Hacked DNC documents may show ugly connections between the party and Hillary Clinton...

[appal_jack]

The full title at the link (below) is KING: Hacked DNC documents may show ugly connections between the party and Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign

Earlier this week it was announced that a hacker breached the servers of the Democratic Party and obtained the DNC's opposition research on Donald Trump. The DNC confirmed as much.

Now, a single person claiming to be the hacker has released the supposed Donald Trump information alongside some other very revealing internal documents. When pressed by reporters to confirm or deny the authenticity of the new documents, the DNC only issued this vague statement doing neither. If the documents were fake, it would seem that the DNC would openly deny as much.

...(snip)...

First, the hacker released financial records from donors to the DNC. Earlier this week the DNC vehemently denied that any such information was accessed or stolen.

Two other documents that are very concerning were internal memos. One, claiming to be written on May 26, 2015, a full year before Hillary was declared the winner of the party’s presidential nomination and months before the first primary was held, speaks of her as if she is already the nominee and how they aim to spend the following year preparing her for such a moment.

The DNC is supposed to be an unbiased arbiter of the campaign and this memo suggests anything but that. Furthermore, the memo gives strategies for they can best position her for general election. One of those strategies says they aim to, "Use specific hits to muddy the water around ethics, transparency, and campaign finance attacks on HRC."

Source: Shaun King, New York Daily News

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/king-hacked-dnc-docs-show-ugly-connections-clinton-article-1.2676755

Despicable & dishonest politics from the DNC. Isn't the 'D' supposed to stand for 'Democratic,' or did 'Despicable' replace it recently?

-app

[Thinkingabout]

1. Why are you disparaging the DNC?

[Else You Are Mad]

4. There is a difference...

Between discussing news stories and disparaging the DNC.

[Thinkingabout]

9. I was talking about the comment which was not included in the news article.

[appal_jack]

14. If this reporting is erroneous, I will gladly retract that comment.

Unfortunately, I think that this reporting tells us about a mere tip of an iceberg.

Believe me, I want a truly progressive party that supports unions, public & universal health care, expanded Social Security, the vigorous exercise of all Constitutional rights by citizens, racial equality, LGBTQ rights, limits on corporate power, fair & just trade agreements, universal voter enfranchisement, etc. My frustrations arise from the DNC turning away from these principles.

-app

[Thinkingabout]

16. Then you do not have the correct facts about the DNC. BTW, again it was the comment added and not

The news article.

[Demsrule86]

34. Believe me when I say I don't care what Bernie wants or what you want. nt.

[appal_jack]

36. That's nice.

And you decided to share these feelings with all of us. Good for you, snowflake.

-app

[Demsrule86]

39. why not...it is better than the link you provided which says nothing about hacked donations as you

implied by the way...oh...the DNC wanted Hillary who wouldn't ? The primary voters sure did...nothing to see at the link showing but but wiki-leaks has it for sure...right...terrible post...Monday Monday...

[oasis]

2. "Hacked documents may show"= Solid evidence unavailable.

[appal_jack]

12. Images of the leaked documents are at the link.

Sure would be a lot of typing and formatting to pretend to invent a 2015 election strategy document that posed Hllary as the candidate before the first primary vote was cast.

Link: https://guccifer2.wordpress.com/2016/06/15/dnc/


-app

[Demsrule86]

35. which have been identified as fakes by some. nt.

They have not been authenticated now have they? Sad to see supposed Democrats attacking the DNC.

[Scootaloo]

42. Which "some"? Are they authoritative?

[Demsrule86]

44. Authenticate the supposed documents if you can find them. nt.

[Scootaloo]

45. I'm asking you a question.

Who are the "some people" who have declared the documents fake, and are these people authoritative?

[randome]

47. Is it even necessary to seek out authoritative sources?

The documents don't stand up to even cursory examination.

1. The memo is written to the DNC, it isn't from the DNC.
2. Clinton was the only declared candidate at the time.
3. The donor list has been said to be of Obama's donors, not Clinton's.

Even if #3 is wrong, what possible difference could it make? So donors' privacy was violated. What does that mean?

And, finally, if an anonymous source is putting these out there, it is on them to show that they're authentic. Obviously the memo is not what they wanted it to be. So it stands to reason the donor list probably isn't, either.

