DNC Chair, Donna Brazile, repeatedly leaked debate questions to Clinton campaign

[Big_Lou]

it's pinworm...

Spoiler

I was headed next door to catch a (further) free buzz and ogle the neighbor's family, but I glanced at my desk and saw alerts from the darling ANAL-XXX-S!

 

[Padawanbater2]

do you really think her answer on flint in one single debate swayed 3 million votes?

The pivot to whether or not the verified cheating swayed the election enough to make a difference is irrelevant to the fact that it happened. You and @Fogdog were some of Clinton's biggest supporters in the 'DNC Email Leak' and 'What's More Important: Democracy or Winning' threads, and I should add @Unclebaldrick to that list as I'd like to get his opinion on this too

After everything that has come to light; Debbie Wassermann Schultz resigning in shame after pressure from the democratic base over unethical behavior during the democratic primary, then being hired to the Clinton campaign on the same day, evidence DWS and the Clinton campaign had direct contact with and influenced multiple mainstream journalists for their mutual benefit, evidence of Donna Brazile feeding multiple debate questions to the Clinton campaign ahead of time in order to influence the outcome, do you still believe the 2016 democratic primary was, as Bill O'Reilly would say, fair and balanced? Do you honestly believe Hillary Clinton won fair and square?

she should go to jail for violating bylaws since she wasn't even DNC chair at the time.

So first when it was DWS, the argument you used was basically that the DNC bylaws were just guidelines, not actual laws, and that the leadership of the DNC breaking them wasn't actually illegal, so pretty much just get over it and accept Clinton as the nominee. But how can you claim Clinton won a fair election with all this evidence standing up against that idea? I mean, what do you say to the direct evidence of Clinton being fed multiple questions by Brazile, then being hired as the DNC chair after? Do you think that's just some giant coincidence?

The message is don't run as a Democrat when you're an independent.

This is disappointing

So what do you think this points to? What's the big picture?

I think this, as well as the other evidence that has come out, points to direct corruption within the government. The evidence proves that the Clinton campaign colluded with multiple members of the mainstream media in order to both push a positive narrative and gain any and every advantage to winning the nomination against a candidate that was surging in popularity.

I think the big picture is that we're left with two candidates that no one really likes that we just have to basically put up with because we're made to believe the other one is so much worse, and if they get elected, the world as we know it will cease to exist. I Think probably more than anything this election has shown us how obsolete and outdated our executive electoral process has become, and how in dire a need of change it is. Or maybe how naive I actually was to believe that righteousness would win the day, all that has to happen is for good people to believe it.. I used to think all you had to do was convince people of the truth for them to accept it..

 

[Padawanbater2]

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” -Edmund Burke

 

[UncleBuck]

PSSSSTTT....bernie lost.

 

[ttystikk]

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” -Edmund Burke

Yep. So it has come full circle from when I saw the evidence of it firsthand on the night of March 1st, at the Colorado Primary.

So what do good men do when faced with the sheer staggering scale of the injustice? My mind boggles. There is no recourse for the stealing of one's democracy.

 

[ttystikk]

PSSSSTTT....bernie lost.

I think the point being made is that he was cheated out of it, which does not make Mrs Clinton a winner in any sense.

 

[UncleBuck]

he was cheated out of it

so you think one question about flint that she was prepared to answer anyway swayed 3 million voters?

she won fair and square.

 

[Padawanbater2]

PSSSSTTT....bernie lost.

so show me the evidence that the media is following the plot of these mid level staffers then.

Here you go, two questions Brazile leaked to the Clinton campaign directly being asked at a Town Hall and an actual debate

 

[ttystikk]

so you think one question about flint that she was prepared to answer anyway swayed 3 million voters?

she won fair and square.

No, but one more straw on the load that broke the camel's back.

 

[Padawanbater2]

so you think one question about flint that she was prepared to answer anyway swayed 3 million voters?

she won fair and square.

You're naive if you believe Brazile and others only leaked the couple questions that were discovered so far by Wikileaks, especially after Brazile herself said;

"Subject: Re: From time to time I get the questions in advance

I rarely hear it. I'll send a few more. Though some questions Roland submitted"

Obviously Brazile, as well as probably every journalist on the list the Clinton campaign invited to dinner, is a corporatist shill. A new poll conducted by Suffolk University concluded that 75% of respondents believed the mainstream media favors Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump, including half of Clinton supporters.

This is Romney +14 points level denial

 

[Padawanbater2]

so you think one question about flint that she was prepared to answer anyway swayed 3 million voters?

she won fair and square.

If it was fair, then why didn't Bernie get the question ahead of time, too?

 

[Padawanbater2]

So here's a really good explanation of the standard millennial mindset towards voting for Hillary Clinton. Louis CK on Conan criticizing millennials not voting for Clinton, Kyle's response begins at 2:20

 

[UncleBuck]

You're naive if you believe Brazile and others only leaked the couple questions that were discovered so far by Wikileaks, especially after Brazile herself said;

"Subject: Re: From time to time I get the questions in advance

I rarely hear it. I'll send a few more. Though some questions Roland submitted"

Obviously Brazile, as well as probably every journalist on the list the Clinton campaign invited to dinner, is a corporatist shill. A new poll conducted by Suffolk University concluded that 75% of respondents believed the mainstream media favors Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump, including half of Clinton supporters.

