31–40 of 240 posts
WikiLeaks is becoming a political mess with Assange leading the charge. The philosophy that all information should be public is just absurd. There is a reason that the whistle-blowers prior passed their information to reporters, it allowed for certain pieces of information to be redacted. Sending out the name of every woman voter in Turkey does not benefit anyone. Leaking the private conversation of a man and his dau…
Wikileaks has always been political. If someone leaked the rnc's emails, those would probably be out too. Let's not forget Cablegate in 2010. I walked around in Philadelphia talking with DNC protestors, during the DNC. Most of them were democrats, who were glad to have evidence of corruption and collusion between the DNC and Media. Most of the protesters I talked with, only had good things to say about wikileaks, and…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder what was Seth Rich's job at DNC ? Technically, could he have leaked those emails ? How can we be sure Assange is dishonest when he implies Seth Rich was the source ? Is there solid proof that Rich was really the victim of a failed robbery and not revenge disguised as robbery ?
>"Whistle-blowers go to significant efforts to get us material and often very significant risks," Assange said. "As a 27-year-old, works for the DNC, was shot in the back, murdered just a few weeks ago for unknown reasons as he was walking down the street in Washington." >When the interviewer interjected that the murder may have been a robbery, Assange pushed back. >"No," he said. "There’s no finding. So… I’m suggest…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except for a few people who had to quit their jobs and clear favoritism from the DNC chief which is supposed to be neutral: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Democratic_National_Commi...
Which is, again, not evidence that anything got rigged . The RNC had a similar anti-Trump preference. There's similarly no evidence they rigged anything against him.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They had a clear preference, just like the RNC preferred a non-Trump candidate. Imagine what you'd read about Trump in their emails. That's not evidence of election rigging.
It was not just preference, they interfered with the media to change their peaces on Clinton. It's not just opinions here, they acted on them.
It's very reasonable for the DNC to work with the media to defend itself against nonsense allegations.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Take a look at the evidence. http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-07-23/leaked-dnc-emails-c...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_Hedge > The site was described by CNNMoney as offering a "deeply conspiratorial, anti-establishment and pessimistic view of the world." Financial journalists Felix Salmon and Justin Fox have characterized the site as conspiratorial. Fox described Ivandjiiski as "a wonderfully persistent investigative reporter" and credited him for successfully turning high-frequency trading "into a…
WikiLeaks is becoming a political mess with Assange leading the charge. The philosophy that all information should be public is just absurd. There is a reason that the whistle-blowers prior passed their information to reporters, it allowed for certain pieces of information to be redacted. Sending out the name of every woman voter in Turkey does not benefit anyone. Leaking the private conversation of a man and his dau…
It's simpler than that. In the past, information was passed to trusted reporters because the media was trusted. A lot of what Wikileaks is reporting now is that the media is coordinating with the same people that these leaks are about in the first place. In other words, the media isn't trustworthy. So it's a choice, put it out whole, or take a real risk that it'll never see the light of day. You could argue that Wiki…
WikiLeaks is becoming a political mess with Assange leading the charge. The philosophy that all information should be public is just absurd. There is a reason that the whistle-blowers prior passed their information to reporters, it allowed for certain pieces of information to be redacted. Sending out the name of every woman voter in Turkey does not benefit anyone. Leaking the private conversation of a man and his dau…
I find it weird that all these critiques from liberals come just when Wikileaks released info that the DNC primaries were rigged. Before that, it was pretty much all praise. Now, it turns out one of their informant may have been the victim of political assassination and you focus on the fact that they released a conversation of a dad and his daughter, which is of course a blunder but still, compared to the other pote…
IMHO you see more people upset about Wikileaks now because they're actually doing things that are more objectionable.
WikiLeaks is becoming a political mess with Assange leading the charge. The philosophy that all information should be public is just absurd. There is a reason that the whistle-blowers prior passed their information to reporters, it allowed for certain pieces of information to be redacted. Sending out the name of every woman voter in Turkey does not benefit anyone. Leaking the private conversation of a man and his dau…
I find it weird that all these critiques from liberals come just when Wikileaks released info that the DNC primaries were rigged. Before that, it was pretty much all praise. Now, it turns out one of their informant may have been the victim of political assassination and you focus on the fact that they released a conversation of a dad and his daughter, which is of course a blunder but still, compared to the other pote…
First, parties are clubs and they can have their own rules about their internal elections and campaigns. The rules of the normal election at federal level do not apply. The whole free association thing.
Second, Bernie is not "real" democrat. He was prior and plans on returning to the Senate as an independent. He joined/registered early enough before the process started... but essentially he was just renting the ticket. I can understand how the party would try to dissuade that.
Which leads to my third point, the party has to care about its platform, future viability and not just one candidate. The Clinton have a long history with the DNC. Obviously Bill was a generally well liked president before (by the base) but they have done a lot over the years to support other Democratic candidates in State, Congressional and even Mayoral races. They've raised a lot of money for the DNC and down tickets candidates.
Finally, Bernie didn't earn any extra points (my eyes) by claiming a lot of problems with voting and the process it self. He benefit from the system where there were caucuses; in NYC (where the DNC electoral organizer sucks) he voters that were purged were in heavy HRC; and to take the the next level the campaign started claiming at the end it was going to flip the super delegates after bitching about it for a while.
TL;DR Parties have their own rules; Bernie did not pay his DNC dues; parties have to care about a lot more then a single election; Bernie acted like a spoiled child about ballot box issues.
Disclosure: I'm registered independent in NY. Can't vote in either parties primary as a result of that.