Slashdot Mirror
WikiLeaks Posts 2,000 More Emails From John Podesta (cnn.com)
WikiLeaks has released an additional 2,000 emails from Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman, John Podesta -- the second leak in four days. The first leak contained thousands of emails from Podesta, including apparent excerpts from Ms Clinton's paid, closed-door speeches to Wall Street executives after leaving her position as Secretary of State. CNN reports: The emails appear to be mostly from 2015, covering a litany of policy and strategy discussions between Clinton staffers on how to handle issues of the day and the press, including the release of the book "Clinton Cash" alleging nefarious activity by the Clinton Foundation. Another email has long-time Clinton aide Doug Band referring to Chelsea Clinton as a "spoiled brat." Doug Band emailed Podesta and longtime Hillary Clinton aide Cheryl Mills about a damning story about his consulting company, Teneo, by lashing out at Chelsea Clinton. "I don't deserve this from her and deserve a tad more respect or at least a direct dialogue for me to explain these things," Band wrote. "She is acting like a spoiled brat kid who has nothing else to do but create issues to justify what she's doing because she, as she has said, hasn't found her way and has a lack of focus in her life." The emails also revealed that Clinton wanted to respond more forcefully to "Clinton Cash," the 2015 book that looked to connect Clinton Foundation actions and decisions made by Hillary Clinton's State Department. According to an email from another close aide, Huma Abedin, Clinton wanted to tape a straight-to-camera video responding to the allegations. Clinton campaign responded to the release by slamming the Trump campaign for "cheering on a release today engineered by Vladimir Putin," after Trump adviser Jason Miller tweeted a link to the document page with the phrase "And here...we...go."
Assange's plan to sink Clinton's campaign a month before elections seems to have been preempted by Trump's meltdown.
So I guess we Assange will have to release 2,000 emails every two or three days to keep this going until the election. Is Slashdot going to run one of these stories every two days?
I didn't think the news could reach this level of meta-irrelevance!
Deny Deny Deny, Distract, Distract, Distract. Sorry folks, but if you are just now waking up you may want to go back to sleep. Politics is full of criminals and criminal actions, each trying to cover up for each other. The media has been in on the scam, as has been Department heads in charge of prosecuting wrong doing.
It's going to take me a while to read through this lot, I'm not done with the last dump. You can bet your ass the Media won't bother with this, because 11 years ago Trump said the P word. For the people focusing on that instead of actual political corruption, you deserve what is planned by the Left.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
I would probably be a spoiled brat too if I had been raised by parents who taught me that political power is the only thing that matters, and that it can buy you out of any moral responsibility.
It probably also wouldn't help if everything in my life were just handed to me because of my parents' political clout, without me ever having to actually earn anything on my own or even having get a real job that wasn't just handed to me on a silver platter.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
As soon as President Hillary Clinton is in office Assange will be a dead man. The ecuadorian embassy will be stormed or destroyed. Any opposition by ecuador will be silenced by military force. Wikileaks will be shut down and anyone who has donated money will be rounded up and punished. And that will be the end of it.
Why? It's not like anything on Wikileaks has been more than a nuisance to her so far. And storming a foreign embassy in another country would do more harm to her than anything Wikileaks has done thus far. However it wouldn't surprise me to hear that Mr. Assange is eventually found dead from suicide, or choked on his dinner.
Hillary's husband can rape as many women as he wants with Hillary attacking the victims and the cat ladies would continue to vote for her.
When her "good friend" Trump met with Bill Clinton, THEN he announced he was going to run, I said, ok, it's over. I started to prepare myself for her to be president (yuck!). Trump was only in this to knock out any other Republican, using his "celebrity" status, and, it worked. He got all the attention, and the others just died on the vine. Now, it won't matter if you caught Hillary on HD video, with a gun in her hand, murdering a small kid in a wheelchair, then laughing because the media would cover it up. Between the media, and the amount of illegal votes that Hillary will receive, she'd have to DROP DEAD before being sworn in, to not win the election. She's been appointed, and the elections don't really matter...their corporate masters are the ones who appoint them. The general election is nothing but a farce. And why shouldn't it be? The "public" pays more attention to the TMZ types, sports types than they do politicians, who, have a greater impact on our lives than anything else. We don't live in a democratically elected republic anymore. It's more akin to what Russia/China have, than anything else.
