DNC emails... What's the issue?

[Slade3200]

I've been looking for this big ugly conspiracy or devious plot but after reading the worst of the DNC emails I'm not seeing what the big deal is. Worthy of some discussion, sure... Worthy of this huge media firestorm, no way!

Can anybody explain what the big deal is by pointing to specifics?

The 4 Most Damaging Emails From the DNC WikiLeaks Dump

 

[Hossfly]

I've been looking for this big ugly conspiracy or devious plot but after reading the worst of the DNC emails I'm not seeing what the big deal is. Worthy of some discussion, sure... Worthy of this huge media firestorm, no way!

Can anybody explain what the big deal is by pointing to specifics?

The 4 Most Damaging Emails From the DNC WikiLeaks Dump

The E-mails so far are just the Socialist Democrats Business As Usual shenanigans.The really big deal, and it's Yuge is the one that will put Hillary in jail. Assange said today he is on the verge of releasing it, among others. "Bye, bye Miss Hillary pie, drove my Chevy to the levee............."

 

[Fueri]

The officers of the DNC all apparently signed pledges of neutrality.

then some violated them in an attempt to wrongfully influence the race for the presidency of the United States.

I'd say that's a big deal...

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

I've been looking for this big ugly conspiracy or devious plot but after reading the worst of the DNC emails I'm not seeing what the big deal is. Worthy of some discussion, sure... Worthy of this huge media firestorm, no way!

Can anybody explain what the big deal is by pointing to specifics?

The 4 Most Damaging Emails From the DNC WikiLeaks Dump

I think it would be wiser to go over to wikileaks and read the archive instead of ABC News cherry picking what they want you to know.

The fact the head of the DNC was not impartial and calling into question if Sanders was truly a Democrat is one reason to be pissed. Also questioning his religion and trying to use if he was Atheist is another low blow on their part.

Maybe you have no issue with party leaders pushing their candidate as the nominee but it shows that Sanders had no chance while running on the Democratic ticket because the party leaders were hell bent on nominating Clinton.

Sanders should never endorse Clinton and should do what Ted Cruz did and tell those that voted for him to look up and down the ballot and pick the right person for them...

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

I've been looking for this big ugly conspiracy or devious plot but after reading the worst of the DNC emails I'm not seeing what the big deal is. Worthy of some discussion, sure... Worthy of this huge media firestorm, no way!

Can anybody explain what the big deal is by pointing to specifics?

The 4 Most Damaging Emails From the DNC WikiLeaks Dump

The E-mails so far are just the Socialist Democrats Business As Usual shenanigans.The really big deal, and it's Yuge is the one that will put Hillary in jail. Assange said today he is on the verge of releasing it, among others. "Bye, bye Miss Hillary pie, drove my Chevy to the levee............."

Hoss,

The day Lucifer hell hound see the four walls of a Prison is the day Alicia Vikander sit on my face and I guess her weight!

 

[BULLDOG]

E-Mail has become a buzzword for right wingers. They don't know what they might actually prove, but they rely on anything involving E-Mails to help them beat Hillary. It's easier to keep the teabaggers stirred up by using familiar terms.

 

[Slade3200]

The officers of the DNC all apparently signed pledges of neutrality.

then some violated them in an attempt to wrongfully influence the race for the presidency of the United States.

I'd say that's a big deal...

The only one that I saw that comes close to that is the email between the CEO and the CFO, suggesting that somebody ask Sanders about his religious views. Is that the "big deal" you are talking about? Please be specific

 

[Slade3200]

I've been looking for this big ugly conspiracy or devious plot but after reading the worst of the DNC emails I'm not seeing what the big deal is. Worthy of some discussion, sure... Worthy of this huge media firestorm, no way!

Can anybody explain what the big deal is by pointing to specifics?

The 4 Most Damaging Emails From the DNC WikiLeaks Dump

I think it would be wiser to go over to wikileaks and read the archive instead of ABC News cherry picking what they want you to know.

