Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

ehrnst

(32,640 posts)
139. Well, until Brazile offers evidence that the agreement she read
Fri Nov 3, 2017, 07:56 AM
Nov 2017

was dated 2015, and not the updated joint financial agreement once HRC became the candidate, then it's not confirmation bias.

Evidence is required of the person making the accusation, not on those who have evidence to the contrary on their side.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/11/2/1712064/-Chasing-links-Brazile-book-excerpt-may-describe-Joint-Financing-Agreement-after-primary-was-won

So Hillary worked the system so she could win the nomination? Botany Nov 2017 #1
She was the overwhelming choice even in 2013/2014 before any of this happened karynnj Nov 2017 #28
It raises many interesting questions harun Nov 2017 #143
Interesting points karynnj Nov 2017 #144
I read that she cravenly "worked closely" with people "inside the beltway" for decades ehrnst Nov 2017 #46
"Then I found this agreement." You keep leaving that last sentence off. scipan Nov 2017 #113
She didn't become party chair until July 2016 - after Clinton became the nominee ehrnst Nov 2017 #141
This nt Kahuna7 Nov 2017 #127
Oh, this is helpful n/t obamanut2012 Nov 2017 #2
Why are we posting this here on DU? There is no need to propagate more trash about Clinton bitterross Nov 2017 #3
The original is posted on politico. woundedkarma Nov 2017 #9
Do you know who Donna Brazile is? RhodeIslandOne Nov 2017 #16
She replaced DWS as DNC chair following her removal. Tiggeroshii Nov 2017 #18
I was asking the person screaming that this shouldnt.... RhodeIslandOne Nov 2017 #19
Yeah... I got that a little after I posted but kept it as an FYI for anybody that needed it Tiggeroshii Nov 2017 #124
It's all good! RhodeIslandOne Nov 2017 #126
I'm quite certain I do know bitterross Nov 2017 #162
MSNBC reporting on it not more than an hour ago. 7962 Nov 2017 #25
On the contrary, it matters a great deal. RandomAccess Nov 2017 #35
Not seeing where corruption is mentioned. ehrnst Nov 2017 #41
What would you call it? RandomAccess Nov 2017 #43
You need to specify what part of the post you are talking about ehrnst Nov 2017 #44
It doesn't have to be technically illegal for it to be corrupt RandomAccess Nov 2017 #47
Um... like this part here? ehrnst Nov 2017 #48
"Then I found this agreement." You keep leaving that last sentence off. scipan Nov 2017 #111
And does that sentence negate what she said before? ehrnst Nov 2017 #112
Right, and it doesn't actually have to be killing an infant to "murder a baby" ehrnst Nov 2017 #49
Well, we will disagree about that RandomAccess Nov 2017 #51
Soap opera writing sells. ehrnst Nov 2017 #53
And authoritarianism works too -- with some people RandomAccess Nov 2017 #66
I complete understand your need to conflate authoritarianism and an opinion different than yours. LanternWaste Nov 2017 #75
I don't mind a different opinion RandomAccess Nov 2017 #80
Me too. Which is why I supported HRC in 2016. ehrnst Nov 2017 #114
Don't let your bias outweigh rational though. LanternWaste Nov 2017 #74
Funny - RandomAccess Nov 2017 #81
Well, until Brazile offers evidence that the agreement she read ehrnst Nov 2017 #139
Bull shit to sell a book wasupaloopa Nov 2017 #67
This is the way it worked that was out of order onit2day Nov 2017 #65
If it was "unethical" why did the DNC make public in August 2015? ehrnst Nov 2017 #115
. Squinch Nov 2017 #118
this TalenaGor Nov 2017 #58
1+, 1+, 1+, 1+, 1+ LovingA2andMI Nov 2017 #108
ITS FREAKING DIVERSION! bitterross Nov 2017 #161
earlier.. this was called analysis. woundedkarma Nov 2017 #4
Well, now... and later... it's called BS DIVERSION from what is important. bitterross Nov 2017 #6
This is NOT a right-wing diversion story TexasBushwhacker Nov 2017 #27
+1 Owl Nov 2017 #134
This is the reason I said this! bitterross Nov 2017 #160
it was pulled off because they didn't follow posting rules plus the poster was banned OKNancy Nov 2017 #7
