Romanian Hacker ‘Guccifer’ Just Gave Bernie Sanders the Democratic Nomination

[Old Union Guy]

Romanian Hacker ‘Guccifer’ Just Gave Bernie Sanders the Democratic Nomination
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/h-a-goodman/romanian-hacker-guccifer-_b_9856196.html

According to Huffington Post, anyway. Not sure I buy it.

When mainstream media (yes Huffington Post is now) report something I really really want to hear I get suspicious.

[Agschmid]

1. Goodman.

[SidDithers]

2. Atlanta’s Killer Mike Just Helped Bernie Sanders Win the White House in 2016

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/h-a-goodman/killer-mike-bernie-sanders_b_8645708.html





Sid

[workinclasszero]

3. HAHA Goodman!

This is great news! Whatever HA Goodman says, the opposite is true!

[JoePhilly]

47. + 1

[Number23]

84. Pretty much. + a million

[bobbobbins01]

4. I dunno who H A Goodman is, but he doesn't do Bernie any favors.

The media is almost purely negative against Bernie, so I'm all for more positive voices in his corner, but he's just a little too much of a fanboy for anyone to take seriously.

[pdsimdars]

58. I really like him

And to my way of thinking, I don't care how "fanboy" he is or negative he may be, it's WHAT he says that is important. Just like it is the CONTENT of the emails that makes them classified and not the "markings".

He quoted Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates and former acting CIA Director Mike Morell as well as the WSJ. Do you think we should not believe what these sources say just because Goodman is a "fanboy"? That is absurd.

[lagomorph777]

70. Heard HRC use the term "marked classified" the other day; it seemed very carefully chosen

Removing the markings from classified documents does not declassify the documents; in fact it is a crime. If that has occurred, this will blow up.

[pdsimdars]

74. There are actually a couple of emails where she instructs one of her staff to remove the markings

and send the message through a nonsecure fax.
That SHOULD mean something.

[liberalla]

80. I read that too. Such disregard for security. Astonishing. It needs to become widely known.

[pdsimdars]

81. One guy pointed out in a video that there are Marines stationed all over the world at our embassies

And they are sworn to fight to the death to protect the information on their computers and in that embassy. . . and Hillary just leaves it out there in public.

[Califonz]

5. Article title

Should be in the Clickbait Hall of Fame.

[Doctor_J]

6. Hillarians could receive proof she sold military secrets to Osama bin Laden and they would still

Vote for her.

[Maedhros]

14. This is the bald-faced truth of it.

The cognitive dissonance that results from supporting Hillary can only be assuaged by outright self-delusion.

Basically, Hillary supporters don't really fucking care about anything other than seeing their hero ascend to her throne.

[mythology]

42. And H.A. Goodman can continue to write utter nonsense and some Sanders supporters will

gladly drink it up in the hopes that this time, Goodman will finally be right and Sanders will be handed the nomination.

[JoePhilly]

48. HAHA Goodman hasn't been right about anything ever.

But Bernie supporters continue to swoon at his every publication.

[brooklynite]

56. And Sanderistas would believe it without any evidence at all...

[840high]

7. Interesting comments by readers.

[creeksneakers2]

11. Are all you guys new to this?

The Clintons have been under investigation since 1992. Their enemies do almost nothing else but try to find a way to send the Clintons to prison. After all this time, the Clintons are still there.

So pardon us if we don't believe the latest attack will succeed. We've had a long history.

If Bernie somehow gets the nomination, they'll go after him too. You'll learn they are a fact of life and there is nothing to do but continue on.

[cheapdate]

13. Good to know.

I'm a Sanders voter who plans to vote for whoever the Democratic candidate is in November and I don't give a crap about Hillary's emails.

So now you know who I am and what I am, too.

[cheapdate]

22. Nothing to do with "celebrity"

It's 100% partisan electoral politics and which party will sit in the White House after November.

I wouldn't care if Bernie Sanders was caught with a dead hooker in his trunk or if HRC was emailing love notes to Kim Jung Un. I'm voting for whoever is the Democratic candidate in November.

I'm 100% opposed to Republican politics and I'll do anything and everything I can to weaken them and deny them power and to make sure they are not in the White House.

[cheapdate]

24. Fine with me.

Here's what's gonna happen. Either a Democrat or a Republican is going to control the executive branch. I've made my choice and it's not a difficult decision. Let us know when you decide, or not, I really don't give a crap.

[cheapdate]

27. Half right.

My immediate concern for November is for the blue team to win. But "struck a nerve" is laughable. I truly don't give a shit what you do.

