This weekend, news hit of a treasure trove of trouble in 20,000 emails Wikileaks stole from the Democratic National Committee. Actually, the hacker Guccifer stole them and gave them to Wikileaks. Buried within this dump of emails were some damning little pieces. For example, Debbie Whatshername-Schulz, the official hag of the DNC, used her position to try to get insider benefits like tickets to Hamilton. It also turns out the DNC is a clique full of smug little bullies who love to gossip about each other. Who knew? //rolls eyes
More interestingly though, the DNC did their best to sabotage Bernie
* The DNC people wanted to conduct a campaign of negative hits by claiming that Sanders' campaign was disorganized. As they put it, that he "couldn't get it together." They planned to do so by claiming that his campaign never responded to their requests and deadlines, failed to put forth nominations, and never complied with requirements. Then they would let it be known that these things only got done if they called Sanders directly. The idea was to create the impression of chaos.
* The DNC wanted to suggest that Sanders, who is Jewish, is an atheist. The DNC Director of Communications apparently wanted to get a trusted journalist to bring this up. Why? Because they thought this might smear him in the South and cost him points:
"Does he believe in a God. He had skated on saying he has a Jewish heritage. I think I read he is an atheist. This could make several points difference with my peeps. My Southern Baptist peeps would draw a big difference between a Jew and an atheist."So think about this. The unbiased arm of the Democratic Party set out to smear progressive Bernie Sanders in the name of helping Hillary Clinton. What's more, they see the idea that he's a Jew and an atheist both as grounds for smearing him. Tell me that won't be news to New York City Jews and college atheists -- two of the Democrats' strongest supporters.
The response to this has been dramatic. It has given life to Bernie's supporters, who had scheduled a pointless rally in Philly today but who now vastly over-performed expectations. There are a tremendous number of calls among Bernie people for Bernie to un-endorse Hillary. What's more, unlike the Benghazi thing, this gives a tangibility to "the email scandal" which has staying power. This plays right into the idea that Hillary and her team of insiders stole the election from Bernie and are lying, cheating and smearing their way across the political landscape. This couldn't be worse for Hillary. And ironically, it wasn't even her emails! Nevertheless, the fact that it was meant to help her as well as her reputation has solidified this connection as an accepted narrative: Hillary plotted to smear Bernie and steal the election.
The immediate result is that the Debbie Whatshername-Schulz has been forced to resign. That is good and bad for the Democrats. It's good because she sucks big time. It's bad because it adds another stain to Hillary's dirty (in)vestments.
The timing on this couldn't be worse either. This hurts Hillary with Jews, progressives, atheists and people who find her dishonest. It hurts her with Bernie people. It will cause dissension and a rift at their convention... look for violent protests. It may hamstring the DNC's operations at a point too where they need to fundraise like mad and finalize plans for November. It also costs her a strong ally at the DNC. It also murders whatever press she got from picking Blandus Rex as her VP. Heck, it even covers up Trump's latest stupidity of speaking up for Roger Ailes. And worse of all, it sticks the word EMAIL back in people's heads... right after she bought off the FBI too. How unfair!
Ha ha. This is going to get ugly.
Thoughts?
I agree with almost everything but I'd say e-mail and the fact Hillary is desperate for power and will do anything for it never left people's heads.
ReplyDeleteWasserman Schultz being in Hillary's pocket has been clear since forever (we shall schedule the minimal amount of debates and we shall do so opposite major sporting events!) but this does further hammer in the appalling reality of Hillary.
I suspect Hillary is going to make even more concessions to the hard left on the subject of free trade in order to try to keep them from either staying home or supporting Trump (who has recently talked about hitting imports with tariffs and withdrawing from the WTO).
So I don't think last week was that bad for her. However, I am sure things will get a lot worse. WikiLeaks has a bunch of e-mails and they have stated they are going to dole them out over time, so they are probably saving the bigger bombshells until closer to the election.
Trump dodged a bullet when he picked Pence over Flynn (below is the text of something Flynn saw fit to retweet over the weekend).
ReplyDeleteThe Trump campaign doesn't need a second tweeter of racist idiocy.
http://www.mediaite.com/online/fmr-lt-general-michael-flynn-retweets-a-pretty-anti-semitic-tweet/
>CNN Implicated
"The USSR is to blame!"
Not anymore Jews. Not anymore.
Guccifer: I had to stop reading and comment how much I love this name.
ReplyDeleteOh, Anthony, I am sure that WikiLeaks has lots and lots more to release. Let's not forget that b/c of Guccifer, we know that the Clintons had their private bathroom server and were receiving classified info. Oh, yeah, they'll have more. How much you want to bet they release another batch sometime later this week right before her acceptance speech?
ReplyDeleteWell, there is still no way I'm voting for Putin plant Donald Trump.