If they lie about one thing, they are probably lying about the other. It's just so mind-numbingly obvious, I can't believe we're having this conversation.

[Scootaloo]

68. I'm interested in knowing who "some" are

I'm not invested either way, except that I hate weasel words. "Some people say" and that sort of thing.

[ohheckyeah]

89. Like the weasal word MAY?

[juxtaposed]

3. truth to power should not be seen!

[RobertEarl]

79. Who are we to see what our leaders are doing in our name?

this information should be censored and hid from us. It may hurt someone's feelings and lead to an educated and informed populace. Where's the ban button when it is needed most?

Knowing that our leaders are not truly working for real democracy is not something any of us not in the loop should even be thinking about!

"sarcasm"

[vdogg]

5. I wish Skinner would've just pulled the damn trigger

Consequences be damned. If the site is down for the weekend so be it. Anything would have have been better than this incessant crap. Bernie lost, get over it.

[Duval]

7. She is the presumptive nominee.

We'll see what happens at the Convention.

[Demsrule86]

32. Right...he still has a chance...not... nt

[DemocratSinceBirth]

46. What is going to happen at the Convention?

[dlwickham]

55. people threatening to hold their breath until they turn blue

and/or stomping their feet and acting like 3 year old children?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

57. That wouldn't be healthy.

[appal_jack]

8. If he lost fair & square, the truth will out.

Of course, if the truth is that Bernie's 'loss' occurred through an unfair process, that truth will be in full view shortly...

-app

[Thinkingabout]

10. If Sanders had gotten the popular vote, the pledged delegates, and the super delegates, would

You think he should be the presumptive nominee?

[appal_jack]

17. I have not trusted voting machines since the move to secret, electronic, paperless systems.

That said, the powers that be have no motive whatsoever to rig an election in Bernie's favor.

I'd like to see secure, verifiable voting systems be part of the Party platform too. The DNC has had since 2000 to push this. Not much progress on that front. I wonder why?

Not that elections could not (and were not ) rigged before Diebold, but it sure seems easier these days. A complicit corporate media (a factor in US politics since at least the mid-19th Century) also helps matters.

-app

[Demsrule86]

28. Right the GOP has cut all the polls but one in my town in Ohio

The parking lot holds about 25 cars...I am sure a line in the platform will help so much...like Kasich will totally say wow...it is in the platform...people...we better restore all the voting stuff we messed with ASAP.

[appal_jack]

31. We did have the Presidency & both houses of Congress for a few weeks in 2009.

Would it really have been so hard to reform voting then? And of course, with the Presidency for a solid 8 years now, how many times has Obama called for verifiable elections?



-app

[Demsrule86]

48. Do you understand that unless we win by uuuge margins

We won't get the House...I think we have a chance in the Senate. However, voting is done in the states for the gerrymander. The governor and legislature set the districts...this is how Dennis Kucinich lost his seat:it was eliminated ...and unless we win back governorships before 2020, we won't end it for another 10 years. There is a lawsuit headed to SCOTUS that may help which is why the courts are so important. This is why many of us are so angry with Bernie...he threatens the general. if he had never gotten in the race...it would be better. And his refusing to concede...makes things even worse.

[Demsrule86]

73. No we didn't have a 60 votes ...not with Lieberman and Kennedy desperately ill.

And let's not forget Sen. Brown of Mass After Kennedy died...yuck....he should have remained a centerfold...lousy Senator.

[Demsrule86]

30. Sore loser talk

He lost by all measures.

[Else You Are Mad]

11. If he does...

Then what will all of those people that post awful things about Sanders do? Since he is a Democrat, people can't post gloating and insulting posts about him anymore.

The new rules apply to all Democrats and not just the presumptive candidate.

[Demsrule86]

26. You can't post about him at all

He is in opposition to the Democratic candidate on Monday...GE day! So you can't say nice things about him...we have in years gone by been allowed to trash talk candidates running against the nominee so I expect we can...will ask the Admins...we can trash Trump and since Weaver says Bernie is still going for the nomination, I think he is fair game also. If he conceded now then it would be different.

[Else You Are Mad]

29. That is not how I read the rules.

...but it was just my interpretation.

[Demsrule86]

49. Bernie says he is a candidate

When the election is called for Hillary...he is opposing her.

[Else You Are Mad]

52. But he is still a Democrat.

[vdogg]

58. When did he join the Democratic Party?

I thought he was still running for his senate seat as an independent?

