This message was self-deleted by its author

[ViseGrip]

This message was self-deleted by its author (ViseGrip) on Mon Apr 4, 2016, 01:19 PM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.

[TCJ70]

1. If that's accurate, that's some of the lowest, dirtiest campaign garbage you can find...

...I don't put much past Hillary, but this is something else...

[HassleCat]

2. I guess it was Vince Lombardi who said it.

Winning isn't everything. It's the only thing.

[daleanime]

5. Especially when it means....

every one else loses.

[ViseGrip]

3. Let's have no 'if it's accurate' responses. If you are unsure, please call.

She offered up her name and number. Something tells me they don't like it either, it also puts a light on their office for making a mistake, they were willing to correct. Hillary should not be on the ballot either, if she truly believes her challenge is justified.

[ViseGrip]

4. Can we kick for maxium exposure please and thank you!

[2cannan]

6. k&r!

Thanks for posting, ViseGrip.

[Baitball Blogger]

7. And in all places, D.C.

Corruption is everywhere.

[appalachiablue]

8. Just contemptible, how HC's campaign tried to exploit this for an advantage.

[Jarqui]

9. There is no imaginable excuse for that.

Why does a significant portion of America want such a person to be President?

Same with Trump & Cruz.

I don't get it.

[notadmblnd]

82. They put up with it because it allows them to justify their own corruption

It allows them not to feel bad when they behave unethically. Everybody else does it, why not me? That's the attitude I perceive.

[Jarqui]

86. They're lowering themselves to get down in the mud

over 20 delegates (less than a half of one percent of all the delegates).

It's just going to show more people what she is really like and turn them off.

Once again, Hillary is not a very smart person. This is another in a long string of stupid, shortsighted acts.

Again, why would one want someone that mentally limited in the Oval Office.

She flunked the Bar in DC and now she's flunking PR 101 in DC.

[nenagh]

10. K&R

[killbotfactory]

11. DC has a large black population, and as the media has informed us, they totally hate Sanders

Why all the subterfuge?

[ViseGrip]

37. It's about FAIR ELECTIONS and Sanders stands up for this, no matter

who it helps! Integrity first...right?

[ViseGrip]

39. Besides, he'll still get delegates!

[Marrah_G]

53. Why would the black population hate sanders?

[killbotfactory]

64. I dunno. But that's the narrative being sold. nt

[Tanuki]

87. Voting for one candidate does not mean that you "hate" the other one.

I have never heard any Hillary supporters suggest that Black voters who vote for Hillary are doing so because they "hate" Bernie. It's just a straw man that someone made up.

[Punkingal]

12. Kick.

Totally sleazy,,,I hope this makes the MSM. It won't, of course.

[saidsimplesimon]

17. It has been mentioned by MSM.

They are just to overworked sniffing around the GOP sleaze to investigate any real news. (snark)

[GeorgiaPeanuts]

13. K&R Hillary campaign is the textbook definition of slimy...

David Brock has rubbed off on her in the worst way... #BernieOrBust

[HooptieWagon]

15. Rubbed off?

More like birds of a feather, flock together.

[saidsimplesimon]

21. Let's not forget the attacks

on then Presidential Candidate Senator Obama some public, some at fundraisers or in private. Mr. Obama did the dust the dirt off his shoulder with the remark when asked if Hills was playing nice, "Hillary is nice enough".

Politics is a contact sport. You can ask Doris Goodman for the real dirt from past campaigns.

[islandmkl]

14. K&R...however, there is one point i would dispute with you:

NOTHING is fucking unbelievable these days...

[ViseGrip]

18. I'll give you that! This is totally devious on her campaign's part.

She approved of this!

[saidsimplesimon]

16. Thanks for the action item

It should be embarrassing for the DC Democratic Party and the Clinton campaign. Perhaps it is time for Senator Sanders' surrogates to start playing hardball. Politics is a contact sport.

We do not have a democracy, it is a republic. Political parties nationally wield a great deal of power in the selection of candidates. The trick for them has always been to let US think we have a choice, while assisting US slow brains in making the correct decisions. (snark)

Well, "The emperor has no clothes on", pitchforks to the ready?

[ViseGrip]

19. Everyone should call!

[Tanuki]

20. I hope this will be resolved swiftly, with both candidates on the ballot.

It would be ridiculous for one or the other to be left off on a technicality. Not just ridiculous, but unconscionable, undemocratic (in every sense of the word), and un-American. I voted for Hillary in my primary, but Bernie supporters have exactly the same right to vote for their candidate. I think she will win the D.C. primary, but I want that to be fair and square. Voter disenfranchisement is a huge issue for me, and one I would never try to enforce selectively. It damages the very fabric of democracy.