ReplyDeleteKit - If only the Clintons hadn't left themselves open to these kinds of cyberattacks by using an illegal homebrew server. Btw Guccifer was not Russian, he is Rumanian. He's the now-imprisoned hacker who stole all of this info left vulnerable by the Clintons who didn't want their private life scrutinized. Surprise!!!
ReplyDeleteIronically, Trump wasn't important enough to the political process to be an open target for cyberattacks which may be his only plus at this point.
tryanmax, I love that name too. Fantastic! LOL!
ReplyDeleteAnthony, The email thing and distrust have definitely clung to her. I think what makes last week bad is that (1) it re-enforced it and (2) it gave the Bernie people concrete evidence they can point to that they will claim proved they were cheated. Reinforcing it acts as a depressant for her fence voters. It becomes the death of a thousand cuts. And whipping up the Bernie people means she'll be fighting her re-energized left flank the rest of the way, which means they won't turn out (might even vote Trump out of spite) and she will need to dive left to try to calm them.
ReplyDeleteAnthony, Pence was a solid, safe choice meant to calm conservative nerves. He is Dick Cheney all over again.
ReplyDeleteBev, They seem to be after Hillary/Obama, so this will be fun to watch. I wonder what else they have? I have to say the timing of this one was perfect.
ReplyDeleteKit, I believe you may have mentioned that before... once or twice... perhaps.
ReplyDeleteBev, I am looking forward to the rest of his revenge! :)
ReplyDeleteBTW Bev, Huffpo has an anti-Wikileaks article today. They've endangered women in Turkey for no reason!!!
ReplyDeleteI'm sure Wikileaks is surprised to find their hero status revoked just because they attacked the wrong target.
It's so fun to see the curtain pulled back in a way that Democrat followers will actually take notice of.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Anthony's sentiments. The "Ready for Hillary" crowd who wants to make history no matter the cost won't be budged by anything. I don't think the Bernie-is-an-atheist remark will do more than ruffle feathers. Anti-religious voters regard Evangelicals as the American Taliban and the Bible as the Republican Koran. And the Jewish remarks read as favorable when scrutinized, though pointing out Jews is always touchy.
On the other hand, this should further suppress Bernie supporters in November and it makes Hillary's negatives in general harder for undecideds to ignore. To wit, RCP has updated their numbers from last week. On the electoral college map, Trump sits firmly at 164 as he has since May. Hillary, however, dropped to 202 with Oregon and Wisconsin moving into the "toss up" column, but picking up Colorado.
**********
Not that it matters, but I honestly can't make sense of the Michael Flynn retweet. What is it supposed to mean? I'll admit that it doesn't look good [see above about pointing out Jews] but I'd be hard-pressed to explain the anti-Semitism to anyone asking.
BTW, you know that thing when you're eating something really sweet and it tastes delicious but the sugar makes your teeth hurt so you have to stop even though you want to finish? Well, that's the thing that happened to me watching this: John Oliver on the GOP convention. He rails against the speakers for appealing to feelings over facts--and I'm not saying they don't--and the irony is just too sweet to bear. The only thing tempering it is Oliver's insufferable habit of mistaking inapt metaphors for humorous insight. It's like watching a bear on a unicycle trying to make pudding in a rusty muffler. *laughter and applause*
ReplyDeleteOh, this is entertaining "Politifact" is now referring to DWS as "Rep. Wasserman Schultz" and no longer DNC Chair. Great redirection for the ethically challenged one and right on cue.
ReplyDeleteDoesn't change a thing. A media this eager and willing to sabotage Sanders will keep chugging along in their bid to drag her into the Oval Office. Dammit, I hate how cynical election years make me.
ReplyDeleteBev, I'm not surprised. I'm surprised they haven't reasoned that she must be a conservative if she's done bad things, ergo we should call her "Conservative Debbie Wasserman-Schutlz."
ReplyDeleteEric, I don't think the media will change, but it is a shock to leftists who assumed the media was fair to them. LOL!
ReplyDeleteThat said, this just reinforces how badly Hillary is doing with the public. I think the evidence for a blowout is growing. What's more, it seems that Hillary isn't capable of turning this around... even with media help.
tryanmax, If Oregon is in play, then Hillary is beyond doomed. For one thing, that is the core of Democratic support -- hippies, witches, elitists and white trash. Secondly, have you noticed that more and more blue states are joining the list of battlegrounds? Her momentum is in the wrong direction.
ReplyDeleteI've always found John Oliver to be unbearable.
ReplyDeleteLooks like the democrat party is giving the GOP competition for the most stupid party, lol.
ReplyDeleteWhat a comedy of errors! It's almost as if fate itself is against Hillary in her bid to win the coronation of Queen Qualude.