[Else You Are Mad]

59. He is still running for president as a Democrat.

[Demsrule86]

74. the election is called by Skinner and he is not the candidate...thus he opposes the candidate...

so not more Sanders posts.

[Demsrule86]

33. I hear you...so tired of it.

[Scootaloo]

43. And I wish Skinner would have just stuck with the rules that had been working fine for several years

[Demsrule86]

75. I am sure you do...Bernie juries...and hounding people out of DU.

[Scootaloo]

78. No. Community standards and ToS enforcement

And hate to break it to you, but the "Bernie Juries" thing is pure nonsense. You do not get 12+ hides on DU because you're an innocent lamb unfairly targeted by meany poop-heads out to get you.

None of this shit would have escaped jury in 2014. Nor this. Or this. This would have all been hidden too. As would this stuff.

As long as both of us have been here, the jury system has worked fine. And that several posters kept getting hidden and TO'd was also fine, because that's what the system was designed to do - lock out consistently rude, abusive people. The people who complained the loudest about getting locked out are now - very uniformly - the people with the most hides after amnesty.

It's not because they're persecuted. It's because they're assholes.

[HumanityExperiment]

81. ^^^ THIS ^^^

spot on: 'It's not because they're persecuted. It's because they're assholes'

[Miles Archer]

63. You can do whatever you want on your own Website.

Personally, I think one of Skinner's 10 greatest hits was his decision to not acquiesce to the "Call It, Skinner" crowd.

As far as "incessant crap" is concerned, it's been coming from both sides.

GE mode starts Monday, not today.

"Get over it."

[John Poet]

66. Hillary's supporters don't seem to be "over it" yet,

so why would Bernie's?

I've never seen such a pack of "sore winners" in all my life. You all seem hell-bent on preventing Bernie's supporters from uniting with you.

[sister_rosa_refried]

69. Same here, dear.

Same here.

[NurseJackie]

6. We should probably wait until HA Goodman weighs-in on this before rushing to a conclusion.

[riversedge]

61. Coming soon no doubt. !!

[eastwestdem]

15. I don't think "hacked" is a good, reliable source of anything. nt

[GreatGazoo]

18. This really sounds like the DNC tried to spin the hack as being

the Russians trying to help Trump but the hackers are now messing with them like a cat with a mouse.

I expect this stuff will continue all the way to November but if we go with Bernie as nominee then all this hacked and copied stuff about Hillary will be moot.

[Demsrule86]

23. But Bernie is not the nominee...

and will never be the nominee...at the convention...the delegates will vote if he takes it that far and he will officially lose...I guess he would insist that maybe he could overturn the electoral college but unlikely. By this time, he will be fodder for late night comediennes.

[randome]

19. A memo written TO the DNC is evidence of collusion between the DNC and...?

Dated the same date that Sanders officially declared his candidacy. At least 2 threads on this bogus...no, let's just call it a lie. And you're still pushing it.

And releasing the names of donors? What the hell does that prove? That people contribute to the Democratic Party? Heaven help us!

[appal_jack]

20. It proves the DNC lied about donor info being compromised.

I myself just donated to a local Democratic candidate this afternoon (small potatoes compared to Morgan Freeman, but still...). If my name gets released via some future hack, I want the people responsible to be honest with me about it.

-app

[randome]

22. Oh, well, maybe they THOUGHT nothing had been stolen.

Besides, someone else pointed out that the donor list appears to be of Obama contributors, not Clinton's. So another lie from Guccifer2.0, who likely doesn't even exist.

And a Sanders supporter fell for it. Again. Here's an idea: maybe the supposed hacker is lying and nothing was stolen. We'll never know the truth because hackers are thieves! Better to believe such a creature as an honest thief exists than to believe in our own political party, right?

[appal_jack]

24. The NYDN was convinced enough to publish. We'll see...

If the docs are fake, it's still worth discussing. I'll gladly admit any mistake demonstrated to me.

-app

[randome]

25. Cool. Sorry if I assumed you wouldn't have an open mind.

[Demsrule86]

50. They are desperate to believe that Bernie did not lose and will fall for anthing. nt

[randome]

53. My daughters preferred Sanders to Clinton but they aren't this naive.

[Demsrule86]

72. My kids liked Sanders too and voted for him in Ohio

They will vote for Hillary in November Because...Mom didn't raise fools.

