers, Jeremiah Wright, Louis Farrakhan, Bill Ayers, Al Sharpton, etc. on the Democrat side it's trivial to find plenty of racist bullshit over there. They're as deplorable as David Duke, yet I don't see Hillary getting all upset about them supporting her.
Do you have ESP?
Hillary lies about what she said. Then she lies about telling lies. And then lies again.
Or perhaps she forgets what she said, after all the brain trauma she's experienced (and used as an excuse for not remembering critical briefings).
AND I guess you didn't see the part where I am not defending Trump. You're defending Hillary is amusing, when it is clear that she is every bit as bad as Trump is, and yet you think Trump is worse.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Have you considered listening to what the big bad Democrats are saying,
Yes, I have. They are liars and cheaters, and I don't believe anything they say, unless it is proven true. Same for Republicans.
1. Minority voters are disproportionately unlikely to have an existing photo ID (say, a driver's license.)
This is fucking racist. There is absolutely no evidence that this exists. And that is not the argument when "free government issued ID" is included in the Voter ID laws. There is NO ability loss just because skin color. The fact that you're making excuses as to why skin color actually matters in getting a photo ID (often Free, low cost), when so many other government services and purchasing things like alcohol, opening a bank account, getting welfare, having a job ... all requires a photo ID. You're basically saying that skin color matters in ABILITY (and without proof, I might add) .. which is patently racist at face value. You are so blinded you can't even see how your view of Race is remarkably ... sad.
2. Once enacted, states with Voter ID laws have a habit of erecting roadblocks to make it harder to get them if you live in areas with high minority populations. For example, closing offices that issue driver's licenses.
Strawman and slippery slope fallacy. And Racist. You're making the case that Government is racist (I wouldn't disagree), is an excuse to continue racism in other forms. And You have no facts to actually back up this claim, because there are no Voter ID laws that are actually valid, since "black people are not capable of getting IDs to vote" (See racist point #1)
3. If you've never had ID, it can be - depending on your situation - difficult to meet the criteria for obtaining ID, requiring the gathering of paperwork that most people don't actually keep, and in some cases is - in practice - impossible to obtain.
Bullshit. And fucking Racist. It is so easy to get Voter approved ID, that Illegal immigrants without any form of ID can get Driver's Licenses in many many states. You're saying that a Hispanic person ("undocumented worker") is more capable of getting ID than a black person, do you realize how fucking racist that is?
The fact is, you're making excuses for people based solely upon the color of their skin, and don't even realize how fucking racist that actually comes across when someone actually questions your motivations. Yes, I believe you're unintentionally racist because you think your big heart excuses your racism, because of intentions. Real racism isn't intentional, it is white guilt masquerade of low expectations.
You see, I see black people as FULLY capable of doing anything and everything a "white" person can and does do. Without exception or excuse as to why they don't. Yes, that puts me in a rare situation where I can see the Racism of white guilt throughout the DNC, that perpetuates the myth that black people need white people to help them, because they aren't white.
They don't need our help, they are fully capable.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
1. Minority voters are disproportionately unlikely to have an existing photo ID (say, a driver's license.)
2. Once enacted, states with Voter ID laws have a habit of erecting roadblocks to make it harder to get them if you live in areas with high minority populations. For example, closing offices that issue driver's licenses.
3. If you've never had ID, it can be - depending on your situation - difficult to meet the criteria for obtaining ID, requiring the gathering of paperwork that most people don't actually keep, and in some cases is - in practice - impossible to obtain.
Really? Just going to say it, people who are against voter ID are insane, in the worst case I'd call you anti-democratic. Even us people in "liberal Canada" and those "ultra liberal" people in Norway, Germany and Denmark have mandatory requirements for voter ID. FYI, voter ID doesn't mean picture ID either. So stop pulling bullshit out of your ass. Seriously, get your fucking shit in order and stop blocking it. If you don't even have two items listed in the accepted section that we use in Canada, you don't fucking exist, and know zero people. Since you can file for an affirmation under oath from a friend. Voter ID isn't racist, it's fundamental to a secure democracy. Hell you can't get really can't government benefits of in the US without some form of ID.
You're basically pro-voter fraud as long as you keep pushing this BS. There are multiple cases of it happening.
Om, nomnomnom...
