AMONG THE NEARLY 20,000 internal emails from the Democratic National Committee, released Friday by Wikileaks and presumably provided by the hacker “Guccifer 2.0,” is a May 2016 message from DNC CFO Brad Marshall. In it, he suggested that the party should “get someone to ask” Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders about his religious beliefs.
Quote:
From:MARSHALL@dnc.org
To: MirandaL [AT] dnc.org, PaustenbachM AT dnc.org, DaceyA [ at ] dnc.org
Date: 2016-05-05 03:31
Subject: No (bleep)
It might may no difference, but for KY and WVA can we get someone to ask his belief. Does he believe in a God. He had skated on saying he has a Jewish heritage. I think I read he is an atheist. This could make several points difference with my peeps. My Southern Baptist peeps would draw a big difference between a Jew and an atheist.
The email was sent to DNC Communications Director Luis Miranda and Deputy Communications Director Mark Paustenbach. It’s unclear who the “someone” in this message could be — though a member of the press seems like a safe bet. A request for comment sent to Marshall was not immediately returned.
I didn't get the same thing out of this as you did (although I suppose that one could read it that way if one chooses to).
I read it as more of "many voters will care a lot about this, so we'd better look into it."
If we lived in a world where a segment of the population cared a LOT whether a candidate's ring finger was longer than his index finger, and to that population someone with a longer index finger was unelectable, then the DNC would absolutely be scrutinizing pictures of that candidate's hands, to identify any potential issues they will have to address. It doesn't mean the DNC themselves care one way or another about the length of any candidate's fingers, and especially that they don't have any personal bias against anyone for the length of their fingers.
This shoehorning what you read into one specific interpretation is the same mistake that gave us Pizzagate.
What a nice way of looking at it! I suppose our divergent views concern real comments from the DNC such as:
"My Southern Baptist peeps would draw a big difference between a Jew and an athiest."
because this is benign right? Since the DNC is only concerned about things that "many voters will care a lot about" right? Right.
In case you missed it, there were many scandalous cover ups revealed by the leaks that the Democratic Party did not see as a big deal. You may or may not have a similar disposition:
What was leaked mattered to a lot of people. Comments directed from the DNC to Bernie matter to a lot of people. The way the Democratic Party dealt with these leaks (aka: "The Russians hacked the election.") was not what Americans wanted to see.
First, as I recall, the Dems did not make a big deal of the Russians hacking the election (prior to the election), or even any kind deal as I remember.
Second, again as I recall, the leaked stuff was between a couple of staffers.
It wasn't just a few staffers. These are visible decision makers. Also, there was a lot more that was leaked than just what I included above:
Quote:
The Wikileaks and Guccifer 2.0 leaks are the perfect end to a Democratic primary that undermined democracy at every possible opportunity while maintaining plausible deniability.
The party’s rules, including the use of super delegates—who disproportionately endorsed Clinton before the primaries began—are intended to provide the Democratic Party leverage over the election process. Throughout the primaries, decisions were made by DNC officials to help Clinton build and maintain a lead over Sanders.
More votes were cast for Clinton, but they were cast at the behest of a Democratic Party that downplayed her shortfalls to the extent that Sanders not only had to run against Clinton but also against the entire Democratic Establishment. Heading into the Democratic National Convention, voters are beginning to understand that their voices are of little concern to the leadership.
The Party rules were established long before the primaries. What were these decisions that we made during the election that helped Hillary?
i never stated 1 thing about Hillary. just quoted from the article. completely rigged:
Quote:
Over the past several weeks, Guccifer 2.0 released several internal memos showing DNC staff strategizing to make Clinton the presidential nominee—as early as March 2015. In June 2016, Florida-based law firm, Beck & Lee, filed a class action lawsuit against Wasserman Schultz and the DNC based on the revelations from these leaked files.