that's about... woundedkarma Nov 2017 #10
we've had the same LBN posting rules forever OKNancy Nov 2017 #12
No doubt, your surprise at threads locked for breaking rules is most sincere. LanternWaste Nov 2017 #20
Keeping the same rules as always? (nt) ehrnst Nov 2017 #42
that black hole is called mopinko Nov 2017 #23
This must be MFM008 Nov 2017 #5
This explains why Donna leaked questions during the debate Red Oak Nov 2017 #8
So Brazile rigged a debate, lost her job delisen Nov 2017 #29
Rigged a debate? ehrnst Nov 2017 #50
She didn't "rig" a debate, exactly. But you remember... Honeycombe8 Nov 2017 #64
Isn't only heard it was about the water in Flint, so of course they knew that was coming. bettyellen Nov 2017 #129
DB's croc tears are about Brazile, not HRC. Red Oak Nov 2017 #60
Ouch. awesomerwb1 Nov 2017 #34
How horrible romana Nov 2017 #11
well, well, well LittleGirl Nov 2017 #13
Sometimes the truth hurts left-of-center2012 Nov 2017 #14
+1 TexasBushwhacker Nov 2017 #21
+1 Oneironaut Nov 2017 #22
+1 KPN Nov 2017 #33
Julian Assange is suddenly in love with her now, too. ehrnst Nov 2017 #39
+1 janterry Nov 2017 #63
"The truth will set you free -- RandomAccess Nov 2017 #68
It's funny to see how many haters of Brazile became instant lovers Blue_Tires Nov 2017 #71
I don't know these tweeters - why should I care? left-of-center2012 Nov 2017 #92
Only you can answer that... Blue_Tires Nov 2017 #93
So why didn't she fucking say anything last year? Blue_Tires Nov 2017 #76
Because she didn't uncover the contract between the DNC and Clinton TexasBushwhacker Nov 2017 #106
And now she's pimping her book five days before elections... Blue_Tires Nov 2017 #121
+1 harun Nov 2017 #98
+1 LiberalLovinLug Nov 2017 #103
1+ LovingA2andMI Nov 2017 #104
+9000 Kimchijeon Nov 2017 #157
+1 Raine Nov 2017 #163
Post removed Post removed Nov 2017 #15
News isn't news if they don't like it, to some here. 7962 Nov 2017 #24
1+ LovingA2andMI Nov 2017 #105
And look what happened. 7962 Nov 2017 #132
WOW!!!! LovingA2andMI Nov 2017 #145
I was on that jury... CTyankee Nov 2017 #38
Post removed Post removed Nov 2017 #55
I hate these infights...I don't post a lot because you never know how it will all CTyankee Nov 2017 #61
Wow.....you see the results. 7962 Nov 2017 #131
No kidding. it's getting fucking ridiculous. nt m-lekktor Nov 2017 #54
Like it or not, this is a big story RhodeIslandOne Nov 2017 #17
I've never thought much of Donna Brazile as a Democratic Strategist, talk show panelist TheDebbieDee Nov 2017 #26
Brazile turned to Karl Rove after the 2000 election delisen Nov 2017 #32
I haven't read the Brazile book but we all have to be discerning about readily accepting TheDebbieDee Nov 2017 #45
Umm.... LovingA2andMI Nov 2017 #107
WOW... Ligyron Nov 2017 #30
Bernie still had a lot of money videohead5 Nov 2017 #31
Really not about Sanders zipplewrath Nov 2017 #82
The Hill headlines are always reliably descriptive of the main point of the article ehrnst Nov 2017 #36
I'd like to see The Hill's excerpts in the context of the entire book. George II Nov 2017 #37
Especially the one that contradicts the headline.... ehrnst Nov 2017 #57
"Then I found this agreement." You keep leaving that last sentence off. scipan Nov 2017 #110
Im sorry, really? MrScorpio Nov 2017 #40
GOOD Democratic party members only thanks... stonecutter357 Nov 2017 #52
Interesting - she says that she found no evidence of rigging in the actual exerpt... ehrnst Nov 2017 #56
And then she says she found it. You stopped reading. 7962 Nov 2017 #133
I didn't stop reading. I read the whole thing. ehrnst Nov 2017 #135
OK, THAT was excellent. "Put on music & light candles.." Kudos. 7962 Nov 2017 #136
Give credit to Brazile. Of course if you read the article, you would know that she wrote that. ehrnst Nov 2017 #138
Jeeze, thats what I get for reading it on the phone. I swear I read the whole thing!! 7962 Nov 2017 #155
Indeed.(nt) ehrnst Nov 2017 #156
It seems to bother her that she feels Clinton had an unfair advantage during the primaries. hughee99 Nov 2017 #59
