Forget What The DNC Leaks Say, Kill the Leakers!

WikiLeaks published purloined emails by Democratic National Committee staffers that show that DNC staff conspired on behalf of Hillary Clinton to deny Bernie Sanders the Democratic nomination. WikiLeaks says they got the material from a disgruntled DNC staffer. But Democrats like Clinton blame Russia, and say the revelations cost her the election against Trump. They want you to focus on casting blame for the leak as opposed to the content of the leak.

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+Share on RedditDigg thisShare on StumbleUponEmail this to someone

24 thoughts on “Forget What The DNC Leaks Say, Kill the Leakers!

  1. Whereas Ted wants you to concentrate on Hillary. I see very little difference between the two camps. Both are far more interested in ‘sound and fury’ than substance.

    Remove Hillary from the equation, and look at what you’re left with.

    • Without Hillary one is left without anyone to worship.

      From there all possibilities open up.

      If the people will lead, the leaders will follow.

      (I know the above is wishful thinking, but so is wishing that Democrats could transform themselves into the saviors of their true believers.)

      Zealots spend so much time trying to convert me to their object of political theology,

      These zealots must think that either I am the necessary and sufficient pivot around which redemptive politics turns, or else they are very crazy.

      Of course, if they think either, they are crazy.

      Right Crazy?

    • «Sanders should have run as “Independent” — the outcome couldn’t have been any worse.» Depends, mein verehrter Lehrer, on what one considers a «worse» outcome. Had Mr Sanders run as an «Independent», the «outcome» of the late US presidential election would probably have been the same with Mr Trump winning the presidency and thus, indeed, no worse than the present situation. On the other hand, the outcome for the Democratic party would be rather different ; then, instead of examining its own role in the debacle, which would have been extremely painful, the temptation to have blamed everything on Mr Sanders for «dividing the progressive vote» (which is in evidence, albeit to a lesser degree, even in the present situation) would have been irresistible. (Now, of course, self-examination is avoided by blaming the whole thing on those dastardly Russians, a cheap but popular, and seemingly effective trick….)

      While, as noted above, the Democratic party, qua party, seems to have decided that self-reflection is not on the menu, the outcome of, not merely the elections themselves, but of the whole process leading up to 8 November 2016, seems to have, among progressive circles in the United States, given rise to a discussion on whether the Democratic party is, in fact, a possible vehicle for progressive politics in that country, or whether a new vehicle is needed. Whether or not Mr Sanders envisaged such an outcome, it strikes me that it constitutes a better alternative than the total lack of introspection that a run as an «Independent» on his part would have (according to my analysis above) ensued….

      The above is, of course, pure speculation on my part, which suffers from at least two prominent weaknesses – 1) I’m a foreigner with no direct experience of the situation on the ground in the US this last half century or so, and 2) Unfortunately, I am not trained as an engineer (although, among other things, as a mathematician) and thus am utterly unqualified to marshal a coherent logical argument. I request your kind indulgence for these inadequacies….

      Henri

      • M. Henri:

        Your argument suffers the fatal flaws of being logical and compelling, something no American can tolerate.

      • Yes, especially the part about “utterly unqualified to marshal a coherent logical argument.”

        … or provide a straightforward answer to a simple question. Let alone a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answer to a yes-or-no question. Construct a valid syllogism, provide a definitive rebuttal of same, or even recognize one in the first place.

        Leaving profession out of the question, the proof is in the pudding (or lack thereof)

        Twenty dollars …

      • @ CrazyH –

        «Leaving profession out of the question, the proof is in the pudding (or lack thereof)»
        *
        You don’t have to pick up every bone that’s thrown. Some comments are not worth a response. I chose to ignore it, as being one of those “taunts” I mentioned above. 😀

      • @ CrazyH –

        “How long do you propose we wait?”
        *
        I see only two options:

        1) ‘Til everyone agrees to stop acting like adolescents in a high-school Study Hall.

        2) ‘Til Hell freezes over.

      • @ CrazyH –

        No, no, no!
        See? That doesn’t move the discussion forward. It’s the equivalent to saying: “The adolescent comments will continue.”

        Give us a break. Let’s wait for a cogent response to your premise.

      • «Your argument suffers the fatal flaws of being logical and compelling, something no American can tolerate.» Thank you for your kind words, Michael, although I fear you do me too much credit. My own experience is that some residents of the United States – not, of course, the «yo mamma» contingent, but that was hardly to be expected – are quite capable of not merely tolerating, but even appreciating a logical and compelling argument. That ability knows no nationality, just as it know no profession – although, on the other hand, residents of nations that have been accustomed to dealing with others on a basis of equality may, perhaps, find it a tad easier to do so than those residing in nations without such recent experience. But counterexamples are not difficult to find, so it might be wise to avoid categorical pronouncements….

        Henri

  2. Those dastardly Russians knocked hundreds of thousands of black voters off registration lists in Republican gerrymandered states, taking the election from Hillary.

    The Russians stole the Supreme Court seat that is a major excuse for lesser-evil voting, and stole black registered voters names from registered voter lists, and even stole votes from Sanders because they figured Trump could more easily beat Hillary in the general election.

    How stupid do the hapless Democrats think their patsy plebeians are? Apparently their estimation is proving to be very good. At least good enough for government work.

    That the Republicans really are covert Putin “Reds” is all the “proof” that McCarthyite Democrats need to have the world believe to demonize Russia.

    But why did Obama spend five billion dollars, as Victoria Nuland claimed, do a coup in Kiev?