Other emails show DNC staff in damage control over allegations from the Sanders campaign, when a report—corroborated by a Politico—revealed the DNC’s joint fundraising committee with the Clinton campaign was laundering money to the Clinton campaign instead of fundraising for down-ticket Democrats. Regardless of the fundraising tactics, because both major campaigns didn’t agree to use the joint fundraising committee super-PAC with the DNC, the DNC should have recused itself from participating with just the Clinton campaign.
Does not matter when the rules were established. The point is that the rules were getting abused. Corrupt.
It does matter when the rules were established. If all candidates know the rules, and they buy in, then they buy into the rules. The rules are designed primarily for the Party, what the Party thinks serves the Party's interests and not individual candidates. If you don't like the rules, they should be changed as they may be in 2020. _________________ "A metronome keeps time by using a Ringo"
Mueller has indicted 13 Russians for election interference. Indictment says that they worked with "unwitting" Trump associates. _________________ ¡Hala Madrid!
Joined: 15 Sep 2012 Posts: 29354 Location: La La Land
Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2018 1:52 pm Post subject:
Ujah's Goat wrote:
kikanga wrote:
Ujah's Goat wrote:
Yup. The whole party was not proved to be racist. Just that it has actual racists in it and that the CFO planned on using heritage/religion to attack another candidate. Very noble.
TRUTH ALERT - COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE !! When this was leaked the Democrats SHOULD HAVE condemned Brad Marshall and others who conspired against Bernie on Hillary's behalf. That did not happen. Instead, the Democratic Party angled it as "the Russians are influencing the election". Not okay.
EDIT: Trump was added at the end of my original quote because he is non-traditional. Similar to Bernie, he was written off before the voting even began.
I don't vote Democratic because of the personal beliefs of the CFO. I vote because of the platform.
And when it comes to racism. The Democratic Party is the least of any informed person's worries. We have a racist, hate group exciting, mass shooter inspiring President.
are you talking about Obama? quite a few mass shootings took place under his presidency and the democrat "platform", while race relations seemed to have taken a negative plunge with the "BLM" movements of black & blue. where are your facts?
or so says the sign held up by one of the students.
So, since we adults can't seem to find any solutions, maybe our kids will.
Godspeed to them on this most taxing and perilous journey.
The message these kids hopefully get...their parents are NOT going to save them. They have already been blood-sacrificed to the 2nd Amendment. These kids are going to have to save themselves. _________________ So glad we gave you your flowers while you were here, Kobe.
Joined: 07 May 2014 Posts: 13823 Location: Boulder ;)
Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2018 4:08 pm Post subject:
ribeye wrote:
Wilt wrote:
Sorry if mentioned:
Mueller has indicted 13 Russians for election interference. Indictment says that they worked with "unwitting" Trump associates.
Unwitting. When history books look back at this period, unwitting may be the one description for those in the administration.
Then again, there just might be one or two or three other words describing them as well.
I think these are still tip of iceberg
Titanic will sink and it is my firm belief, after seeing the NRA reserve potentially 100 million dollars from Russia to affect the elections with, that MANY many many Republicans Know thier own coffers are stuffed with Russian monies/donations...
Mueller indicting Trump's Russian friends shows he is only concerned about Justice. This Rosentein character seems like he's afraid of Trump. He, Rosentein, had to clarify that what these people did didn't affect the election.. That is a scary man who needs investigated. Seems like quite the lie to me..
Joined: 17 Nov 2007 Posts: 67720 Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.
Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2018 4:25 pm Post subject:
Great, we're indicting some Russians. What are the measures to combat meddling? If Trump is the instrument to enact them I don't see them being seriously confronted. WHERE'S THE BEEF? _________________ Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.
America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.
Joined: 02 May 2005 Posts: 90307 Location: Formerly Known As 24
Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2018 5:48 pm Post subject:
jodeke wrote:
Great, we're indicting some Russians. What are the measures to combat meddling? If Trump is the instrument to enact them I don't see them being seriously confronted. WHERE'S THE BEEF?
