easyt65
Diamond Member
- Aug 4, 2015
- 90,307
- 61,101
- 2,645
Wow: Dem Bloodshed as Donna Brazile Outs Hillary Clinton as Grifter Who Milked DNC Dry
"If you want to understand why the Democrats and the media are still so incensed of the release of DNC emails by Wikileaks, you have to understand the real story. Itās not about Russians or even privacy per se. Itās about being exposed.
The emails themselves were not extraordinarily scandalous and they received scant coverage from the media (here Iām separating the content of the emails from the release of the email). Contrary to claims there is zero, zip, nada evidence that these emails had a negative impact on Hillary Clintonās campaign. The emails were released on July 24.
The emails did, however, show one thing.
Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the DNCās attack corgie, was forced to resign because the email release showed she had been working hand-in-glove with the Clinton campaign to nominate Hillary
Officials from Hillaryās campaign had taken a look at the DNCās books. Obama left the party $24 million in debtā$15 million in bank debt and more than $8 million owed to vendors after the 2012 campaign and had been paying that off very slowly. Obamaās campaign was not scheduled to pay it off until 2016. Hillary for America (the campaign) and the Hillary Victory Fund (its joint fundraising vehicle with the DNC) had taken care of 80 percent of the remaining debt in 2016, about $10 million, and had placed the party on an allowance.
Consider this for a moment. Senior leaders in the DNC had no idea of the finances within the DNC because Wasserman Schultz cut them out of the loop.
The Clinton campaign arranged a loan on behalf of the DNC without clearing it with the DNC board. The Clinton campaign was actually controlling and using funds that were donated to support Democrat candidates.
Politico was actually wrong, this was not āessentially money launderingā this was the āessence of money laundering.ā
The fact that the Clinton campaign controlled staffing, messaging, and campaign activities of the DNC directly and before the convention strikes me as a clear violation of campaign finance laws. Likewise, the Clinton campaign rake-off of the Victory Fund is very shady.
The Clinton camp just concluded that they were going to win, and if they won then it didnāt make any difference. To their relief, they are finding that the career staff at Justice and FBI are firmly in their corner and nothing will be done about this,"either.
"If you want to understand why the Democrats and the media are still so incensed of the release of DNC emails by Wikileaks, you have to understand the real story. Itās not about Russians or even privacy per se. Itās about being exposed.
The emails themselves were not extraordinarily scandalous and they received scant coverage from the media (here Iām separating the content of the emails from the release of the email). Contrary to claims there is zero, zip, nada evidence that these emails had a negative impact on Hillary Clintonās campaign. The emails were released on July 24.
The emails did, however, show one thing.
Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the DNCās attack corgie, was forced to resign because the email release showed she had been working hand-in-glove with the Clinton campaign to nominate Hillary
Officials from Hillaryās campaign had taken a look at the DNCās books. Obama left the party $24 million in debtā$15 million in bank debt and more than $8 million owed to vendors after the 2012 campaign and had been paying that off very slowly. Obamaās campaign was not scheduled to pay it off until 2016. Hillary for America (the campaign) and the Hillary Victory Fund (its joint fundraising vehicle with the DNC) had taken care of 80 percent of the remaining debt in 2016, about $10 million, and had placed the party on an allowance.
Consider this for a moment. Senior leaders in the DNC had no idea of the finances within the DNC because Wasserman Schultz cut them out of the loop.
The Clinton campaign arranged a loan on behalf of the DNC without clearing it with the DNC board. The Clinton campaign was actually controlling and using funds that were donated to support Democrat candidates.
Politico was actually wrong, this was not āessentially money launderingā this was the āessence of money laundering.ā
The fact that the Clinton campaign controlled staffing, messaging, and campaign activities of the DNC directly and before the convention strikes me as a clear violation of campaign finance laws. Likewise, the Clinton campaign rake-off of the Victory Fund is very shady.
The Clinton camp just concluded that they were going to win, and if they won then it didnāt make any difference. To their relief, they are finding that the career staff at Justice and FBI are firmly in their corner and nothing will be done about this,"either.
