Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

[DanTex]

Go look through the last 20,000 emails you sent. Find the very worst one. The one you sent when you were in a bad mood, when someone broke up with you, when you were angry, drunk, awkward, half-joking, trying to blow off steam, whatever.

Then imagine it plastered all over the media, people insisting that that one worst email you ever sent, which you have now forgotten about and had no idea or intention anyone would ever see, and imagine people try to make the case that that one email represents you and everything you stand for.

It's good politics, sure. Congratulations Putin. But it's a farce.

[bravenak]

1. Oh my worst emails would really upset the world

If I were a celebrity or a politician.

[Hortensis]

15. Suspect that may be an understatement, lol.

Very good reading, though.

But the more accurate scenario would be to imagine all the emails that ever arrived in one's inbox, or the inboxes of various underlings, then having them plastered nationally and be blamed for those.

[bravenak]

25. Exactly

I really saw nothing with her name on it

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

2. Are the emails a fabrication?

[DanTex]

3. No. They are real. Real people say dumb things. All the time.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

6. Ah, dumb things.

In politics that's a killer...dumb things.

I wonder what other shoes are going to drop; revealing dumb things.

[DanTex]

10. Yeah, dumb things are killer in politics. People in politics need to understand

that there is no such thing as secrecy or privacy anymore. They can't act like regular people. Obama learned the lesson with his "bitter people cling to guns and religion" thing. Nobody is immune.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

14. Or Romney with his 47% comment.

Well, it's alright. I understand that HRC is hiring DWS. That will show the electorate that they won't have DWS to kick any longer.

[DanTex]

18. Or the Bernie surrogate who called Hillary a whore at that event.

Nobody is immune to saying the occasional dumb thing.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

20. I wonder what orher "dumb things" are going to come to light?

That may require others to resign or drop in the polls.

[DanTex]

23. Hopefully some from the Trump campaign. But Putin doesn't seem interested in hacking

into Trump's emails for some reason. Why do you think that is?

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

27. Hopefully, but stupid people do dumb things.

And sometimes those stupid things bite us hard.

As to whether Trump says dumb things...I would love to see an email where he said something wise.

And to the claims that Putin was responsible for hacking the DNC emails? I'd like to see the proof so it could create an international boycott of Russia.

That doesn't change the fact that the DNC was lying about its role during the run up to the general.

[DanTex]

31. The DNC wasn't lying about its role. A few DNC staffers sent dumb emails

out of 20,000. The dumb ideas weren't acted upon. It's a political mess, true. And for the sake of unity, DWS had to go.

BTW, there's already an "international boycott of Russia." That happened after they invaded Ukraine.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

33. There's always more to boycott, and I still wonder what other "dumb things" are to come?

[DanTex]

38. So you think that hacking into a DNC server is going to bring more sanctions than

invading a country? I guess that explains why you are salivating over more Russian hacks of the Democratic Party.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

43. Potentially, yes. If it became clear that it IS Russia behind this then

acting tough might actuall be beneficial to PBO and HRC.

Also, please don't tell me what I salavitate over.

I'm very concerned. That's all.

[pnwmom]

67. Without reading 20K of them how would we know? Other than the one Brad Marshall wrote,

which specific ones are you referring to?

[rjsquirrel]

4. And after you do that

Download and archive your email on a local secured hard drive with strong password protected encryption delete all your old archives off the server (make sure you clear out "All Mail" in GMail). Enable two factor authentication on every account possible. Use very strong and frequently changed passwords. Try to be hyper alert to phishing and social engineering attacks. Do NOT USE email ever for any sensitive communication. Text messaging (esp via an encrypted option like snapchat or iMessage) if you must communicate in writing.

Learn to use Pgp encryption if you just must use email for anything not pro forma.

Email has never been a secure medium. It's at best a postcard and not a letter and can be intercepted at any of dozens or hundreds of nodes it might pass through around the world on its way to or from your computer or device.

Do not leave your email archive on anyone's cloud.

There is almost no one who has used email for a few years whose life could not be seriously affected by having that archive hacked. Luckily young people are turning away from the entire medium.

[DanTex]

16. Yes good advice. Email with pgp only.

Even with text messaging, if you really want it to be secure, host your own server with end to end encryption. And turn off logging.