This is actually a cagey move by Mueller. The recent GOP narrative has been driving toward, "this whole russian thing is nonsense, time to pull the plug", which leads to getting rid of Rosenstein and ultimately Mueller himself, and the shuttering of the congressional and Senate committee investigations. By publicly indicting Russian actors, Mueller has hamstrung the "nothing there" angle, forcing even Trump to acknowledge it. Now there's an established there there, and if the plug is pulled, it becomes pretty clear the reason has to be protecting connections.
I expect that Mueller is only indicting the Russians with the most tangential Trump connections now, so as not to tip his hand on what he's developing re collusion and obstruction and other crimes like money laundering. I also expect we will find out that trump himself probably is a bit unwitting in all of this, seeing what he was doing as fairly simple quid pro quo business corruption that he trafficked in regularly. The initial collusion probably was unwitting on the part of the Trump family and guys like Bannon (who was really a low level hack who was made by his involvement with selling trump as a white nationalist), although less unwitting with guys like Manafort and Flynn, but there's already evidence out there that they began to realize there were tracks to cover, and of course once involved, there's little evidence that they made any play to disengage, and still haven't, which speaks to the leverage Steele posited Putin had on Trump. _________________ “We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
Joined: 02 May 2005 Posts: 90307 Location: Formerly Known As 24
Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2018 5:51 pm Post subject:
ChefLinda wrote:
Christopher C wrote:
ChefLinda wrote:
If Bernie runs, he's still an issue. When Bernie Bros continue to harass me, call me a liar, arrogantly tell me I have no legitimate arguments, then I'm supposed to turn the other cheek like women have been doing for hundreds/thousands of years? No. Ain't happening. The misogyny and sexism underlying this (bleep) will be called out.
You were caught in a lie and instead of admitting it, you're doubling down and personally attacking me by calling me misogynist and sexist. Fascinating. I'm glad this site has such a high standard for moderators.
To recap, this is a lie:
ChefLinda wrote:
And this is another thing about Bernie that wore thin. The attitude of his supporters who bullied and harassed women and people of color in his name. And he never once tried to dial that back. If was not a flattering picture. Bernie is all about Bernie.
So he called it out once. Big whoop. He also let it go thousands of times. I think he's sexist, you don't. That doesn't make my perception of him a lie. But your behavior definitely demonstrates precisely the way women are treated when they speak up with opinions you don't like.
I think there's also an issue of a double standard on what constitutes fair game on the giving and receiving end. _________________ “We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
The misogyny and sexism underlying this (bleep) will be called out
ChefLinda wrote:
I don't like Bernie. I think his schtick is overly simplistic and he rope-a-doped a lot of gullible young people. He's a one issue candidate whose act wore thin. He lost the primaries because people of color and women were repelled by his arrogant, chauvinistic, paternalistic attitudes and policies. I would have voted for him over Trump. But in 2020 I'd prefer some younger candidates with fresh ideas.
White flag my ass. And this is another thing about Bernie that wore thin. The attitude of his supporters who bullied and harassed women and people of color in his name. And he never once tried to dial that back. If was not a flattering picture. Bernie is all about Bernie.
And did he ever release his taxes? Nope. What is he hiding?
I suspect there is some antisemitism underlying this (bleep) and it will be called out!
Joined: 17 Nov 2007 Posts: 67720 Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.
Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2018 6:10 pm Post subject:
People, People, let's play nice. _________________ Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.
America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.
Joined: 10 Dec 2006 Posts: 52657 Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.
Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2018 6:57 pm Post subject:
Christopher C wrote:
ChefLinda wrote:
The misogyny and sexism underlying this (bleep) will be called out
ChefLinda wrote:
I don't like Bernie. I think his schtick is overly simplistic and he rope-a-doped a lot of gullible young people. He's a one issue candidate whose act wore thin. He lost the primaries because people of color and women were repelled by his arrogant, chauvinistic, paternalistic attitudes and policies. I would have voted for him over Trump. But in 2020 I'd prefer some younger candidates with fresh ideas.
White flag my ass. And this is another thing about Bernie that wore thin. The attitude of his supporters who bullied and harassed women and people of color in his name. And he never once tried to dial that back. If was not a flattering picture. Bernie is all about Bernie.
