Think the leaks are a "nothingburger"? Former DNC Chair Ed Rendell: "Serious" "Truly violates"

It's just his way. No harm no foul.

Oh, and the left, of course. But that goes without saying.

IT is a nothingburger, just like Rendell.

some people (the media, certainly) are acting as if crimes were committed, or that this in any way compares to the horror that was the bigoted mess in cleveland.

fine, it was "inappropriate".

compared to everything else going on, yes, it's a nothingburger.

... the DNC would act impartially.

- exactly what did they do (not just talk about doing, but actually do) that was damaging to impartiality
- exactly how damaging were those actions to impartiality
- were those actions countered by any actions that were not impartial in the other direction
- did it have any material effect on the outcome of the process
- and i'm not a lawyer, but there's probably more

generally speaking, non-profits don't get charged with fraud for this sort of thing. at worst, you see exactly what's happening, the head of the non-profit steps down.

it's not fraud every time a non-profit skirts its internal rules.

i could be a cagy lawyer maintaining a lay online image to reduce the risk of disbarment.
or i could just be a liar

but go ahead, ignore the rest of the post and stick with insults.

Let me give you an example: If I say I am raising money to accomplish x,y and z, but instead used it to fund a,b and c, that is fraud.

If I give a billion dollar donation to npr and explicitly state that they use it for funding Fresh Air, but instead use it to fund All Things Considered, and they agree - that is not only fraud it's a felony.

Non-profit are run by different laws than a for-profit corporation.

i'm arguing materiality and facts not in evidence.

non-profits violate internal rules *all the time* in ways big and small.

few such violations amount to actionable fraud.

Where people could start to be interviewed and depositions taken. Many of the emails also show DWS using DNC resources for her own primary election, which is against DNC rules, also against FEC law.

Did Debbie set the debate schedule to favor Hillary?

Did anyone from the DNC attempt to leak the story to the media? (Whether it was actually printed is irrelevant)

Were Hillary and Bernie camps given equal access to DNC resources?

Were funds spent to promote candidates? If so, how much was spent on each candidate?

Etc ... etc ... etc...

This will never happen on such a large scale, but if a donor had resources and time it would quite messy and very very expensive.

a *candidate* who got the short end of the impartiality stick might have a case if the rules under which the candidate decided to invest time and money weren't properly followed. if the dnc took actions that unfairly affected bernie, he would have an easier time proving material damage. if the suspicions turn out to be true, bernie could argue that he was defrauded, though so far it seems he isn't inclined to pursue such a case (and it would be rare for a politician to do so).

a *donor*, on the other hand, would be hard-pressed to show material damage. contributions to the dnc go to a large variety of purposes; the primary process is just one of them. moreover, it's not clear how the donor is damaged or defrauded if there were minor examples of bias. sure, if the entire primary process were a complete sham, then yes, sure, that would be fraud. but there's quite a long distance between, to take your example, setting the debate schedule to hillary's advantage and a complete sham.

to win the contest.
sort the rest out after we win.

Past that ed doesn't know jack shit.

He has been clowning for too many years to take him seriously anymore.

I pretend anyone who disagrees with my premise is simply throwing people under the bus as well. It certainly allows the bias in our narrative to appear more oppressed.

Got it part II.

The fact you give that blowhard credence because he agrees with you says a lot

I can do this all day with this jack ass. You want to hold him up as some paragon of virtue be my guest but he is still a clown.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511923424

give it a rest

ENOUGH already

FOCUS ON TRUMP

on edit, never fucking mind, done with you too, for good - I DETEST sore losers

But thanks for trying to impugn my motives instead of addressing the real problem.

This is nothing new. I wouldn't put too much stock in what he says.

You were once a Hillary fan, but since the DNC did the dirty, you blame Hillary because she benefited and do something strange or another. Got it!!

Because it's just not working out that way.

Seems like, indeed, this was the intent of the email leak.

But it appears to have failed miserably.

Note the context: your post is from two days ago, since then Ed said that the DNCs efforts were "ineffectual." As I argued before, the emails that were worrisome came out after Clinton had already shored it up.

Worrying about some people gossiping in emails after a candidate got a mathematically superior lead, not so much.

Especially when the originators of the hack were state actors from a foreign country that your Presidential opponent supports.

Much to the disappointment of the Russian hackers.

I just pity it at this point. Pure pity.

http://www.snopes.com/2016/07/25/what-we-know-so-far-about-wikileaks-dncleaks/

A handful of emails out of nearly 20k emails, and all after May.

Absolutely a joke of epic proportions.

She spends too much of her time attempting to debunk the clear Russia connection. Using none other than Wikileak's twitter account as "proof."

Oh no, the Russians did it: http://motherboard.vice.com/read/all-signs-point-to-russia-being-behind-the-dnc-hack

Anyone who dared wait a day to open their mouth and take a step back and analyze could've figured that one out.

'ol Kimmy will be doing an edit on her Snopes article and will likely wind up having to do many more edits as the DNC Hack turns out to be a Russian psyops as it clearly is.

The source of the emails is not at issue here; the content is.

Literally gossip in a handful of emails.

Serious business. Way more serious than literal Russian espionage supporting a candidate who is our nominated opponent who ... supports them.

A much much bigger deal than some snark some idiot writes in an email that actually never went anywhere.

And you know you didn't. And you know I'm telling the truth that you didn't. And you know that nothing you have provided means shit on the scheme of things.

Pretend all you want. You and I both know the actual truth.

Brazile and others have said that the hackers were inside the DNC for over a year and that they expect more DNC emails to be released soon. I assume Brazile has seen more emails than have been released so far and that they are damaging.

Rendell is likely to know many details of what is going on and the cleanup that is required.

I think the odds are that we will see a lot more emails before November, likely including missing ones from SOS Clinton and ones from the Clinton Foundation.

From the way the hacks of the DNC systems are described, the problems go far beyond just reading or making copies if emails. It sounds like they had access and control of the internal network. Most everything could have been exposed.

I suppose we won't know if they got into Clinton's servers until they start releasing more emails.

Just because Rendell is being a tool doesn't mean you have to.

So is the mindset that everyone needs to think like you or you're unhappy

this bernie bunch were ALL new to our local party.

don't give me bullshit blather about them not being real dems....the could and and should be if made to feel welcome...


what does not help is when the public face of our party pulls crap like the emails....

DWS didn't do anything ethically that isn't business as usual around this state. If you don't like it nationally, please do more than just extend an apology. They go by the premise that it's easier to apologize than to ask for permission.

I bet if I hacked any company's email and selectively released thousands of messages takenmoutmof context you'd find embarrassing things. People say stupid things on email.

It's a private political party, not an institution of government.

Nothing with a side of bullshit.