The fact the head of the DNC was not impartial and calling into question if Sanders was truly a Democrat is one reason to be pissed. Also questioning his religion and trying to use if he was Atheist is another low blow on their part.

Maybe you have no issue with party leaders pushing their candidate as the nominee but it shows that Sanders had no chance while running on the Democratic ticket because the party leaders were hell bent on nominating Clinton.

Sanders should never endorse Clinton and should do what Ted Cruz did and tell those that voted for him to look up and down the ballot and pick the right person for them...

Sanders is a grown up and can endorse whoever he wants. I did sift through wiki leaks for a bit but have no interest in Reading all that shit. If people have a beef then post specifically what it's with. I am a sanders fan and don't like Shultz at all but didn't see anything wrong with her private statements responding to sanders public attack on the DNC.

 

[Fueri]

The officers of the DNC all apparently signed pledges of neutrality.

then some violated them in an attempt to wrongfully influence the race for the presidency of the United States.

I'd say that's a big deal...

The only one that I saw that comes close to that is the email between the CEO and the CFO, suggesting that somebody ask Sanders about his religious views. Is that the "big deal" you are talking about? Please be specific

Yes when members of the DNC are brainstorming to damage a candidate that would qualify. I don't care if it's about religion or his crazy hairdo or what he ate for breakfast that day. They were looking for ways to undercut the guy.

I was specific. I clearly stated that these people had signed statements as to their neutrality in this process and then violated them in an attempt to influence the race. As they had signed these statements of neutrality, this attempt was done in violation of that oath.

As far as I'm concerned that is the issue here. The fact that it was going on at all, on whatever scale, undermines the entire process and THAT is the issue....

 

[Slade3200]

The officers of the DNC all apparently signed pledges of neutrality.

then some violated them in an attempt to wrongfully influence the race for the presidency of the United States.

I'd say that's a big deal...

The only one that I saw that comes close to that is the email between the CEO and the CFO, suggesting that somebody ask Sanders about his religious views. Is that the "big deal" you are talking about? Please be specific

Yes when members of the DNC are brainstorming to damage a candidate that would qualify. I don't care if it's about religion or his crazy hairdo or what he ate for breakfast that day. They were looking for ways to undercut the guy.

I was specific. I clearly stated that these people had signed statements as to their neutrality in this process and then violated them in an attempt to influence the race. As they had signed these statements of neutrality, this attempt was done in violation of that oath.

As far as I'm concerned that is the issue here. The fact that it was going on at all, on whatever scale, undermines the entire process and THAT is the issue....

Do you have a link to the pledge? Did sanders sign anything stating he would support the party? I remember some pretty vicious attacks from his camp agaianst the DNC. Not sure how they could respond in a neutral way but the conversations in these emails don't scream corruption to me.

 

[Fueri]

The officers of the DNC all apparently signed pledges of neutrality.

then some violated them in an attempt to wrongfully influence the race for the presidency of the United States.

I'd say that's a big deal...

The only one that I saw that comes close to that is the email between the CEO and the CFO, suggesting that somebody ask Sanders about his religious views. Is that the "big deal" you are talking about? Please be specific

Yes when members of the DNC are brainstorming to damage a candidate that would qualify. I don't care if it's about religion or his crazy hairdo or what he ate for breakfast that day. They were looking for ways to undercut the guy.

I was specific. I clearly stated that these people had signed statements as to their neutrality in this process and then violated them in an attempt to influence the race. As they had signed these statements of neutrality, this attempt was done in violation of that oath.

As far as I'm concerned that is the issue here. The fact that it was going on at all, on whatever scale, undermines the entire process and THAT is the issue....

Do you have a link to the pledge? Did sanders sign anything stating he would support the party? I remember some pretty vicious attacks from his camp agaianst the DNC. Not sure how they could respond in a neutral way but the conversations in these emails don't scream corruption to me.

Not to the pledge itself, no, however there are references to it multiple times by members of the DNC.

As in this article:

What was in the DNC email leak? - CNNPolitics.com

...Baltimore mayor and DNC Secretary Stephanie Rawlings-Blake denied any suggestion that Clinton's camp was treated more favorably by the committee.