Proof? I'm still waiting for the explanation as to how the hacks and leaks have been tied to the Russians. To date, this is all still conjecture and/or assertion without any credible presentation of evidence to back it up. Until I see it, I'll just [safely] assume this is an act of desperation by team Clinton to try to tie Trump to the Ruskies. Pathetic, weak diversion.
sig: sauer
is the press office of the KGB. Only releases information that is useful to russia.
If America didn't criminalize transparency and persecute whistleblowers, then the Russians wouldn't have a monopoly on the flow of information.
Assange has made it a point to dump material for Journalists to report on. Wikileaks my occasionally provide some commentary, but that is not the service they want and not the service they claim to provide.
The real issue is that we have a massive media monopoly in the US. Journalism has died and entertainment took it's place. IMHO, the US DOJ should start breaking up the media monopolies. We have laws for that.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Maybe you should blame your party's leadership for their own actions instead of the people who are revealing their actions.
How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
Well, he can't live in his Ecuadorian mother's basement forever.
You are welcome on my lawn.
I wouldn't be surprised if the Russians were helping make these leaks, whether by breaking into the computers, connecting the data thieves with leaking organizations, bankrolling those organizations, or whatever.
But even if they did all those things, the real questions are (a) is the content true, and (b) if it is true, why do we need the Russians to reveal it?
Julian Assange's October Surprise. Hillary will have to drop out now that an email has been leaked from someone calling her daughter a 'spoiled brat".
The American People must not stand for this.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Wait, Snowden — hiding in Russia is a hero for his exposes, but Assange — hiding in London — is a "KGB agent" for his?..
The only known instance of an American politician covertly seeking Russian help in exchange for favorable policy changes is that of Ted Kennedy (struggling against Ronald Reagan) — the Democratic "lion" and otherwise a hero of everything Progressive.
Secretary Clinton lied yesterday, when she claimed, Trump is the first to be accused of collaborating with Russia. And, while accusations against Trump are completely unsubstantiated, those against Kennedy are backed by the KGB's archives...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
If anything He's been helpful.
Don't make the mistake of assuming the Slashdot echo chamber is representative of the general voting public. (The people that remain here lean nutbag-libertarian) The past few leaks paint her in a very favorable light for to business republicans - The exact demographic that's been Alienated by Trump.
Free trade? Open borders? They love that stuff. This last batch is basically a bunch of business emails. They completely lack any scandal-quality bombs that would make a huge election difference.
He's also helping drive home the narrative that links Trump and the Alt-right to Russia's alternate channel political meddling that's been going around the globe.
At this point I'd be more likely to call Assange a Clinton plant.
She's got Goldman Sachs and most of corporate America paying her. She's outspending Trump by a ridiculous amount and it's not making a difference. Trump has one thing and one thing only going for him. He's not Hilliary Clinton, and for nearly half of American voters that's all he needs.
Hearing the media, progressives, and phony right career politicians claim doom and gloom for Trump is a narrative that benefits the left. It's obvious why they push the narrative, but I trust them with that as much as I trust them not to try and tag team Trump in debates. The left is so sure they won the USA they are playing sloppy. Remember Brexit was going to be a blowout too, and all the elites wanted to remain in the EU. I seem to remember the people of the UK getting the result that the majority wanted though, and not what the establishment "predicted".