[ViseGrip]

51. A technicality they both suffered out of their control. That's why they were fixing it.

But Hillary went and did this!

[morningfog]

22. If Camp HIllary is worried about the very last primary and 20 delegates, I am very happy.

[ViseGrip]

67. Then you make sure YOU are on the ballot. Both were told it was being fixed.

But camp Hillary, doesn't want the elections office to fix it!
But it's okay to remain in place for her? Really?

[OilemFirchen]

23. Doxxing is now acceptable at DU?

Despicable.

[progressoid]

27. Didja read the first paragraph?

"She said to give her private number out and name at the elections office..."

[OilemFirchen]

30. Yes.

I have no reason to believe the poster. Even if true, it's a violation of DU's TOS.

[progressoid]

35. Well, it's not actually private info so it's not a TOS violation.

This took me about five seconds to find in the intertubes.

https://www.dcboee.org/pdf_files/nr_1791.pdf

[OilemFirchen]

40. Doesn't matter.

Respect people's privacy.

Do not post or link to any private/personal information about any person, even if it is publicly available elsewhere on the Internet.

My bold.

[progressoid]

44. She's a public official with a public phone number.

It's not her private address or phone number.

I can call my elected officials as well because they post their numbers so they can be contacted. My bold

I can even call the White House if I want: 202-456-1414

[OilemFirchen]

49. I don't care.

This post is a violation of the TOS of this site. The seminal poster agreed to the TOS when he or she signed up.

You're welcome to argue this to your heart's content, but you are wrong.

[progressoid]

76. Uh Oh, I did it too.

Here are all the names, addresses, and phone numbers of every US Senator.

http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm



Time for lunch. Maybe I won't be in such an argumentative mood after some sustenance.




(but I'll still be right).

[nadinbrzezinski]

84. Numbers of public offices are not a violation of any TOS

That is the office number at the Registrar, or whatever DC calls that office. It is public record. I am saddened you do not know the difference. Though I suspect that is purposeful obtuseness on your part brought by a case of partisanship. Once the election is over, I hope it heals

[OilemFirchen]

88. I sense your pity.

You've been here long enough to know that this has already been litigated. No tolerance for doxxing.

Hey... you're a world-class investigative reporter, right? Howsabout I post your name and number? It's quite easily accessible, right?

While you're mulling that over, mind pointing out how anything I've said about his is obtuse? Partisan?

[ViseGrip]

65. Exactly, she has a public line, all her own and gave it out. Her 'personal work line'

[ViseGrip]

70. Then Skinner should make a phone call, to verify the truth.

Public office, public campaign, public candidates....and the elections' office is paid for with our tax dollars. She did say that. I am no liar.
She offered in case it's hard to get through! They are working hard and trying to do a good job for a fair election.

[OilemFirchen]

80. You violated the TOS.

There was no reason to post this woman's name and phone number. You're aware of this and haven't edited you OP.

Like your compatriot here, you can offer up any excuse you desire. It doesn't make you right.

You could still fix this, right?

[Tanuki]

32. Yes, this appears to be a "kill the messenger" post, inciting harrassment of a specific

employee. As concerning as this issue is, why target this one individual, when she doesn't seem to be the one "behind it" in any way? Is jamming her office phone really going to resolve the problem?

[ViseGrip]

71. I did not say to 'jam' her office. She offered to speak to anyone who

DOES NOT UNDERSTAND THIS ISSUE, OR DISPUTES WHAT SHE TOLD ME, OR BELIEVES I MIGHT HAVE GOTTEN IT WRONG.

Since you dispute what I said, why are you not calling her to verify what I said here?

[intheflow]

24. Hillary is a real Democrat.

So her actions are justified to keep the purity of the party intact. What utopian vision and democratic principles she will bring to the White House!

[global1]

25. A Couple Of Questions Here....

1. Has MSM covered this yet? Like has this been talked about on the cable news channels? What are the saying about this?

2. What is Bernie's campaign doing to challenge this?

And this one is for Hillary supporters.

3. How can you live with yourself knowing that your chosen candidate is using voter suppression tactics to win the nomination. She is essentially not playing fair. She is cheating. What are you thinking?

[firebrand80]

28. I don't have an opinion, yet

They key for me will be who actually made the challenge.

I read something earlier that indicated that it was a Hillary supporter acting on his own. I tend to doubt that her campaign would be behind this, it just seems incomprehensible that any candidate would do something like this is a race that they are expected to win by a blowout, and there aren't very many delegates at stake either way.