"My expectation is beyond your opinion about a candidate, that you act evenly. All of the officers took a pledge of neutrality and I honored that, and I take that very seriously," Rawlings-Blake told CNN's Poppy Harlow. She added: "I know that the chair will hold those employees accountable if they're found to have acted outside of that neutrality and even-handedness."

ETA: just google "DNC neutrality pledge"

 

[Rozman]

As Barbra Boxer likes to point out....
Just another nothing burger.... heh heh hhe
More made up shit from the republican party.....

But it does seem like the Bernie people are a bit pissed about it...

Looking forward to the reception DWS gets when she opens the convention in about 30 minutes......



Oh wait....
Is that not happening now LOL....
Is Debbie doing the perp walk to the airport...
Flying back to Florida in disgrace....

What a shame...
But to be expected when one gets caught up in the Clinton vortex....

 

[owebo]

Don't eat the democrat sausage, it's spoilt.......

 

[Fueri]

As Barbra Boxer likes to point out....
Just another nothing burger.... heh heh hhe
More made up shit from the republican party.....

But it does seem like the Bernie people are a bit pissed about it...

Looking forward to the reception DWS gets when she opens the convention in about 30 minutes......

View attachment 82905

Oh wait....
Is that not happening now LOL....
Is Debbie doing the perp walk to the airport...
Flying back to Florida in disgrace....

What a shame...
But to be expected when one gets caught up in the Clinton vortex....

That is the problem the Dems will have with this.

Usually they can simply piss the fire down by screaming "RWNJ's!" and enough of their base will buy it that it goes away.

This time it's their own actions on display. The Pubs have nothing to do with this one.

Of course they're trying to gin up "Putin and Donald sitting in a tree K-I-S-S-I-N-G", and "the Roooooskis" done it, but that's pretty flimsy and nobody is disputing the authenticity of this stuff, so they still own it, like it or not.

 

[Slade3200]

The officers of the DNC all apparently signed pledges of neutrality.

then some violated them in an attempt to wrongfully influence the race for the presidency of the United States.

I'd say that's a big deal...

The only one that I saw that comes close to that is the email between the CEO and the CFO, suggesting that somebody ask Sanders about his religious views. Is that the "big deal" you are talking about? Please be specific

Yes when members of the DNC are brainstorming to damage a candidate that would qualify. I don't care if it's about religion or his crazy hairdo or what he ate for breakfast that day. They were looking for ways to undercut the guy.

I was specific. I clearly stated that these people had signed statements as to their neutrality in this process and then violated them in an attempt to influence the race. As they had signed these statements of neutrality, this attempt was done in violation of that oath.

As far as I'm concerned that is the issue here. The fact that it was going on at all, on whatever scale, undermines the entire process and THAT is the issue....

Do you have a link to the pledge? Did sanders sign anything stating he would support the party? I remember some pretty vicious attacks from his camp agaianst the DNC. Not sure how they could respond in a neutral way but the conversations in these emails don't scream corruption to me.

The officers of the DNC all apparently signed pledges of neutrality.

then some violated them in an attempt to wrongfully influence the race for the presidency of the United States.

I'd say that's a big deal...

The only one that I saw that comes close to that is the email between the CEO and the CFO, suggesting that somebody ask Sanders about his religious views. Is that the "big deal" you are talking about? Please be specific

Yes when members of the DNC are brainstorming to damage a candidate that would qualify. I don't care if it's about religion or his crazy hairdo or what he ate for breakfast that day. They were looking for ways to undercut the guy.

I was specific. I clearly stated that these people had signed statements as to their neutrality in this process and then violated them in an attempt to influence the race. As they had signed these statements of neutrality, this attempt was done in violation of that oath.

As far as I'm concerned that is the issue here. The fact that it was going on at all, on whatever scale, undermines the entire process and THAT is the issue....