Virtually everything you hear from the media in the US is contrived to manipulate Hillary into office. I have studied Philosophy, Rhetoric, Logic, and the necessary History, Psychology, Math, etc.. to make sense of the world. I can spot the crap from miles away, but this election requires very little insight. The Trump audio was released the same day as Wikileaks dumps. Would you like to bet money that they get another paid spokesperson to claim Trump touched her "no-no" place to distract from this one? Today or tomorrow you will see another contrived claim and even more hysterical phony outrage from people.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
During the Republican debates, Trump admitted* to bribing just about every politician on the stage. Is a pimp better than a ho?
If he's the answer to corruption, then what's the question?
Almost all politicians are sleazebags. We just happen to be seeing the dirty laundry this time due to the hacking. The honest ones get steamrolled by slimers because voters are easily duped, inattentive, and forget history.
* More like bragging
Table-ized A.I.
Yeah, sure, with the republican and democratic party candidates acting like complete and utter idiots I'm sure this presidential election see a record of 0 electoral votes for anyone else. We are talking about an electorate that re-elected George W. Bush here.
Reality has a well known liberal bias!
... because it revealed things that truly matter to the freedom of the people of the US and the world. And yes, even because in doing so it put some people's lives in danger for what it and its supporters consider to be a good cause. Not everyone agrees to the latter, but at least the debate about what was right and/or wrong fundamentally mattered to the citizens of this world and will continue to matter for decades to come.
Nowadays, Wikileaks has degraded itself to being a mere tool in Assange's personal revenge vendetta against Hillary Clinton. He doesn't care about right or wrong (anymore).. All that he wants these days is to damage his personal enemy by any means possible and if achieving that implies potentially handing over the US nuclear arsenal and its economic power - and therefor the entire world - to a raging lunatic, then apparently so be it.
Now, if these leaks there would actually reveal a substantiated serious accusation... But no...The fact that Wikileaks now thinks that it must inform the world of the galactically shocking fact that someone finds Chelsea a spoiled brat says more about Assange's character and insignificance than it says about the Clintons..He used to get media attention by doing things that mattered. It seems that he as run out of such things, but can't accept that he too doesn't matter anymore and the media therefore moved on to other hunting grounds..
I'm no fan of Trump, but even if I were one, I would still hold the same opinion of what Assange is doing. Who wants to be president because someone considers the daughter of one's opponent to be a spoiled brat?
Linux user since early January 1992.
tie Trump to the Ruskies.
I wonder where that idea came from? Perhaps someone who's last name rhymes with dump?
CHECK THIS, THE MOST SHOCKING "JON PO" EMAIL!!!
Proof that this email thing has been going on for years.
Getting Down and Dirty with "John Po".
<blink>down the rabbit hole</blink>
But it's Russia! And they hacked the DNC leaking all the info on how the Dems colluded to fuck Bernie over! Oh the horror!
I can't wait to see how his regular fan boyz are going to rationalise this.
That would be such a good argument if Trump hadn't been fat shaming women, telling people to go hunt down porn and talking about a newswoman bleeding out of her "whereever" in just the last few weeks.
Unfortunately for your argument, Trump's behavior has made it incredibly clear that he has not changed at all, despite his protests to the contrary.
Apropos of nothing, how does a recording made 11 years ago show that he hasn't changed?
The media is basically taking marching orders from the Clinton Campaign.
https://theintercept.com/2016/...
Its going to be on this, and no none of the below are going to break it.
The media is one of the strongest weapons in showing the world the devastating effects of corruption and shining a light on those who would use their entrusted power for personal gain. An independent and free media is a cornerstone of democracy and a crucial component of a healthy governance system.
Clinton has corrupted this and turned it into a propaganda arm for her campaign.
ABC,NBC, CBS,CNN, NY Times, Bloomberg,Vox, Huffington Post , People , New Yorker, Vice , Politico taking assignments from her campaign.
This should scare the hell out of the american people if they know their history.
Note some journalist declined her invitations , they are real journalists.
Glenn Greenwald broke the who Snowden story open and the NSA spying on everyone.
Glenn hates trump and hillary both but at least he is ethical.