    Remember how the CIA planned an invasion of Cuba and was royally pissed at Kennedy, and how Kennedy was royally pissed at the CIA in return for setting him up to invade Cuba or take the political hit for its failure if he didn’t follow their lead in foreign policy?

    So whose idea was the coup in Kiev, the CIA’s or Obama’s?

    And if it wasn’t Obama’s idea, but the CIA’s, wouldn’t the CIA be as royally pissed at Trump as they were at Kennedy for bucking their foreign policy instead of caving into them as Obama did?

    Senator Schumer mockingly scoffed at Trumps naïveté in picking a fight with the CIA.

    Did Trump in his deep ignorance actually believe that as president and commander in Chief he would be in command of foreign policy?

    Maybe Schumer should be made to testify about that which he confidently stated in public without rebuke, and yet many, including Trump, seem to have been unclear about or totally ignorant of.

    • «Did Trump in his deep ignorance actually believe that as president and commander in Chief he would be in command of foreign policy?» I fear, Glenn, that Mr Trump has been reading one of those obsolete copies of the US Constitution in which it states (Article II, Section 2, Clause 1) that : «The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.» No wonder that noted legal scholar Khizr Khan offered to lend Mr Trump his updated copy of that document, in which, no doubt, it explicitly states that the US president shall have the Power to determine US foreign policy, «by and with the Advice and Consent of the CIA, the NSA, and other such Organisations»….

      I suspect, moreover, that in Mr Khan’s modern version, Section 4 of Article II has been updated (upgraded ?) to read as follows : «The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors, most importantly Talking to Russians.»

      Henri

      • Mr Rall wrote a book (not available where I am, where the government decides what books are allowed into the country) about Mr Trump, but I can’t read it.

        Candidate Trump promised a) to bring the troops home and use the money for infrastructure, $1 trillion that would put people back to work, and b) to bring back all the lost coal jobs.

        St Hillary promised to evict the Russian squatters from their bases in Syria and replace the evil regime with a legitimate government that would be happy to have the rightful owners of those military bases, NATO, take over those bases, and Syria would, of course, pay NATO for providing them protection from Communists and terrorist Ayatollahs.

        Putin said, if she tried, it would mean WWIII, and she said if Putin did not back down, it would be WWIII on Day 1.

        President Trump is keeping his promises to kill stupid, job-killing regulations like the ones that formerly prohibited mines from dumping their waste in drinking water supplies. He has also found his inner Hillary, making him the first trans-gender president, and says the evil Syrian regime that leases military bases to the USSR must be replaced by the Higher Negotiation Commission, located in the real Syrian capital, Riyadh, who will hand those bases over to NATO.

        And the special counsel says he’s planning to charge Trump with obstruction of justice for trying to impede the investigation into the proven fact that the evil Russians hacked the election. The US MSM knows that only the most deplorable racists and misogynists, a tiny minority, would have voted against St Hillary, so most of Trump’s votes MUST have came from the Russians. And they know that this logic is irrefutable proof.

      • «He has also found his inner Hillary, making him the first trans-gender president …» Brilliant, Michael, absolutely brilliant ! Made me laugh out loud, which does not happen every day in these latter times, when some have departed from the faith, and given heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils…. 😉

        Henri

    • To Glenn:

      Whose idea was the Ukraine putsch?

      I’d suggest it was a conspiracy (defined as two or more people cooperating to plan and carry out illegal acts) between Sec State (2009-2013) HR Clinton and State Dept ultra neo-con V. Nuland. (It’s not clear to me that Obumma ever had an idea of his own.)

      Nuland got a hefty promotion in 2013 to Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs presumably in anticipation, and to add gravitas (read legal cover), for her efforts that would be forthcoming in Ukraine. It is not clear whether she, herself, or HRC, made the cookies she so coyly distributed at the site of the putsch which she and Senator (and I use the term loosely) McCain attended.

      HRC’s natural affinity to neo-cons would later become quite clear in her 2016 campaign.

      That HRC was absent from the State Dept at the time of the coup is irrelevant … in much the same way that HRC lost her bid for president but the senate still has monumentally confirmed her policy of WWIII sooner rather than later.

      • «Whose idea was the Ukraine putsch?

        I’d suggest it was a conspiracy (defined as two or more people cooperating to plan and carry out illegal acts) between Sec State (2009-2013) HR Clinton and State Dept ultra neo-con V. Nuland.»

        No, no, Falco ; it was those dastardly Russians, led by Satan himself, Mr Putin, who are consumed by an overwhelming desire to restore the Soviet Union and will stop at nothing to do so. Just ask, e g, the New York Times or the Washington Post or Messrs McCain and Graham, whose intimate – and I do mean intimate ! – knowledge of the situation in the Ukraine is unparalleled in the august halls of the US Senate….

        Henri

      • To Henri,

        Sorry, it must have been a momentary lapse of robotic regurgitation of NYT & WaPo self-approved fake news!!!

      • That’s right falco.

        The United States of Amnesia remembers nothing of these events, and has been conditioned to cry out “Russia, Russia, Russia” just as does the right wing corporate media.

        The media performers can say that they bark on command only for the money, but the plebeian patsies don’t have even this little fig leaf to hide their shame.

        “It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.”

        ― Mark Twain

  3. Come on, Ted – you know those dastardly Russians are behind all the evils of this world, including and not least, Ms Clinton’s loss in the late US presidential elections ! Surely Ms Clinton and the DNC (not that I’m accusing anyone of «collusion», you understand) can hardly be held responsible for the fact that the 45th US president’s surname begins with a «T», rather than an «S»….

    Henri

Leave a Reply