I'm voting Democrat. You can do whatever you want.

[dchill]

36. Too bad the "Democrat" you're referring to...

is Neocon warmonger with a long track record of VERY undemocratic activities and positions. Some of us demand more of a potential POTUS!

[cheapdate]

43. Demand away.

I'm talking only about November. I sat in with Occupy (with my daughter), helped lead marches to protect the civil rights of our local Muslim community, confronted the Sons of the South (a white supremacist group) when they came to our town, and lobbied our state lawmakers for affordable housing with the community organizing group I'm a part of.

I'm 100% opposed to Republican politics and I will not do anything that gives them the White House in November.

Movement building and party reform can wait for the 1 hour it takes me to vote after work in November.

Whether it's Sanders or Clinton makes no difference. I've made my decision and it's not a tough call. I'm voting Democrat.

[dchill]

44. That IS your right.

[JDPriestly]

37. The problem with the e-mail controversy is that if Hillary is elected, that controversy

could be used by Republicans to destroy her, her Democratic, presidency.

That could be very dangerous for the whole world.

We need an effective president. Not Hillary.

Bernie will be an effective president.

[cheapdate]

45. He already got my vote

in the primary and if he's the party's nominee he'll get it in November. Best of luck to him. I'd love to see him succeed. I think he would be good for the country.

Whatever happens I'm voting Democrat. The GOP can kiss my ass, every last one of them.

[Darb]

53. A Bernie supporter confronts the madness.

Thanks. I just have a hard time with the all or nothingness of some of your compatriots. I hope they come around.

[COLGATE4]

68. First, let's get the nonsense out of the way. Bernie will not be

an effective president because Bernie will not be president- at least not in 2016. Secondly, let's not pretend that the so-called e-mail controversy is going to make Hillary any more or any less effective with a Republican controlled Congress. It hasn't and IMO won't finally amount to any more than another in a long, long list of RW talking points.

[JDPriestly]

71. Wishful thinking in my opinion. But enjoy it while you can. I'm 72. I remember JFK and Watergate.

JFK -- a moment of utter despair that had never been really satisfactorily explained.

Watergate -- a moment of utter disgust and distraction that has never really been understood and that uncovered an unfathomable mountain of corruption and filth.

I remember when people laughed at the Watergate investigation.

As is often said, it wasn't the break-in itself that caused Nixon's problems. It was the pervasive malfeasance and secrecy in his administration and wrongs other than the Watergate that brought him down.

The Watergate burglary took place during the campaign season in 1972.

The affair began with the arrest of five men for breaking and entering into the DNC headquarters at the Watergate complex on Saturday, June 17, 1972. The FBI investigated and discovered a connection between cash found on the burglars and a slush fund used by the Committee for the Re-Election of the President (CREEP), the official organization of Nixon's campaign.[4][5] In July 1973, evidence mounted against the President's staff, including testimony provided by former staff members in an investigation conducted by the Senate Watergate Committee. The investigation revealed that President Nixon had a tape-recording system in his offices and that he had recorded many conversations.[6][7]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watergate_scandal

How the Watergate scandal escalated from that tiny incident into something very large:

Rather than ending with the conviction and sentencing to prison of the five Watergate burglars on January 30, 1973, the investigation into the break-in and the Nixon Administration's involvement grew broader. Nixon's conversations in late March and all of April 1973 revealed that not only did he know he needed to remove Haldeman, Ehrlichman, and Dean to gain distance from them, but he had to do so in a way that was least likely to incriminate him and his presidency. Nixon created a new conspiracy—to effect a cover-up of the cover-up—which began in late March 1973 and became fully formed in May and June 1973, operating until his presidency ended in August 9, 1974.[32] On March 23, 1973, Judge Sirica read the court a letter from Watergate burglar James McCord, who alleged that perjury had been committed in the Watergate trial, and defendants had been pressured to remain silent. Trying to make them talk, Sirica gave Hunt and two burglars provisional sentences of up to 40 years.