> Add to this the suspicion that the Russians are trying to game our political system by hacking and leaking and it all becomes a morass.
The way to minimize this problem would be to not be corrupt scumbags trying to manipulate an election.
That's probably because education makes one less conservative in general, and most reporters are well-educated.
If you have a good education, you are less likely to believe climate change is a scientific conspiracy, or that the world is 6k years old, for example.
It'd be really good if the partisan hacks grew up at one point and realize that's not actually true. Some of the most ignorant people I've ever met were very well educated and claimed they were worldly. I'm sure you're going but, but that's just your viewpoint! Really, ask yourself how many well educated people you know who are completely ignorant on the basic things that your average high-school or tradesman knows off the top of their head. You can also read this if you're bored.
And due to your critical thinking skills, you learn to actually check the Bible to see if homosexuality is condemned more often than greed & gluttony rather than just accept a pastor's weighting.
Then again, the left(in general) has a serious problem with those and "social justice" don't they? If you have to retreat to your safe spaces every time someone says something that's contrary to your worldview and you need to ban speech in order to push your point of view, perhaps they need to get their shit together like conservatives did and get rid of the extremists. Oh, I'm sure you're going but-hur-dur conservatives never did that. And here's that fancy reminder that they did, right through the 90's and 00's. The left on the otherhand decided to embrace people like Hillary, Merkel, and so on who are pushing authoritarian agendas, wanting to ban things on the internet that have viewpoints contrary to their opinions. Remember it was Hillary and Tipper Gore that wanted to ban "rap music" and "video games" not people on the right. Much like it is today with social media, and them banning conservatives and other people who have view points contrary to what those platforms consider acceptable. It's those same people on the left that are pushing for no-platform policies, and claiming that men can't talk about reproductive rights in any form.
Om, nomnomnom...
She apologized because she got caught, not because she didn't mean it. "basket of deplorables"wasn't an accident. She didn't apologize for calling 1/2 of Trumps supporters all those "phobic" names, which means she apologized for the word choice, not how she actually feels.
It is like liberals who claim to hate Misogyny, while laughing at Ann Coulter being called a CUNT 37 times during a roast for someone else. If I actually used that word, and called Hillary a "fucking cunt", every liberal would come unglued and I would instantly be labeled misogynist.
And again, you missed the point where I am not defending Trump at all. I'm not voting for him, so his lies aren't any better than Clinton's. You should go back and read through this thread, I actually made the case against pointing to bad behavior as justification / excuse for bad behavior being quite childish.
I don't find Trumps lies any less or more than Clinton's. They are more or less the same in my book, which is why NEITHER of them should be president. But keep defending the indefensible all you want.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
I'm sure you can find such a citation on Breitbart ;-)
In 2008, Hillary did imply that white, working class voters wouldn't vote for Obama, making her the safer nominee. And that's pretty nasty, but at least it was basically true - they mostly didn't vote for him. She never raised the birther issue - in fact, I don't think that came up until after Obama was actually elected. Trump didn't raise it first either, but he rode it well beyond its lifetime even as a useful lie - to the point that even now he can't even disavow it for fear of having to acknowledge what a blatantly opportunistic panderer to racists he was when he was talking about it back then.
Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
I'll take a stab at this. Since never. You've formed a false equivalence in your head. Anti-Trump protests != fervent Hillary Clinton supporters. At least not always. I realize that the choice SEEMS binary because of our flawed electoral system, but it's not. People can be extremely opposed to Donald Trump's message and yet still be extremely opposed to Hillary Clinton's practices. They may end up voting in a binary way, but please stop with this "us vs them" mentality. It does everyone, including you and the side you support, a disservice.
FYI: Not a US citizen, can't vote in the US, don't live in the US. Your basic idea on false equivalence falls flat on it's face in just that. Hillary just pulled a Romney with the "binders full of women" on her deplorables(and alt-right stuff) remark. And just pulled a Bush 1 on her "pepe the frog is racist" crap. The fact that hardcore democrats fall in line with this is no different then either case as to why they weren't elected, or elected for a second term. And considering the number of articles from the press on the "alt-right" BS, it seems that not only is the press pulling an "all in" but many of her hardcore supporters are. All the while, they just pushed those who lean slightly democrat, or are independents right into the Trump camp and don't even realize it. In fact they're doubling down on it.