[ViseGrip]

31. Read the OP again. The 'challenge period' is over. Bernie didn't do it

because he and Hillary were assured by the elections office this was an internal error and could and would be fixed, and both would be on the ballot.

So they allowed them both. Hillary got sigs to do a court challenge! To keep Bernie off, but not her. Bernie didn't think to do that, the elections office should not be able to 'amend', then Hillary can't be on it either. But a judge will decide this.
Bernie thinking it's going to be fixed, thinks about progressing his campaign, and not what he can do to stop Hillary, now the D.C. office said they'll put them both on. How do you ethically do a challenge when you are on there, and your paperwork was delivered together with the other candidates?

This is why people don't trust her. Her thinking is always in the negative, most undemocratic way. No alerts here, as it's HER campaign that got the sigs and did the challenge. Hillary signed it.

[Tanuki]

46. "Hillary got sigs"? Are you sure? I do remember reading another thread here that one guy

who self-identifies, and probably is, a zealous HRC supporter, sent in a petition for a challenge. Is this the same thing you are talking about? I strenuously disagree with what he did, but a lone wolf action like that is a far cry from the candidate herself or her campaign organization doing it. Hopefully the judge will throw it out on Wednesday, as it has no merit, as it seems obvious that both candidates met the filing deadline. Now, I hope you are equally concerned about the Sanders-supporting caucus official in Clark County, Nevada, who sent out erroneous information about pre-registering for the caucus and breached confidentiality by including a Sanders operative on a private e-mail list for information about the Clinton campaign. I wouldn't want to think your indignation about disenfranchisement was selective.

[ViseGrip]

75. The elections office said to me, "the Hillary campaign got the signatures"

[ViseGrip]

74. The 'challenge period is over' Bernie can't do anything.

He didn't file to keep her off, as both were told it's just an internal error and will be fixed and both will be on the ballot. Not anymore!

Hillary camp got the sigs for a challenge. What I don't get, is what's the challenge to her, when her paperwork was turned in at the same time? And she was told she'd be on the ballot too!

Gads....

[Casandia]

26. The hearing for this is Wednesday at 10:30

I talked to Margarita and she said that the public is welcome, at their D.C. Office.

She verified everything that was posted, but added that Sanders is not ON the ballot, but he isn't OFF either - pending the outcome of the hearing.

I asked if it would be televised, she said no BUT reporters could film. I asked about Cspan and she said the office has no capability to record, but someone outside could bring equipment.

She was VERY nice. I explained that the whole world was watching, and she agreed.

[ViseGrip]

33. Thank you for calling! They don't like the advantage of their mistake, it's not Bernies

mistake.


ALL GO TO THE HEARING IF YOU CAN!

[Scuba]

29. When you can't win on policy, cheat. Just like the Republicans.

[jillan]

34. Oh so this is what the latest attack on Bernie (taxes) is all about. Looky over there!!

Do not look at what I am doing over here.

Slime.

[Renew Deal]

36. The Clinton campaign was not involved

And it has been said repeatedly by those with control that Bernie will be on.

[CentralCoaster]

41. Might the Clinton Campaign intervene to help restore Sanders name to the ballot?

I know that's a lot to ask of a former SECRETARY OF STATE, right?

If it's certain that Bernie will be on then why the Wednesday hearing?

[Agschmid]

48. Did you even try Google?

Or did you just believe the false OP hook line and sinker?

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/274822-clinton-campaign-head-put-sanders-on-dc-ballots

[Bodych]

52. Hey: Thanks for That Link

I believe in fairness, and appreciate seeing that information.

[Agschmid]

55. No problem.

[ViseGrip]

73. Her campaign got the signatures to keep him off! Intervene to help?

[ViseGrip]

72. Those in control now say Hillary's campaign got signatures for a challenge.

It's now up to the court, not the elections office. I wanted to be sure, so I CALLED THEM UP AND ASKED to have all explained to me.

[Renew Deal]

83. Link?

[dana_b]

38. First off, thank you for calling them

and getting all of this information.

Secondly - Her campaign is one of the lowest, dirtiest, worst run that I've ever seen. She should be ashamed and should fight to get him on it. Then she should APOLOGIZE!!

[Uncle Joe]

42. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, ViseGrip.

[Ino]

43. More Clinton slime.

That's the most charitable comment I can make.

[Tarc]

45. I'd call this a bit of karma for the Nevada hijinks, then

What goes around, comes around.