[Demsrule86]

37. I don't think this proves anything...hard to believe this post survived a jury if it did. nt

[WhiteTara]

54. You do realize that donation information is PUBLIC information

and can be obtained by ANYONE?

[1StrongBlackMan]

40. LOL ...

And (regarding the list of donors) I suppose the DNC is the only organization or person with access to excel ... oh wait!

[randome]

41. The documents don't even stand up to a cursory examination and this is like the 5th thread on them.

It's mind-boggling. I wouldn't say the future belongs to those 45 and younger. The future belongs to those who can read and reason. If there's a plausible explanation to refute one's viewpoint, you move onto the next point, not dig in your heels.

[swhisper1]

62. who says they dont stand up?

[randome]

64. Anyone who can read at a comprehensive level will come to that conclusion.

The memo is to the DNC, not from, so it probably came from one of Clinton's super-pacs. It was written on the day that Sanders declared his candidacy so even if you get past the first point -and how could you?- since Clinton was the only person running, it does not at all point to any sort of collusion.

Then there is the donor list. Never mind the unethical -possibly illegal?- violation of individual privacy, many have pointed out that it appears to be a list of Obama donors, not Clinton's. Even if you get past that first point, what could it possibly prove that was worth 'outing' people who have contributed to the Democratic Party?

So what is this about? Maybe you can enlighten us?

[Demsrule86]

70. Fake documents...monday monday.

[randome]

71. I've discovered new depths to human gullibility because of DU. It's incredible.

[Demsrule86]

77. I have seen wishful thinking in the flesh or bytes as it were. haha nt

[1StrongBlackMan]

85. But it HAS to be true ...

I read it on the internet!!! ... and I really want to believe it.

[1StrongBlackMan]

83. My biggest complaint regarding my BabyGirl's "education" ...

not counting the near complete absence of African-American history, beyond cursory discussions of slavery and Martin, was they worked hard to teach her WHAT to think, not HOW to think. It seems many are rebelling against what they've been taught to think; but, have little/capacity to arrive at reasonable alternate thoughts.

[randome]

87. I guess that's true. If the future is in the hands of those who don't self-doubt, we're in trouble.

Although DU is just being DU, in that respect. I'm more optimistic about the country in its entirety.

The uncompromising Sanders supporters are not only doing Sanders a disfavor, they are doing the same to the millennials. That generation is no more 'special' than any other. We're all in this together.

[Demsrule86]

21. Fake documents last time anyon posted them...the post was hidden as a result.

Why are you here if you hate Democrats so much? The green traitors would welcome you with open arms I am sure.

[MattP]

27. Take it to crackpot radicals

[Demsrule86]

38. I went to the link...there is only gossip and innuendo...I would be ashamed to post this.

Jackpine...awaits you. Monday...is almost here.

[stonecutter357]

51. tick tock..

[pinebox]

56. "Tick tock". Everyone drink!

[pdsimdars]

60. But anyone who has been paying attention didn't need a hacked email to tell us that.

[appal_jack]

65. True 'dat. Yet there's more.

I recommend Segami's post in the BS group for a Paste Magazine article with another good image of the May 2015 document: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1280213486

-app

[Sheepshank]

67. "Documents "MAY" show ugly connection..." You are pissing over a possible, maybe?

And you add your nasty interpretation based on a could be?

And THIS is a perfect example of a Bernie supporters hatred for Hillary clouding all reason.

[ohheckyeah]

90. But he hates

Weasel words... like may isn't a weasel word.

[Silver_Witch]

76. Ohh you didn't know!!

Shouldn't be surprised !

[BootinUp]

80. This reminds me of WTC building 7 CT!!! LOL.

[appal_jack]

82. Right!?! Because buildings that were not hit by planes collapse ALL THE TIME.

I mean, what with the commercial buildings falling down all the time for no reason whatsoever and those widely-despised politicians legitimately winning elections by millions of votes, it's a wonder that the nation has any infrastructure or true leaders AT ALL.

Oh, wait...



-app

[JoePhilly]

84. Another run through the tin foil asile at the grocery store is needed.

[AzDar]

86. K & R

[felix_numinous]

88. Let the manufactured debunking

commence. It is coming down to the line, between democracy and something else.