#mediagate
Bill and Hillary have both been proven to be guilty, though the latter was given a free pass and the DOJ denied the ability to prosecute.
Complains about innocent until proven guilty and due process, immediately claims Clintons are guilty even though they have never been convicted. Such doublethink... frankly amazing.
Do you check under your bed every night in case Putin is waiting to get you?
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
My request was for fair treatment, yours was claiming guilty by allegation. Not that you really care (shill much?) but for the accidental reader:
Bill was proven guilty of both sexual assault and perjury, check the court records. He settled one case for $850,000.00. He was disbarred for misconduct, check the Bar records. Bill also faced numerous allegations which were never brought to court. By your standard, he should be in jail for all of those allegations.
Hillary was also proven guilty by admitting she destroyed emails after receiving a subpoena from Congress which is at a minimum Obstruction of Justice. She is guilty of perjury again by looking at her own testimony where either she lied to Congress or the FBI Director did. Within the statues of the law, she is guilty of mishandling classified information. Proven by the FBI directory who for her case, and only her case, put a stipulation of mens rea on filing charges. NO other cases in the US have used intent as a stipulation for assessing guilt, NONE. Intent has not even been used in the sentencing of cases against US Military mishandling classified materials. Some of which were completely accidental (US Marine who found a paper in his laundry and turned it in only to be handed over to the courts).
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Assuming the Russians have ALL of Hillary's emails (to be expected with her defenseless email server), why wouldn't they want her to win? How hard would it be to blackmail her into becoming Putin's puppet? If she loses the election, they squander the value of the work. If the Russians have a preference in this election, it's for a candidate who is easily controlled. Trump is utterly unpredictable, so it's hard to imagine why the Russians would work to promote him.
If (the original) Guccifer was a FSB asset, no way would he be extradited to the US. Based on what he revealed about Hillary's server, it could have been hacked by the Geek Squad from Moscow Best Buy.
No matter who these people turn out to be, they weren't the idiots who deployed the server, nor did they force Hillary to use it.
Blaming the Russians is just a political ploy to set expectations low. Don't expect anyone to get caught. Problem is, blaming the Russians isn't any more plausible than blaming the Benghazi attack on a YouTube video.
Yes, apparently at the moment of her swearing in, there will be a sudden nauseating shift and we'll all stagger for a moment before resuming our lives as jackbooted American Neonazis who have our embassy-cracking assault squads on standby 24 hours a day. Hillary will wear an eyepatch and have a long knife scar on her face, and all the men will have well-groomed facial hair. And we'll all look great in whoever is the spiritual successor to Hugo Boss! Sign me up, I wanna squeeze into a set of jodhpurs and strap on my pistol baldrics!
You never asked me my standard. I happen to think that you are right, the media jump to conclusions far too often and people should be presumed innocent until proven guilty. I just thought it was particularly hilarious that you had so much cognitive dissonance in literally two back to back sentences. None of your examples prove guilt because "random Slashdot commenter's opinion" is not the standard of proof we use for these situations. They were all either acquitted or never tried. Also, I don't really give a shit about Bill Clinton one way or the other, but he was not disbarred as you are claiming. He had his license suspended.
before I posted already. You deserve +5 Informative.
Hillary was also proven guilty by admitting she destroyed emails after receiving a subpoena from Congress which is at a minimum Obstruction of Justice. She is guilty of perjury again by looking at her own testimony where either she lied to Congress or the FBI Director did. Within the statues of the law, she is guilty of mishandling classified information. Proven by the FBI directory who for her case, and only her case, put a stipulation of mens rea on filing charges. NO other cases in the US have used intent as a stipulation for assessing guilt, NONE. Intent has not even been used in the sentencing of cases against US Military mishandling classified materials. Some of which were completely accidental (US Marine who found a paper in his laundry and turned it in only to be handed over to the courts).
Can we stick to facts please...