Do you have a link to the pledge? Did sanders sign anything stating he would support the party? I remember some pretty vicious attacks from his camp agaianst the DNC. Not sure how they could respond in a neutral way but the conversations in these emails don't scream corruption to me.

Not to the pledge itself, no, however there are references to it multiple times by members of the DNC.

As in this article:

What was in the DNC email leak? - CNNPolitics.com

...Baltimore mayor and DNC Secretary Stephanie Rawlings-Blake denied any suggestion that Clinton's camp was treated more favorably by the committee.

"My expectation is beyond your opinion about a candidate, that you act evenly. All of the officers took a pledge of neutrality and I honored that, and I take that very seriously," Rawlings-Blake told CNN's Poppy Harlow. She added: "I know that the chair will hold those employees accountable if they're found to have acted outside of that neutrality and even-handedness."

ETA: just google "DNC neutrality pledge"

So I guess the next step would be to see if they actually did anything to damage the sanders campaign, yes?

 

[owebo]

The officers of the DNC all apparently signed pledges of neutrality.

then some violated them in an attempt to wrongfully influence the race for the presidency of the United States.

I'd say that's a big deal...

The only one that I saw that comes close to that is the email between the CEO and the CFO, suggesting that somebody ask Sanders about his religious views. Is that the "big deal" you are talking about? Please be specific

Yes when members of the DNC are brainstorming to damage a candidate that would qualify. I don't care if it's about religion or his crazy hairdo or what he ate for breakfast that day. They were looking for ways to undercut the guy.

I was specific. I clearly stated that these people had signed statements as to their neutrality in this process and then violated them in an attempt to influence the race. As they had signed these statements of neutrality, this attempt was done in violation of that oath.

As far as I'm concerned that is the issue here. The fact that it was going on at all, on whatever scale, undermines the entire process and THAT is the issue....

Do you have a link to the pledge? Did sanders sign anything stating he would support the party? I remember some pretty vicious attacks from his camp agaianst the DNC. Not sure how they could respond in a neutral way but the conversations in these emails don't scream corruption to me.

The officers of the DNC all apparently signed pledges of neutrality.

then some violated them in an attempt to wrongfully influence the race for the presidency of the United States.

I'd say that's a big deal...

The only one that I saw that comes close to that is the email between the CEO and the CFO, suggesting that somebody ask Sanders about his religious views. Is that the "big deal" you are talking about? Please be specific

Yes when members of the DNC are brainstorming to damage a candidate that would qualify. I don't care if it's about religion or his crazy hairdo or what he ate for breakfast that day. They were looking for ways to undercut the guy.

I was specific. I clearly stated that these people had signed statements as to their neutrality in this process and then violated them in an attempt to influence the race. As they had signed these statements of neutrality, this attempt was done in violation of that oath.

As far as I'm concerned that is the issue here. The fact that it was going on at all, on whatever scale, undermines the entire process and THAT is the issue....

Do you have a link to the pledge? Did sanders sign anything stating he would support the party? I remember some pretty vicious attacks from his camp agaianst the DNC. Not sure how they could respond in a neutral way but the conversations in these emails don't scream corruption to me.

Not to the pledge itself, no, however there are references to it multiple times by members of the DNC.

As in this article:

What was in the DNC email leak? - CNNPolitics.com

...Baltimore mayor and DNC Secretary Stephanie Rawlings-Blake denied any suggestion that Clinton's camp was treated more favorably by the committee.

"My expectation is beyond your opinion about a candidate, that you act evenly. All of the officers took a pledge of neutrality and I honored that, and I take that very seriously," Rawlings-Blake told CNN's Poppy Harlow. She added: "I know that the chair will hold those employees accountable if they're found to have acted outside of that neutrality and even-handedness."

ETA: just google "DNC neutrality pledge"

So I guess the next step would be to see if they actually did anything to damage the sanders campaign, yes?

You mean the hitlery potus campaign.....

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I've been looking for this big ugly conspiracy or devious plot but after reading the worst of the DNC emails I'm not seeing what the big deal is. Worthy of some discussion, sure... Worthy of this huge media firestorm, no way!