I'm sorry, but I don't see the "bombshell." It just looks like a bailout. Bleacher Creature Nov 2017 #62
Uh, not quite RandomAccess Nov 2017 #85
All I'm seeing is Brazile's spin on that agreement. Bleacher Creature Nov 2017 #109
That's what was reported at the time RandomAccess Nov 2017 #120
all that was reported was a "tight rein on spending" questionseverything Nov 2017 #123
Let me put it this way RandomAccess Nov 2017 #125
the copy/paste i posted was from this questionseverything Nov 2017 #128
So Clinton agreed to help the DNC. Freethinker65 Nov 2017 #69
In LBN, one isn't supposed to modify the title of the article which was done here. Kaleva Nov 2017 #70
I love that the cross-section of people who believe beyond a doubt Blue_Tires Nov 2017 #72
Donna didn't say that Hillary rigged the primary Kaleva Nov 2017 #79
Sadly the narrative is out there now Blue_Tires Nov 2017 #83
This is just an attempt at distraction. It won't slow down Mueller. Kaleva Nov 2017 #86
I believe that Mueller's actions have EVERYTHING to do with a thread like this. (nt) Paladin Nov 2017 #87
It won't distract the people that really matter like Mueller and his legal team. Kaleva Nov 2017 #90
Maybe not. But it keeps the Democratic Party in non-stop turmoil. Paladin Nov 2017 #94
A lot about Hillary controlling funding, but nothing about how it affected the nomination muriel_volestrangler Nov 2017 #73
I don't know that whatever question Brazile fed to the campaign mattered.... LisaM Nov 2017 #78
+1 I agree, and well said FakeNoose Nov 2017 #89
Well, exactly. Those were some very obvious questions that Hillary clearly didn't need. LisaL Nov 2017 #137
Every Party ever would prefer to have one strong candidate rather than a difficult primary MGKrebs Nov 2017 #77
Hmm, I guess I called that one. MGKrebs Nov 2017 #116
This is exhausting. MontanaMama Nov 2017 #84
RW media and the deplorables are loving this. highplainsdem Nov 2017 #88
So, to recap: Blue_Tires Nov 2017 #91
Despite edit, OP still isn't following LBN rules about posting headlines Kaleva Nov 2017 #95
They used the right title, not breaking rules. harun Nov 2017 #99
Note the difference between your title and the title of the OP Kaleva Nov 2017 #101
The quote marks difference? Rest is same, isn't it? harun Nov 2017 #142
Quotation marks are important. Kaleva Nov 2017 #149
What you wrote is correct. Kaleva Nov 2017 #102
Jose, Thank you, saidsimplesimon Nov 2017 #96
There are a remarkable number of people commenting on this OP who have less than 500 posts Justice Nov 2017 #97
And look at how the OP changed the title of the article Kaleva Nov 2017 #100
Things that make you go, "Hmmmmm......" Squinch Nov 2017 #117
Heres the reform the Democratic Party needs: never, ever allow a non-Democrat NYC Liberal Nov 2017 #119
That's the thing I'll never understand, how that is allowed. OnDoutside Nov 2017 #122
Horrible idea that would make corruption worse, not better. harun Nov 2017 #146
Oh really? So all Democrats are corrupt? NYC Liberal Nov 2017 #150
Roll through these charts and form your own opinion on if there is a corruption problem harun Nov 2017 #154
That's completely and totally irrelevant to what I was talking about. NYC Liberal Nov 2017 #164
You claimed I was saying all Democrats are corrupt, which I didn't. harun Nov 2017 #165
If I had a suspicious mind dflprincess Nov 2017 #130
Donna Brazile was Al Gore's campaign mgr DeminPennswoods Nov 2017 #140
Twitter - DB just said primary system was NOT rigged. Raissa Nov 2017 #147
Really? Then get back on the TV and straighten this shit out DONNA. Wwcd Nov 2017 #153
Donna Brazile has a book to sell BlueIdaho Nov 2017 #148
With Trump destroying the country I have no outrage to spare for this. 50 Shades Of Blue Nov 2017 #151
Brazile is lying JCannon Nov 2017 #152
Memo surfaced Bradical79 Nov 2017 #158
Brazile's claim shown to be untrue Bradical79 Nov 2017 #159
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Brazile: 'Proof' that Cli...»Reply #139