Hillary did not say that she destroyed email after receiving a subpoena from Congress. The guy managing her email destroyed the emails after being asked to remove personal emails months earlier but he slacked off and didn't delete them until later. The FBI found that there was no collusion. Even the Republicans in Congress couldn't find any evidence. Anything beyond that is just political grandstanding... unless you have hidden evidence to add to the discussion...
http://www.politifact.com/trut...
http://www.politifact.com/trut...
As for intent, historical court cases does not back up your assertion that intent was not a requirement for a successful conviction. Here is a good article explaining the previous cases:
http://fortune.com/2016/07/06/...
? And?
No, you should really try to read it again. Claiming that Hillary is still subject to criminal punishment is not the same as claiming she should be in jail for allegations. I laid out facts demonstrating her guilt, which you have not questioned.
The reason for my post requires reading the article linked, which claims that Trump should be jailed for an allegation. If allegations were the only measure, both Bill and Hillary should be in jail with Trump.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
I should also add that my facts are based on recorded testimony from FBI Directory Comey, Hillary Clinton, mostly responding to questions by Trey Gowdy during the Congressional hearings. Those are not allegations, but testimony given under oath. Quite different than a little boy claiming "Hillary raped me" showing up in the media.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
The Clinton's have made lots and lots of enemies here in the US. I find it much more likely that these leaks are from insiders who are pissed. You know, like the guy who is believed to have been responsible for the DNC leak who ended up shot dead in a Nothing Stolen Robbery? You think the law abiding people in the FBI like what Comey did and how it makes them look? Come now, this is much more plausible than the evil Russians who already do business with Hillary.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
You are right, keep to facts. There were several emails referencing the acknowledgement of wrong doing. This puts the category as willful. If PersonA was beating a dog and ignored people telling her to stop should she be innocent of animal cruelty? What if that person as deaf? There is absolutely criminal conduct, but again in Hillary's case it was ignored.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Again, nobody gives a shit about your facts. You are not a federal prosecutor, or a federal judge, and are not qualified to find someone guilty. That is not how any of this works.
That's something that came out in The Panama Papers.
Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)
http://www.lawrenceperson.com/
the only thing about this that could cost her supporters is if she tried to cover it up instead of acknowledging it and moving on. Bush/Cheney both did way worse than this but everytime somebody called 'em on it they just said: meh, wadda ya gonna do? Hilary's email "scandals" were caused by her poor response. She's long since learned. We saw that in the debates. Hell, we saw it in spades when they tried to bait her into blaming Colin Powel and (to her credit) she didn't bite (even when it was later revealed he did suggest the private email server).
If nothing else she's learned from her mistakes. If it were anyone else the scandal would have long since been dropped. But there's a _lot_ of folks who don't like Hilary so it's easy to keep it going. Still, if this is the best they got then she'll sail into the Whitehouse and probably a second term...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Oh God the clown doesn't realize that politifact was busted working with the dnc in the dncleaks.
You can always tell who's a paid shill here once you see AC lamenting the slashdot "echo chamber" that forced them to go anon with their awful prepackaged ideas.
Kettle, is that you?
Nothing posted to
Wow, did you just think that up all by yourself? I am simply amazed by your intellectual prowess. (That is called sarcasm, because you appear to be slow)
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
But he was a hero when he was working with Chelsea Manning, no?
I guess we have gotten to the point where you can't defend your hypocrisy any more so you resort to name calling as a desperate attempt to hold on to your fragile world view. But sure, keep believing in your media coverups or whatever other conspiracy theory you want. Let me know when your manifesto is done and I'll make sure to give it a read.
Even the most virulent Donald Trump haters, the people who despised him three years ago, have to be amazed at how well he is doing in his run against the Cuckquean.
Assange doesn't even REALLY believe he's a target of America. If he did he would stop leaking this stuff. Anyone else remember when wikileaks said it would release documents about Russia? Then the Russian security service threatened them publicly? And then they haven't released any anti-Russia stuff since? Assange even removed anti-Russian documents from the Syria release.