Can anybody explain what the big deal is by pointing to specifics?

The 4 Most Damaging Emails From the DNC WikiLeaks Dump

The E-mails so far are just the Socialist Democrats Business As Usual shenanigans.The really big deal, and it's Yuge is the one that will put Hillary in jail. Assange said today he is on the verge of releasing it, among others. "Bye, bye Miss Hillary pie, drove my Chevy to the levee............."

Hoss,

The day Lucifer hell hound see the four walls of a Prison is the day Alicia Vikander sit on my face and I guess her weight!

122 lbs + or - 2 lbs

 

[Fueri]

The officers of the DNC all apparently signed pledges of neutrality.

then some violated them in an attempt to wrongfully influence the race for the presidency of the United States.

I'd say that's a big deal...

The only one that I saw that comes close to that is the email between the CEO and the CFO, suggesting that somebody ask Sanders about his religious views. Is that the "big deal" you are talking about? Please be specific

Yes when members of the DNC are brainstorming to damage a candidate that would qualify. I don't care if it's about religion or his crazy hairdo or what he ate for breakfast that day. They were looking for ways to undercut the guy.

I was specific. I clearly stated that these people had signed statements as to their neutrality in this process and then violated them in an attempt to influence the race. As they had signed these statements of neutrality, this attempt was done in violation of that oath.

As far as I'm concerned that is the issue here. The fact that it was going on at all, on whatever scale, undermines the entire process and THAT is the issue....

Do you have a link to the pledge? Did sanders sign anything stating he would support the party? I remember some pretty vicious attacks from his camp agaianst the DNC. Not sure how they could respond in a neutral way but the conversations in these emails don't scream corruption to me.

The officers of the DNC all apparently signed pledges of neutrality.

then some violated them in an attempt to wrongfully influence the race for the presidency of the United States.

I'd say that's a big deal...

The only one that I saw that comes close to that is the email between the CEO and the CFO, suggesting that somebody ask Sanders about his religious views. Is that the "big deal" you are talking about? Please be specific

Yes when members of the DNC are brainstorming to damage a candidate that would qualify. I don't care if it's about religion or his crazy hairdo or what he ate for breakfast that day. They were looking for ways to undercut the guy.

I was specific. I clearly stated that these people had signed statements as to their neutrality in this process and then violated them in an attempt to influence the race. As they had signed these statements of neutrality, this attempt was done in violation of that oath.

As far as I'm concerned that is the issue here. The fact that it was going on at all, on whatever scale, undermines the entire process and THAT is the issue....

Do you have a link to the pledge? Did sanders sign anything stating he would support the party? I remember some pretty vicious attacks from his camp agaianst the DNC. Not sure how they could respond in a neutral way but the conversations in these emails don't scream corruption to me.

Not to the pledge itself, no, however there are references to it multiple times by members of the DNC.

As in this article:

What was in the DNC email leak? - CNNPolitics.com

...Baltimore mayor and DNC Secretary Stephanie Rawlings-Blake denied any suggestion that Clinton's camp was treated more favorably by the committee.

"My expectation is beyond your opinion about a candidate, that you act evenly. All of the officers took a pledge of neutrality and I honored that, and I take that very seriously," Rawlings-Blake told CNN's Poppy Harlow. She added: "I know that the chair will hold those employees accountable if they're found to have acted outside of that neutrality and even-handedness."

ETA: just google "DNC neutrality pledge"

So I guess the next step would be to see if they actually did anything to damage the sanders campaign, yes?

Well, wikileaks claims to have more, so I guess we see if that's the case.

We can also say that this bias has been evident all along and has been from the beginning when people were rightfully pissed about the number of debates and the scheduled times for them.

Proof of actual damage to the outcome? No. In addition to what we're seeing now, however, does this constitute a preponderance of evidence as to the likelihood of some amount of bias that was actually acted upon?

I think so, and it would seem that the Dems know it looks pretty bad also, as they've asked for, and gotten, Wasserman's head as a direct result of all of this.