On March 28, on Nixon's orders, aide John Ehrlichman told Attorney General Richard Kleindienst that nobody in the White House had prior knowledge of the burglary. On April 13, Magruder told U.S. attorneys that he had perjured himself during the burglars' trial, and implicated John Dean and John Mitchell.[17]

John Dean believed that he, Mitchell, Ehrlichman and Haldeman could go to the prosecutors, tell the truth, and save the presidency. Dean wanted to protect the presidency and have his four closest men take the fall for telling the truth. During the critical meeting with Dean and Nixon on April 15, 1973, Dean was totally unaware of the president's depth of knowledge and involvement in the Watergate cover-up. It was during this meeting that Dean felt that he was being recorded. He wondered if this was due to the way Nixon was speaking, as if he were trying to prod attendees; recollections of earlier conversations about fundraising. Dean mentioned this observation while testifying to the Senate Committee on Watergate, exposing the thread of what were taped conversations that would unravel the fabric of Watergate.[33]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watergate_scandal

The e-mails themselves may seem inconsequential, but they raise a question about whether Hillary was or was not trying to hide something and if yes, what Hillary it was.

As Democrats we may think the best of the Clintons. We may see them as idealists. But if there is any greed or if there are coincidences between their receipt of money and approvals by the State Department, if their speech income came from people or even countries who wanted things from the State Department, if people in the State Department were being paid from donations paid into the Clinton Foundation by foreign nationals who also received advantages of any kind from the State Department, we could have a long and complicated series of investigations and distractions.

It is not whether Hillary is a bad person. It is whether there is the appearance of corruption. There does not have to be a reality to the corruption. There just has to be something to investigate, and the country could again be caught up in a huge controversy that weakens us and costs us a lot of wasted money.

If your wife is secretary of state, you don't accept large sums of money for speeches in foreign countries that might want favors from the Department of State. It's just not very smart if your wife, later, wants to run for president.

Sorry. The e-mails are not really the issue. They are the plastic wrapper around other issues.

[creeksneakers2]

19. If she's charged I'll care

I care that she was at least shockingly careless with her E-mail.

I'll tell you who I am though. I'm somebody who doesn't submit to the rich and powerful keeping control by running witch hunts. See how you feel if they go after Bernie. He doesn't have to make it god damned easy. They create something out of nothing all the time.

Something else you can learn from me. Almost no one is so pure that constant investigation can't turn up something they did wrong. Investigations are a tool of the rich and powerful.

[Maedhros]

15. So, Obama's Justice Department is a Clinton enemy? [n/t]

[gordianot]

16. Justice runs a close second to Military Intelligence.

It matters not who is in the White House.

[Maedhros]

18. Given how aggressively the Justice Department has pursued other, lesser instances

of the leakage of data, it would be extremely hypocritical of them to simply give Hillary a pass.

[creeksneakers2]

20. No, but

this whole thing started from the Benghazi Committee. The Justice Department has to jump through many hoops to be able to defend themselves if they clear Hillary. The Republicans are surely going to claim its a cover up.

[gordianot]

35. By focusing on Benghazi Republicans show how incompetent they really are in distracting.

Hillary handed them their asses in the last hearing lbut yet the Blumenthal thing was perplexing. Fast forward it was the server all along. If elected (high probability) someone owns Hillary's chain as Agnew found out it is never too late.

[NWCorona]

26. No I'm not new to this at all.

While this isn't the 90's anymore. The RW is indeed gearing up with their own Senate hearings on the server that will unfortunately have to be dealt with but this is Obama's FBI and DOJ.

[creeksneakers2]

29. Pushed into it

by the Benghazi Committee and threatened with endless hearings and accusations of cover up if they don't do enough to satisfy the witch hunters.

[NWCorona]

31. I disagree actually. Looking at the facts, an investigation would be a logical scenario

[notadmblnd]

52. Why do the Clintons have enemies?

[pdsimdars]

65. The adjective you skipped over was "FBI". Have they ever been under CRIMINAL FBI investigation?

[creeksneakers2]

79. Yes

While he was ignoring the terrorist threat, Former FBI Director Louis Freeh had hundreds of agents going after the Clintons.

[workinclasszero]

30. Because we live under a system of laws that presumes a person is innocent

until proven guilty by a court of law.

We don't hang people based on internet clickbait gossip sites and the foolish liars that work for them.

Do Sanders fans have a problem with that?

[JDPriestly]

38. No one is suggesting hanging Clinton. We would just like to know with certainty

that she can't be impeached or indicted during the campaign or right after winning the presidency, should she win.

Bernie is a much better bet for the Democratic Party.

I didn't think the e-mail scandal was anything at all until I saw Sydney Blumenthal's e-mails with her. Those do not look good.

I worked in offices with computers. It was just obvious from the get-go that if you are working for a company or other employer, you do not mix your business and personal e-mails. You just do not do that.