[rjsquirrel]

21. For most people

running their own server is not an option. And running a server securely is hard.

Just ask the DNC.

[DanTex]

29. This is true.

I'd be interested to know how the hackers got into the DNC server. I doubt they paid much attention to security, obviously a huge mistake. Did they run their own server or just use GoDaddy or whatever? Did the hackers use social engineering or actually exploit some technical vulnerability?

[rjsquirrel]

32. I believe spearphishing

was the vector, to deliver the malicious backdoor payload. And I think DNC had its own server iron, although I don't know this for sure.

Been running servers of many types for coming on 25 years. I know my way around firewalls and htaccess rules and intrusion detection. I've watched and managed countless servers under attack in real time. And I would not want to be responsible for running a mail server backend, myself. security has become a serious specialty.

[DanTex]

36. The humans are usually the weakest link in the chain.

I'd like to read more details about the DNC setup and how it was breached. I have a small-ish company, we have some servers that run services that I don't want to describe but I feel good about their security. Email is not one of them. I consider all email communications to be insecure. I guess I could use pgp, but if I have something secure to communicate, I do it some other way.

[Scuba]

5. I've never defrauded donors by pretending to run a fair process when I wasn't.

[DanTex]

7. Neither did the DNC. But they did send some dumb emails to each other.

[Squinch]

35. Exactly. And I'm not really believing that the wide-eyed ones are not getting the distinction.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

8. Yes, if I did that to my clients then I wouldn't have any.

[Android3.14]

9. Sounds like somebody is unhappy they got caught

Transparency is only good for the GOP, eh?

Well, I think we understand your values.

[leftofcool]

17. You equate Russia hacking our emails with transparency?

Funny, I thought emails were private, or supposed to be.

[Android3.14]

51. Good people are appalled that our own party was undermining the democratic process

[DanTex]

58. Except that the party wasn't undermining the democratic process.

There were a handful of dumb/offensive emails out of 20,000, and none of them were actually acted upon.

[Android3.14]

70. Oh suuure. They're apologizing because it was all fair and square

[DanTex]

71. They're apologizing because of one offensive email out of 20,000.

[Android3.14]

72. What does it feel like to engage in situational ethics?

Should the DNC remain impartial?
Yes.
Do the emails show the DNC favored Clinton?
Yes.

You can chop that turd any way you want, but it will still stink.

[DanTex]

73. I wouldn't know. Hillary is the nominee, get over it.

[Android3.14]

74. Gonna be a Pyrrhic victory

Especially for those incapable of seeing the stick in their own eye.

[DanTex]

75. I'm sure you'd like that. But it's not gonna happen.

[Android3.14]

76. Wrong there, Bubby

I'd much rather we had a straightforward primary, even with a Hillary win. This cheating, refusal to do anything substantive about the cheating, foreign meddling, and hypocritical responses by many of the Hillary advocates such as your own response makes me ill and it ruins the democratic process for all Americans.

You guys have poisoned the waterhole.

[DanTex]

77. Cheating, LOL. Bernie lost, fair and square, by a mile. Get over it.

The funniest thing watching MSNBC is the idiot protesters who want the superdelegates to override democracy and install Bernie by imperial decree. The very same people who were earlier cheering the fact that superdelegates were being reduced.

There's a reason the far left and the Green Party has never amounted to anything except for a pile of whines.

[Android3.14]

78. Like I said, I'm not arguing over the primary. Clinton's our candidate

The sad thing is watching folks still crow about the Primary win as if they recognize it is tainted but can only pretend otherwise, seeing so many Clinton supporters further alienate good people who are supporting Clinton despite that taint, and people behaving like the DNC's lack of ethics is a sillier version of Deflate Gate, and essentially boosting Trump's chances by mistreating others.

It is sad, pathetic and foolish.

[DanTex]

79. Yes you are. You just accused her of "cheating".

Newsflash: Hillary got millions more votes than Bernie.

Sad, pathetic and foolish are the protestors and the booing delegates who are talking about voting for Trump.

[Android3.14]

80. I challenge you to quote where I accused her of cheating

[DanTex]

81. "This cheating, refusal to do anything substantive about the cheating"

[Shandris]

11. And then imagine it a second time, to the NEXT DNC head.

How does the analogy work after that? Is it like a split personality?