"Bill was proven guilty of both sexual assault"
You are a liar.
Fortunately, the embassy IS in London, and protected by that British Explosives Suppressing Field. No bombs can go off there, so the embassy is safe. That's why we know that the subway bombings a few years ago were faked. No explosions in London!
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
"A million bucks would buy lots of real-estate in middle America, but for a dice-roll in Manhattan? Your DNC talking point only works on the stupid."
Like people stupid enough to think that Donald Trump's $1 million loan back in the 1970's would be like a million dollar loan in 2016? People stupid enough to not understand what 40 years of inflation and forever increasing real estate prices mean?
Have you looked at Russia lately?
Bah, save it for the siege of Denver in 2024-early 2025.
Oh God the clown doesn't realize that politifact was busted working with the dnc in the dncleaks.
Everything that I typed can be checked against multiple news sources. But instead of fact checking what was stated you would rather attack the links provided and call me a clown. Do some homework yourself and maybe we'll listen to what you have to add to the conversation. Until then you are just name calling...
Democrats need to turn away! Don't look! Stay ignorant of all the Clinton corruption! Shut up and vote for the Wall Street Bankers via their puppet Hillary!
Love the bits like this one where Hillary's pal Donna Braizle who was then a vice-chair of the DNC working for the DNC was getting Bernie info and forwarding it to the Clinton team via Clinton guy John Podesta. Then, of course the DNC was "cleaned up" by getting rid of Clinton gal pal Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, and sliding in ..... wait for it .... Donna Brazile!! ta dah!
It would be impossible to make this stuff up! It's just too impossibly twisted and corrupt.
No, he exploited Chelsea Manning and left her to rot. Assange is a user.
Further, the ties between Wikileaks, Assange, Trump and the Kremlin have just been confirmed. Read this very interesting article about a phony email in the Wikileaks dump and attributed to Sidney Blumenthal that was actually written by Newsweek reporter Kurt Eichenwald. It was released through Kremlin propaganda channels and ended up being read at a rally by Donald Trump just a few hours later.
http://www.newsweek.com/vladim...
I knew as a news junkie you'd find this interesting.
You are welcome on my lawn.
"Manhattan real estate has been among the most expensive in the nation for a century. A million in Manhattan even in the 70s was not like a million anywhere else."
A million in Manhattan in the 70's would go VERY far. Adjusting for inflation it would be over 4 million now, and the prices were much, MUCH lower then (EVEN accounting for inflation). Additionally, Trump was made president of his father's real estate company, which was worth hundreds of million dollars then (and would be worth over a billion now).
"The woman is such a parasite that she even enriched herself on the "charitable" funds that were supposed to re-build Haiti after an earthquake."
Total lie. Right-wing nutjob websites made that up, and you fell for it.
Oh, as for this:
: Donald Trump has been an imperfect but productive human being with a track record of getting things done, on-time and on-budget,
Trump is LEGENDARY for his bungled deals and failed real estate projects, as well as for screwing over business partners.
Happy now? I was too lazy to log in.
John Podesta says Hillary Clinton "lies" often , so she is Crooked Lying Hillary.
http://canadafreepress.com/art...
Do you think Clinton campaign gives a shit about Slashdot?
Play Command HQ online
How can you tell If this story is real or was placed by the campaign?? http://www.zerohedge.com/news/...
Just like anonymous caving to the Zeta drug cartel.
Play Command HQ online
It's just their anti-Trump bias, and thank goodness for it.
Play Command HQ online
Right, not for people like you or me. But for her, you're absolutely correct. Laws for Thee not for Me.
The ecuadorian embassy will be stormed or destroyed.
The embassy is in London. Idiot.
So send a few Navy Seals across from Detroit. Easy.
How awful would a campaign have to be to not be doing that? Put it this way, would you vote for someone who was too unorganized / dumb to not do that?
This won;t change a damn thing.