Hell the Clinton camp came out and re-affirmed Hillary's deplorables comment after she said well maybe it wasn't a good idea.
Om, nomnomnom...
Politifact is biased, it's owned and operated by a newspaper(Tampa Bay Times), that is not only in the tank for Hillary, but openly endorsed her. That means it's a partisan organization, and not independent. They much like snopes will turn around and claim something is half-true, or not true at all when it's expedient to do so because it doesn't fit their agenda. Seriously, if you can't see this you're simply unwilling to question something because it fits your own agenda. Especially if someone like me who is a political outsider and non-US citizen can find the facts that are contrary in many of their cases.
Personally, I still like her "under sniper fire" BS...while she was receiving a bouquet of flowers.
Om, nomnomnom...
Yes and no. The maximum salary for an ambassador is under $200k, so a wealthy donor certainly isn't in it for the money. In fact they usually end up spending far more than that out of their own pockets to keep up appearances.
It's surprising how this was modded up to 3 or 4, then down to flamebait. Particularly surprising for a post that is entirely factual.
It strikes me that there's a group of people who are finding posts like this that make Hillary look bad and gang up on them. Really weird behavior. It's slashdot, not the front page of the NYT or something.
Do you have ESP?
I was actually saying the (racist) POLICIES supported by the Democrats are racist, because they basically are saying to the entire black community "You can't do it because of your skin color, and we will help you". Every time they pander to the Black community about how aweful the government is, police are, white people are, and that they are the ONLY ones who can help. And, they use the same "government" that they claim is racist on one hand (Police, Voter ID, ...) to provide them with special treatment because ... they're black.
If you think about it for half a second, beyond the complete hypocrisy of marketing Racist Government will fix racist government, it is actually fucking insulting to all black people because it is so fucking racist.
I've asked a lot of my black friends if they think that they are helpless folks who need help from "rich white people" like the Clintons or if the feel any sort of rage at the notion being propagated that they can't do things like white people because they are black. When they realize what I am saying about the DNC, they really do become pissed off, but the ingrained nature of the whole "Race card" thing is really hard to overcome.
There is a huge racist culture of dependency built into the whole DNC propaganda designed to keep the black people dependent on the DNC. Having a 85-98% voting block is a nice cushion for otherwise close elections. IF the Black community ever realized how much power they have given up by voting DNC as a lock step block for the past 50 years, the DNC is dead.
AND you can see it in this race, where the only thing Clinton can actually run on are the Deplorable Phobic people (ie. racists)
No this isn't a defense of Trump. This is a rant against Hillary and the DNC. Vote for Liberty, vote Gary Johnson.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
If you don't want black people to be coddled as you say, then stop coddling them with "you can't do it without white people's help" attitude.
Don't take my word for it, http://www.cbsnews.com/news/li...
My viewpoint isn't based on MY race, it is based on what actually is. I have no doubt there are racists, I have given plenty of examples of racism via "low expectations" logic presented by liberals in defense of their own racist policies.
Oddly enough, they are almost all more liberal states.
You're actually making my point. ;) Black people (and minorities) need help because they are black (or other minority) , so liberals help them with their policies. I happen to live in one of those states, and the reasoning given for these laws is patently racist (unintentional as it may be) "Minorities can't do normal things because they are minorities.
As for voter fraud, you can't substantiate that which you cannot measure. We can't measure fraud, because we can't check for it. Because to check for fraud, implies racism because .. black people (and minorities) need all the help they can get to vote. Never mind that any illegal vote is disenfranchises all the other votes. ;)
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Because that's wingnut dumbfuckery:
1) There are only two political appointments at the IRS, and the chief was a Bush appointee
2) The only group to be denied tax-exempt status was a liberal one
Now, this is where the chicken-fuckers whine that more conservative groups were investigated than liberal ones - but no shit, Sherlock, that's because the explosion in groups after Citizen United was entirely conservative. Unions didn't have billions to suddenly throw at front groups, that's the Koch's and the Sheldon Adelson's. And unions are of course invested in the other right wing party - the Democrats.
It's not like there aren't legit issues for right-wingers to complain about - Obama signing the NDAA, letting the banks commit the greatest theft in the history of the human race, persecuting more whistleblowers than all previous presidents combined times two - but that would require you to be honest for five seconds.
And we can't have that, can we?