[Bluenorthwest]

12. That which you sow is that which you will reap.

When casually tossing away your banana peel take caution not to slip upon it.

[merrily]

13. First, I never sent a single bigoted email and never will. Second, false equivalency much?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=2287501

[Warren DeMontague]

19. so now, we're not hung up on people saying offensive things? No big deal?

Hmmm. Interesting.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

22. It only matters with those some need to vilify.

[elehhhhna]

30. IOKIYAdnc

?????

[cyberpunk]

61. It's all tribal politics.

"You weren't for us at $time so we're going to vilify you for your reprehensible outbursts while justifying our own".

[pnwmom]

68. Other than Brad Marshall's offensive email, which are you referring to? n/t

[Warren DeMontague]

82. other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?

The email is what I was referring to. As someone who is both of Jewish heritage and an Atheist, yeah, it bugged me.

[pnwmom]

83. But DSW didn't write it, and for all we know she DID respond to it, since there was no repetition.nt

[Warren DeMontague]

84. My biggest problem with DWS is that she allied herself with Sheldon Adelson in 2014 to

defeat mmj reform in Florida.

And she doubled down on that stance repeatedly, also going to the times and insulting millennial women voters.

But that wasn't my point in this thread.

[Doctor Jack]

24. If you actually read the text of these emails

A lot of them are about people at the DNC trying to get ahold of the Sanders' campaign about various requests Sanders made and never hearing back. Such as the debate in California that Sanders demanded but later claimed was rejected by the DNC. The DNC was trying to get more information about when they would want the debate and whatnot but hearing nothing in response.

Many of the emails are increasingly frustrated DNC staffers trying to get Sanders campaign to fill out forms and to meet certain deadlines but no one at the Sanders campaign paying any attention. And yet everyone is focusing on extremely tame insults in low level staffers private emails. The horror.

[elehhhhna]

26. My worst email ever does not

Try to arrange the public bashing of




Oh fuck this if you don't get it you won't get it. Willful ignorance is a luxury you'd better enjoy now. Reality is going to be harsh.

[oxymoron]

28. This. nt

[CBHagman]

34. One characteristic of this election season...

...has been the near-constant display of harshly judgmental and unforgiving attitudes, including towards icons of civil rights, should they toss off a remark that gets up the nose of a supporter of one candidate or another. In the age of social media and 24/7 news coverage, it's terrifying how much people indulge their an initial reaction. What a difference a bit of reflection would make.

[Bluenorthwest]

37. Let he who is stoned cast the first sin!!!!

Let she who digs a pit fall in it!!!!

[SpareribSP]

39. The problem isn't any specific email -

The problem is the systematic working against Bernie privately, while announcing they're neutral publically. They purposefully engaged in a pattern of deceit and were ethically challenged.

The nitpicks of every single email are bad for sure, as you've said. However, it doesn't change the basic problem.

[DanTex]

40. A few emails out of 20,000 is not "systematic".

The problem is that the press chooses the very worst emails out of the whole dump. And I understand why they do it. What kind of story would it be of they said "19,990 out of 20,000 emails show the DNC operating as they should"? Nobody is going to click on that.

[Bluenorthwest]

41. The emails are not suprising because of all the crap hurled during the cycle with such

abandon. Days of 'That's not Bernie in those photos, he's lying about it because he's such a racist'. Days of that. And that was entirely fabricated. That was Bernie in those photos. That was a dirty trick done in public and with an air of impunity. We heard about chairs and bottles thrown when none were. Fabrications.

So the emails just show some of the back stage chatter that set up the things we saw happen and the tone we saw taken.

[DanTex]

42. That's true, with Bernie's campaign constantly slandering the DNC, I'm not surprised

some of the DNC members he was slandering sent private emails to each other venting about it. One of his surrogates even called Hillary a whore, it was pretty ugly. But throughout it all, the DNC behaved professionally and impartially.

But Putin caught them in a political trap. Yay Putin!

[Bluenorthwest]

44. Yeah, that sort of characterization is exactly what I'm talking about Dan. You can't

face up to the facts I listed so you do some adjective work. It's not going to fly any longer.

Let's talk about that email from Brad, the guy who wanted to bait Bernie's religion to his Southern Baptist 'peeps'. Southern Baptists are also biased against LGBT, so that means Brad would exploit that bias against candidates and deem that a perfectly acceptable tactic to giggle about in emails openly shared around the office. I do not find that acceptable. You seem to. Please explain your thinking.