[hrmjustin]

9. I think this should be Goodman's song.

[Stallion]

10. Hell-O Goodman

Nemesis

[NanceGreggs]

28. Please share with the rest of the class.

How can anyone "give Bernie the nomination" at this point?

The votes that have been cast can't be changed. The delegates that have been awarded cannot be changed.

The only way Bernie can win the nomination at this point is if hundreds of SDs switch their support from HRC to Bernie - and I doubt that any of them are interested in what "Guccifer" has to say.

[cheapdate]

34. See, you're stuck in the old paradigm

where there'll be an "election" in November and we'll choose from the names printed on a "ballot".

Free your mind!

[JDPriestly]

39. Hillary could drop out or be forced to drop out.

Anything can happen.

Teddy Roosevelt back when was nominated for vice president under rather strange circumstances. The vice president's job was powerless and rather irrelevant at the time.

[NanceGreggs]

41. Yeah.

Just like Bernie could be forced to drop out because he's 300 delegates and millions of voters behind.

Anything can happen. But being the also-ran loser will pretty much cinch it every time.

[bjo59]

32. I figure people who are die-hard Hillary Clinton supporters will see the name H.A. Goodman and

dismiss this op-ed piece immediately. If they actually bother to read it, they'll see that he's quoting people who are less easy to dismiss.

[Tarc]

33. HA Goodman is the Glenn Beck of the left

Completely unhinged about about 15 degrees removed from anything that most other on/near his side support.

[dchill]

40. Only 15 degrees?

Then he's doing better than Camp Hillary!

[VulgarPoet]

64. Better a hacker than a professional li-- a lawyer.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

49. LOL

[leeroysphitz]

50. No.

"There’s only one Democratic candidate not linked to an ongoing FBI investigation, and his name is Bernie Sanders."
lol

[Demsrule86]

54. hahah

More of this? Even if he hacked her which the FBI has said they don't believe...it would not matter. We know he hacked state or someone did. Just another breathless desperate Bernie supporter wanting to believe Bernie can 'win' which he can't.

[riversedge]

55. ah--it is HA Goodman--->aka-Baghdad Bob

Hillary Clinton's message to Democrats, Independents, & thoughtful Republicans:

🇺🇸#ImWithHer #UniteBlue #NeverTrump

[Gothmog]

57. HA Goodman's attempts at political analysis are so sad that they are in their own category

The FBI has rejected Guccifer's claims https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/federal-prosecutors-in-virginia-assisting-in-clinton-email-probe/2016/05/05/f0277faa-12f0-11e6-81b4-581a5c4c42df_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_clintonemails-730pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&tid=a_inl

U.S. officials also dismissed claims by a Romanian hacker now facing federal charges in Virginia that he was able to breach Clinton’s personal email server. The officials said investigators have found no evidence to support the assertion by Marcel Lehel Lazar to Fox News and others, and they believed if he had accessed Clinton’s emails, he would have released them — as he did when he got into accounts of other high-profile people.

[winter is coming]

59. Who are these unnamed US officials?

I've seen this spin floated again and again, but it's nothing more than "some people say". Interesting, though, that the Clinton camp feels a need to push this meme at this time.

[NCTraveler]

60. The gullibility of Goodman fans is off the charts. nt.

[Octafish]

61. ''There’s only one Democratic candidate not linked to an ongoing FBI investigation...''

"...and his name is Bernie Sanders."

Great lede.

[GreenPartyVoter]

83. Yes!

[Adrahil]

62. HA HA Goodman. Yeah, now HE'S reliable.... LOL. NT

[Bobbie Jo]

63. LOL

Didn't even have to click, it's HA!

Bless his heart...

No, not "according to Huffington Post." Your thread title is a bit misleading.

[mcar]

66. HA HA!

[Sparkly]

69. Also, Whitewater, Vince Foster, Rose Law Firm...

[pdsimdars]

72. K & R --- to be sure.

[Herman4747]

75. Former Obama intel official: Hillary Clinton should drop out:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/12/politics/hillary-clinton-michael-flynn-email-fbi-investigation/

But hey, we know she's not going to put her country & the Democratic Party above her presidential aspirations, is she now?

[artyteacher]

76. nope... its bs.... eom

[Jackie Wilson Said]

77. GOP continues to work tirelessly on DU to destroy the Clinton's

[kerry-is-my-prez]

82. OH yeah, there's definitely some here.

[Freddie Stubbs]

85. Come on! It's not like H. A. Goodman has a history of supporting Republicans

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/h-a-goodman/im-a-liberal-democrat-im_b_6169542.html