BTW, John Oliver is a bloody twit!
ReplyDeleteAllena - I think you right about the most stupid party competition. However, Bernie's Sandernistas are taking his 'Vote For Hillary' command evem worse than the Trumpsters took the "Vote Your Conscience (not Trump)" from Ted Cruz.
ReplyDeleteMy fear is that the Hillary-hating left will turn violent.
Bev, I'm hoping they turn violent. There is no better way to remind the public of the danger of the left than for them to turn bloody during an intra-party fight.
ReplyDeleteAllena, The Democratic Party is many times more stupid, more hateful and more destructive. Be thankful you aren't stuck on their side.
ReplyDeleteBev,
ReplyDeleteOn Guccifer: If it comes out of Wikileaks, then it comes with Putin's stamp of approval.
LOL! Ted Cruz got booed for not supporting his party's candidate. Bernie Sanders got booed for encouraging support of his party's candidate.
ReplyDeletetryanmax, An interesting thought. In image after image I've seen of Bernie's supporters, they are almost always middle-aged women. Isn't that supposed to be Hillary's team?
ReplyDeleteAndrew - Re: Hillary's middle aged women problem. You see, we remember Hillary in the early '90's when she dissed women who weren't her - you know, the women who "stayed home and baked cookies". We also remember how mwny women who Bill sexual harassed, abused, and outright was accused of raping. And that she made sure that these women were demeaned and silenced with threats and payoffs for her own personal political gain. She also had the audacity to weigh in on the college rape issue by saying that women who have been sexually assaulted have to right to be heard. And I hear all the time about who cares what Bill did, he's not running...but he is with his wife as her partner.
ReplyDeleteYeah, we are middle-aged women, hear us roar...
Hillary has a white woman problem which is getting worse (poll is a few weeks old so things are probably worse now).
ReplyDeletehttp://newsblaze.com/usnews/politics/shocking-poll-results-on-womens-support-of-hillary-clinton_61632/
Compare this week’s poll with a June version. Hillary had a 12-point lead, 51 to 39 percent.
Furthermore, in June, Clinton held a 22-percent lead among college-educated white women. Today, pollsters have found that demographic is evenly split between the two candidates.
Anthony, Those are amazing numbers, especially as white women are the group that is supposed to carry her over the top.
ReplyDeleteBev, Right now, it's "hear me shout down Hillary's speakers." :)
ReplyDeleteI'm really amazed at how poorly Hillary is being received by women. She has really underestimated women up to now assuming that they would support her because of her gender alone.
I truly hope Assange has more goodies to come. Andrew, I don't do much blogging these days, but I have a question maybe you can answer. When Comey stated there was no history of the Feds indicting anyone without proof of malicious intent and listed something like 4 cases in 00 years, my thought was that was the wrong standard. Better, is there any possible way to determine how many cases have there been where evidence was found of mishandling classified info. and the government decided not to indict on those grounds. If there are none or only a couple, it undercuts the rationale used to not prosecute
ReplyDeleteHi Jed, welcome back!
ReplyDeleteI'm not aware of any way to figure out a number like that. What I can tell you is that many, many, many crimes require no negative intent at all. Just doing the act is enough.
To my knowledge, misuse of confidential/secret information is a crime that does not require any examination of intent. If that is the case, then any rational about "well, he didn't mean to break the law" is actually the Executive adding a requirement to a law which does not exist.
I also suspect that there are dozens of cases at Merit Service and probably in the courts of people who got whacked for violating the law without even knowing about it.
Apparently, Assange has a lot more.
thanks, Andrew. I figured somebody would have been on this, but I suspect there are legitimate reasons why the justice department would or should turn over files on cases that were investigated under the same statute, but charges were not brought because of lack of proof of intent. If I could have questioned Comey during the congressional hearing, I would have asked "Mr. Director, are you personally aware of investigations where there was evidence of mishandling classified documents, but the justice department chose not to bring charges because of lack of evidence of criminal intent? Is so, without citing specific cases, how many?" It would have trapped Comey, because if he said none or only a handful, one could rightfully demand "how does that set a precedent to not prosecute a case with clear evidence of mishandling regardless of intent when the statute clearly does not require it?"
ReplyDeleteand yes, I hope Assange holds back until it is too late for the Dems to dump her and bring in Pocahontas or Joe (the are going to put y'all back in chains) Biden. Hopefully, he delivers a Clinton Cash smoking gun e-mail.
ReplyDeleteJed, I hope he has emails from her game planning her defense to the families of the Benghazi victims. That would resonate. Or mocking her own supporters.
ReplyDeleteThe biggest giveaway with Comey was that he quickly swore that Hillary's case would not become a precedent for them. In other words, she was being handled differently than anyone else.