There is already a shit ton of hardcore evidence out there about how blatantly corrupt Hillary, Bill and the Clinton Foundation is, yet It seems clear that most Hillary fans simply refuse to believe any of it no matter how undeniable it is.
I would seriously bet that even if Hillary directly admitted that she was a devil worshiper who sacrifices babies and bathes in their blood every day, most Clinton fans would still find some way to ignore/rationalize it and would still vote for her.
She's got Goldman Sachs and most of corporate America paying her.
Unlike Trump who is fighting man of the people!! and - oh wait.
She's outspending Trump by a ridiculous amount and it's not making a difference.
Want to know why Trumps campaign is broke and Clintons is rolling in the dough? Because Trump is so inept he cannot even hold the Republican base let alone win the swing states that any Republican candidate MUST win to win the electoral college. All this blather about emails is making no difference where it counts, in the states that should be in play, but aren't because Clinton is too far ahead. The Republicans have thrown Trump to the wolves, because he stunk up their house and they couldn't stand it no more. At no point has Trump looked likely to win, and he never looked less likely to win than he does right now. So nobody is giving his campaign any money because why throw money at a loser?
Let me share something of how the rest of us see things differently to what you do as a loyal Trump lapdog and shill. In the recent debate Trump promised to put Clinton in jail if he won the election. He said that, and his supporters cheered because they thought it made him look like a straight talker and a tough man, an alpha dog, the strong man. Like Duterte and his jokes about missing opportunities to gang rape a woman and boasting about the number of people he has killed, or Recep Tayyip Erdogan: although old Tayyip is too smart to publically say he is going to jail his political opponents , he prefers to do that sort of thing in private. Which is why he gets to be president, and Trump never will.
This implication did not escape the notice of many, those of us from functioning democracies, and not lost either on those Americans who long for healthy democracy, who long for a better place where you can say what you want without being threatened by punishment. Trump has just demonstrated, emphatically, that he will never be the leader who will take them to that better place.
There just aren't enough Americans who are charmed by his tough man Duterte-lite act to win the election. And he has left it too late to pivot toward the moderates, without whom he cannot win.
He's not Hillary Clinton, and for nearly half of American voters that's all he needs.
Where "nearly half" means "not anywhere near enough voters to win the presidency"
>Hillary did not say that she destroyed email after receiving a subpoena from Congress. The guy managing her email destroyed the emails
Ah, well, as long as the destruction of evidence was by a person *working for her*, then everything is okay.
That money makes a huge difference. Because of her ads she's just that tad little bit less hated to get enough votes to ensure her election.
You are on /. and can't link? are more incompetent Russian astroturf?
If you were a native speaker you would know that the sentence that is highlighted is saying the opposite of what you're claiming it says.
Maybe that's why I liked him so much. I knew he wasn't all bad.
Sure, thats exactly what happened, the IT guy screwed up and tried to fix it and accidently deleted something. Because you know, he was an IT guy and I am sure wasn't following the news and had no idea the implication of doing so.
According to Politifacts timeline a subpeona was issued on March 4th. Then, around March 24th they were deleted. So, there may be no evidence that she or her team asked for them to be deleted - but they had 20 days to ask for them all to be retained and to tell him to NOT delete the emails.
At a minimum its grossly incompetent. If a company tried to pull that in a court of law they would be screwed.. 'Oh I am sorry your honor, I forgot to tell IT to not delete all the records you ask for, and so they did it anyway'. Whether she asked or not its an example of a disregard for the law, she obviously made the decision that she would take less political heat deleting them than releasing them, if you think otherwise then you are kidding yourself.
Why didn't Clinton's hatred of ordinary americans make it into summary?
2 people on HER OWN TEAM wrote about how she (you know) hates ordinary Americans?
Oh that's right, because \. is carrying water for the DNC.
this argument is funny to me....
"the republican base" you mean the people we have been trying to get out of the way since 2008? whoi cares about them???