And did he ever release his taxes? Nope. What is he hiding?
I suspect there is some antisemitism underlying this (bleep) and it will be called out!
"Suspect"? If you're going to level that kind of accusation, it behooves you to actually point to something of substance to back it up.
Not a good look dude. _________________ You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames
"Suspect"? If you're going to level that kind of accusation, it behooves you to actually point to something of substance to back it up.
Not a good look dude.
It's called sarcasm, DMR. Look at the first quote from CL that I chose to focus on. Now apply your reaction to CL's non-sarcastic personal attack. Get it?
Joined: 10 Dec 2006 Posts: 52657 Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.
Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2018 7:37 pm Post subject:
Christopher C wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
"Suspect"? If you're going to level that kind of accusation, it behooves you to actually point to something of substance to back it up.
Not a good look dude.
It's called sarcasm, DMR. Look at the first quote from CL that I chose to focus on. Now apply your reaction to CL's non-sarcastic personal attack. Get it?
Fair enough . . . I get it. _________________ You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames
Joined: 02 May 2005 Posts: 90307 Location: Formerly Known As 24
Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2018 8:04 pm Post subject:
I don’t think being a caricature of what you object to being accused of is a great way of getting people to stop accusing you of it. _________________ “We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
Joined: 02 May 2005 Posts: 90307 Location: Formerly Known As 24
Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2018 8:16 pm Post subject:
Christopher C wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
I don’t think being a caricature of what to object to being accused of is a great way of getting people to stop accusing you of it.
Maybe not, but a moderator actually doing their job might help. Or are you an apologist for antisemites?
Since our earlier tete a tetes, I’ve given you a lot of leeway and even protection and support, despite the fact that you’ve used it mostly to see how aggressive and hostile you can behave toward me and others. I respect your right to your opinion, and I respect many of the opinions themselves, but don’t for a minute think you’re fooling me with this b.s. Or that you can take another run at Linda. Ain’t happening, and hate on me all you want. If you can share ideas like a grownup, I welcome that agree or disagree, but your hypocritical attack and cry foul act is about done for me. I was going to do this privately, but I think I prefer to stand by it publicly. _________________ “We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
Joined: 02 May 2005 Posts: 90307 Location: Formerly Known As 24
Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2018 8:17 pm Post subject:
Btw, there is a serious, fatal flaw in your “Linda is an anti Semite” attack. I leave it to you to figure out what that might be. _________________ “We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
Joined: 02 May 2005 Posts: 90307 Location: Formerly Known As 24
Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2018 8:23 pm Post subject:
Christopher C wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
Btw, there is a serious, fatal flaw in your “Linda is an anti Semite” attack. I leave it to you to figure out what that might be.
Maybe that it isn't an attack in the first place? Do you know what sarcasm is, genius?
Yea, like this one. _________________ “We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
Joined: 02 May 2005 Posts: 90307 Location: Formerly Known As 24
Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2018 8:25 pm Post subject:
ContagiousInspiration wrote:
Christopher C wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
I don’t think being a caricature of what to object to being accused of is a great way of getting people to stop accusing you of it.
Maybe not, but a moderator actually doing their job might help. Or are you an apologist for antisemites?
Good battles usually but you're looking to be put on the injured reserve?
Is that alcohol?
Please leave this one alone Trey. _________________ “We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
Joined: 30 Nov 2006 Posts: 33474 Location: Long Beach, California
Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2018 8:31 pm Post subject:
I have my opinions, but to moderate this thread, I have to push them aside, so I'll just say this...
We can facilitate constructive dialogue or attack each other... the two are usually mutually exclusive. I think at some point in a back and forth like this, or any of the conversations which takes place in this thread, the question arises which asks whether you want to be part of the problem or part of the solution. Without taking any side or signaling out any one person, I would ask everyone in this thread to always do their best to check their emotions and decide which they want to be. That goes for this page, this conversation or any other. _________________ LakersGround's Terms of Service
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
This never happened with Obama.