[auntpurl]

59. Please stop saying this.

As a Hillary supporter, you don't speak for me.

First of all, the Hillary campaign has already called for this administrative snafu to be fixed and for Bernie to be on the ballot in DC. Second of all, Hillary's campaign DID NOT DO this. Third of all, Bernie's campaign is not responsible for what happened in Nevada. And fourth of all, even if Hillary's campaign WERE responsible for the DC snafu, and Bernie's campaign WERE responsible for the Nevada snafu (which they weren't), I don't want EITHER candidate to be pulling dirty tricks on the other!

Karma: that's not what that means.

[ViseGrip]

77. Like IA, AZ, IL, and MA??????

[Agschmid]

47. This is blatantly false.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/274822-clinton-campaign-head-put-sanders-on-dc-ballots

That's what Hillary's campaign is actually saying/doing.

Stop spreading misinformation and falsehoods.

[FSogol]

56. Agreed. Completely false. Too many people on DU are getting played by the OP. n/t

[Agschmid]

57. Yup, thanks.

[ViseGrip]

78. I didn't play anyone! That's why her public number is available for you to call

and VERIFY!

[FSogol]

90. Your "story" is full of misreprentations, falsehoods, and outright lies. You must think DUers are

pretty gullible. Adding a real phone # doesn't make it real, it just makes it seem like a DOX attack.

[JonLeibowitz]

58. Have you called the number to see what the employee says?

It could be that accounts differ. That doesn't mean that ViseGrip is spreading falsehoods.

[Agschmid]

60. Yup, voicemail so far.

[JonLeibowitz]

61. I'd try calling back after lunch hour. Office employees take that seriously. ;-)

[Agschmid]

66. Thanks, plan on it.

[GreatGazoo]

50. the guy who filed the complaint is 5th ward chair in DC and kind of a loose canon

It is not impossible that he just took it upon himself to file paperwork and wasn't part of any bigger effort. Likely the court will even this out.

Here is the guy that filed the challenge against Sanders:

But some of Brannum’s aggressive tactics have made local Democratic leaders uncomfortable.

Upset by editorials from the Washington Post, Brannum repeatedly parked his car in front of the newspaper’s building this summer to berate the editorial board via a bullhorn.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/dc-wire/post/robert-brannum-elected-chair-of-ward-5-democratic-committee/2011/09/27/gIQAIRF21K_blog.html

[Renew Deal]

62. There are tons of these people in local politics

That's why candidates always have to be careful on the procedural end. There someone that knows the rules and is happy to use them.

[etherealtruth]

54. How odd .... on the 31st of March

http://dcist.com/2016/03/bern_notice_filing_says_allowing_sa.php

While the Sanders campaign submitted his fees on time, the D.C. Democratic Party submitted the paperwork—from both the Sanders and Hillary Clinton's campaigns—to the D.C. Board of Elections after the official deadline.

"All of the information was submitted at the same time," says Margarita A. Mikhaylova, spokesperson for D.C. BOE. However, in addition to the $2,500 fee, Clinton also collected 1,000 signatures—a process the Sanders campaign forewent (in D.C., you can pay the $2,500 to avoid collecting the signatures).

It seems that Margarita Mikhaylova is telling the press a very different story than you were told .... ??????

[JonLeibowitz]

69. How is that a conflict?

[Gothmog]

63. The Clinton campaign is pushing to get Sanders onto the DC ballot

Here are some facts for the Sanders supporters to ignore http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/30/politics/bernie-sanders-dc-ballot/index.html?eref=rss_politics

Clinton's campaign chairman, John Podesta, tweeted Thursday that Sanders should not be held off the ballot.
"An administrative error should not keep a candidate off the ballot. Let's get @BernieSanders on the ballot in DC," Podesta tweeted.

John Podesta ✔ ‎@johnpodesta
An administrative error should not keep a candidate off the ballot. Let's get @BernieSanders on the ballot in DC.
12:21 PM - 31 Mar 2016
244 244 Retweets 342 342 likes

[Agschmid]

68. Yup, but this is way more fun right?

[ViseGrip]

81. This way???? I called to get the truth, and avoid exactly what you accuse

me of now.

I will bookmark this, but won't need it, because Bernie Sanders is going to win.

[ViseGrip]

79. Well that is wonderful to hear! Kudos to Hillary if this is true.

She can stop the challenge. The elections office did say they were putting them both on the ballot, until this challenge.
Now if she's saying this, will the MSM cover this until it's resolved?

[Duppers]

85. Un.f'n.believable. K&R

[imagine2015]

89. Kick