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
politifact is not an unbiased source and is about as reliable as wiki. we really need to stop using them
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
Clinton directed that personal emails be destroyed, which was perfectly legitimate. She is responsible for what they do on her orders, and not generally otherwise. She doesn't seem to be all that good at picking IT subordinates. Since she's not going to be picking them as President, that doesn't bother me all that much.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Of course he has a good reason to hate her. But he does not seem to have the integrity to keep his personal situation out of the big picture. By doing so, he is undermining what used to be his own good cause.
Linux user since early January 1992.
Can I trouble you for a miniscule loan then?
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
If anyone thinks that bullets don't kill, here's your challenge. Load a handgun, hold it to your temple, and pull the trigger. If bullets don't kill, you can't possibly kill yourself, so the experiment is safe.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Clinton tried to kill him with drones? Why's he still alive then? Why haven't I heard of any drone attack? Are you saying Clinton's a lousy pilot or something?
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
The attacks have a Russian connection, and they're similar in several ways to other Russian state-sponsored hacks. The evidence isn't conclusive, but it's there.
Also, there's absolutely nothing desperate about Clinton's position right now. Trump has been doing an excellent job of that. Team Clinton isn't about to perform an act of desperation when they've got the election pretty well locked up. The emails aren't all that shocking, and don't have much new in them. Why would Team Clinton do anything desperate about them?
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
At least, they were voting Republican up till now.
When people say that MSM is working for Clinton, this kind of "news" is what they mean.
The best thing people have to say in favor of Clinton is that she is not Trump. Well, this release also showed that besides taking Sanders out of the Democrats race, they pushed Trump up on the Republicans race . That is news, not the internal brawls that the emails might cause.
When they say Trump is the KGB candidate they are lying, Trump is the DNC's republican candidate.
The release also showed that she considers the enviro groups opposing her effort to expand fracking are Russian front groups. But the media focus on the little BS to steer people away from things that matter.
Typical cherry picking bullshit. In the recent debate Trump promised to put Clinton in jail if he won the election. Wrong, and a complete fabrication just like most of the other anti Trump rhetoric. What Trump DID say is that he would ask his Attorney General to assign a Special Prosecutor to investigate the Clintons due to the overwhelming amount of corruption that surrounds them.
That is a LEGAL request, and follows actual procedure LAW requires. Reading full statements is not that intellectually difficult, so you are not trying. Pointing out Liberal controlled media cherry picking the same way does not make it true, it makes you look like an idiot who can't follow even a few simple sentences.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Ah yes, leaked records. Are you sure they're accurate? Is there any context? Could this be a (possibly bad) joke, like one might make in a setting one presumes will remain private?
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Okay. Bullets and guns aren't harmful. It takes people with bad intentions. So, if you're so sure of that, and you don't have bad intentions....
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Infowars? Geez, why don't you cite the time cube guy?
Ooh, moderator points! Five more idjits go to Minus One Hell!
Delendae sunt RIAA, MPAA et Windoze
Well, she turned me into a NEWT!
Ooh, moderator points! Five more idjits go to Minus One Hell!
Delendae sunt RIAA, MPAA et Windoze
>She doesn't seem to be all that good at picking IT subordinates
To the contrary. Her choice in IT specialist seems to have worked out perfectly for her, since he was able to violate a document preservation order (protecting her, if the Wikileaks emails are anything to go by) and get immunity for it (protecting him). Nobody got to see the emails to see if they had any classified information before they were deleted, so there's that also.
And she was able to blame her use of classified material on an unclassified server on her brain blood clot, and then later on deny any health problems that would disqualify her for the presidency.
If it wasn't for the media doing everything they can short of calling Trump a molestor (oh, wait, Anderson Cooper did that during the debate), Hill-dawg would have been disqualified a long time ago.
Maybe we should stop pluralizing mass nouns.
That makes no sense. I gave something Assange did. Are you saying backing down from Russia is anything other than fear?