This is Romney +14 points level denial

are you literally a retarded small child?

i have to ask because literally anyone of our intelligence has already prepared for every question they could ask, and some they won't ask.

not every question that is submitted makes it to the debate anyway. and clearly, by your own citation, she is talking about submitted questions, not necessarily the ones that absolutely will get asked.

you or i would prepare for any question, whether it would be asked or not. you or i would look for clues and hints about what questions might be submitted. you or i would use any information we could get to be better prepared. you or i would even consider the likelihood of a submitted question being asked.

don't be fucking retarded. this is more mundane than my daily shit.

 

[schuylaar]

Funny how Trump has all these baseless accusers lining up, while Clinton is being buried with evidence.

Makes sense, election is less than a week away. Clinton must be a little worried.

Spandex..you brought your avi cracker back.. how come this one has burn marks?

 

[schuylaar]

So what do you think this points to? What's the big picture?

That it's okay to dupe the American people and disregard their choice forcing us to deal with the stress of two uber unpopular candidates just like was predicted by polls.

If Bernie were still in, he'd mop the floor with that walking Tic-Tac dispenser.

 

[schuylaar]

are you literally a retarded small child?

i have to ask because literally anyone of our intelligence has already prepared for every question they could ask, and some they won't ask.

not every question that is submitted makes it to the debate anyway. and clearly, by your own citation, she is talking about submitted questions, not necessarily the ones that absolutely will get asked.

you or i would prepare for any question, whether it would be asked or not. you or i would look for clues and hints about what questions might be submitted. you or i would use any information we could get to be better prepared. you or i would even consider the likelihood of a submitted question being asked.

don't be fucking retarded. this is more mundane than my daily shit.

Um..I taught my millennials to question authority..even yours, Buckster.

 

[schuylaar]

Do you still have that duster and those boots (LOLOL) that you were wearing in the klan rally pics?

Duster.

 

[twostrokenut]

The pivot to whether or not the verified cheating swayed the election enough to make a difference is irrelevant to the fact that it happened. You and @Fogdog were some of Clinton's biggest supporters in the 'DNC Email Leak' and 'What's More Important: Democracy or Winning' threads, and I should add @Unclebaldrick to that list as I'd like to get his opinion on this too

After everything that has come to light; Debbie Wassermann Schultz resigning in shame after pressure from the democratic base over unethical behavior during the democratic primary, then being hired to the Clinton campaign on the same day, evidence DWS and the Clinton campaign had direct contact with and influenced multiple mainstream journalists for their mutual benefit, evidence of Donna Brazile feeding multiple debate questions to the Clinton campaign ahead of time in order to influence the outcome, do you still believe the 2016 democratic primary was, as Bill O'Reilly would say, fair and balanced? Do you honestly believe Hillary Clinton won fair and square?

So first when it was DWS, the argument you used was basically that the DNC bylaws were just guidelines, not actual laws, and that the leadership of the DNC breaking them wasn't actually illegal, so pretty much just get over it and accept Clinton as the nominee. But how can you claim Clinton won a fair election with all this evidence standing up against that idea? I mean, what do you say to the direct evidence of Clinton being fed multiple questions by Brazile, then being hired as the DNC chair after? Do you think that's just some giant coincidence?

This is disappointing

I think this, as well as the other evidence that has come out, points to direct corruption within the government. The evidence proves that the Clinton campaign colluded with multiple members of the mainstream media in order to both push a positive narrative and gain any and every advantage to winning the nomination against a candidate that was surging in popularity.

I think the big picture is that we're left with two candidates that no one really likes that we just have to basically put up with because we're made to believe the other one is so much worse, and if they get elected, the world as we know it will cease to exist. I Think probably more than anything this election has shown us how obsolete and outdated our executive electoral process has become, and how in dire a need of change it is. Or maybe how naive I actually was to believe that righteousness would win the day, all that has to happen is for good people to believe it.. I used to think all you had to do was convince people of the truth for them to accept it..

Thats fair. Is it in dire need of change because some are choosing to not adhere to the rules or should the rules simply be enforced. That conversation needs to happen.

 

[sixstring2112]

are you literally a retarded small child?

i have to ask because literally anyone of our intelligence has already prepared for every question they could ask, and some they won't ask.

not every question that is submitted makes it to the debate anyway. and clearly, by your own citation, she is talking about submitted questions, not necessarily the ones that absolutely will get asked.

you or i would prepare for any question, whether it would be asked or not. you or i would look for clues and hints about what questions might be submitted. you or i would use any information we could get to be better prepared. you or i would even consider the likelihood of a submitted question being asked.

don't be fucking retarded. this is more mundane than my daily shit.

im not sure i like how you keep using the word "retarded" around the site.moron is a much more PC term,please stop

 

[spandy]

Spandex..you brought your avi cracker back.. how come this one has burn marks?

You are right.

Fixed!