[DanTex]

45. You forgot to actually list the "facts" you claim you listed.

Yeah, the email about Bernie's religion was every bit as odious as the Bernie surrogate who called Hillary a whore. Of course, that was a private email, whereas the Bernie surrogate proudly called Hillary a whore during a big rally attended by thousands of people who screamed with approval when he said that. But other than that, I would say they are commensurate in their odiousness.

[Bluenorthwest]

46. It was not a surrogate and he said 'corporate whores' not 'Hillary is a whore'. This is about

voracity, so try some on for size. Your characterization is miles from the truth. Miles.

Those emails are not private and their actions as Party employees are not private actions. If they are, they should return their salaries.

So we have evidence of a Party employee engaging openly and gleefully in the baiting of minorities to his bigoted pals and you compare that to something that did not happen in the way you describe it at all. That's not going to work. What you are trying to evade here, this open baiting of minority groups under the color of this Party, is far too serious to cover up with more primary bullshit. This Party does not belong to Southern Baptists only Dan. Get used to it.

[DanTex]

56. Of course not. Just a random guy Bernie chose to speak at one of his events.

He probably just picked people off the street for that.

And you're also right that preceding "whore" with "corporate" makes it totally fine. Totally. No worries at all. I like your ironic misspelling though. You are right, in a way it is about voracity.

It's also ironic that you bring up minority groups of color, groups that overwhelmingly voted for Hillary, the dreaded "establishment" candidate. As I said in the OP, let he who is without sin cast the first stone. Leak 20,000 private emails from any organization and you're going to find a handful of dumb/offensive remarks. Jeff Weaver said the same thing on MSNBC. In addition to the surrogate at that event, how many times do you think a Bernie staffer called Hillary a "whore" in a private email. I'd guess it's around 50.

But we'll never know because Putin isn't going to bother hacking into Bernie's emails. So congratulations. With an assist from the FSB, you got your scalp. You get to be outraged and voracious now.

[Bluenorthwest]

60. I'm giving exacting quotes while you editorialize to avoid the facts, it's script writing and

the fact that you approach an issue about bigotry and baiting of minorities by officials in this Party by using faked quotes and inaccurate reporting is dismissive of that very important issue. I get it Dan, you are Straight and White and Male and you don't see anything wrong with salaried Party workers baiting minorities to their bigoted 'peeps' but that is a corrupt and horrible thing. That guy, Brad and the office he worked in openly engaged in bigoted tactics. While cashing checks from the Party.

'Hey, I know some bigots who hate this minority, let's go tell them about this candidate and how he's so gay!!!' It's not acceptable. No wonder you can't manage to look it in the eye and call it by its name. But you need to. If you can't reject that level of bigotry and baiting then what's the point? That's what Trump does, seeks out bigots and baits them with rhetoric about minorities. DU criticizes him for that all day,every day. Brad did the same thing, and you want to wave it away. That's hypocrisy. Glaring hypocrisy.

I get it. If you admit what was done you have to defend it or reject it and so you dance. It's not very appealing, that avoidance of such a very definitive issue.

[DanTex]

62. It's crazy that you are trying to make excuses for a Bernie surrogate calling Hillary a whore.

At an event in front of thousands of fans screaming their approval. That's not a faked quote, there's video of it. To his credit, Bernie immediately repudiated that sexist language, but evidently some of his disgruntled fans still think that kind of thing is OK. That was an ugly moment in the campaign.

I have no idea what being me being straight, white and male (Bernie's core demographic) has to do with it. That offensive email was about religion, about bringing up Bernie's supposed atheism as a weakness in Bible Belt states. I happen to be an atheist (Bernie is not, apparently), so this email was an attack on people like me. I don't like the oversized role that religious plays in politics one bit. Of course I think using atheism against someone is wrong, and the guy who wrote the email has apologized.

But we're talking about private communications, not something said publicly at a campaign event in front of cheering fans. They never actually did attack Bernie for his supposed atheism, it was just one statement out of 20,000 leaked emails that barely amounts to anything. And as much as I don't like the idea of atheists like myself having our atheism used against us, I am also aware that if you leak 20,000 emails from anyone, you're going to find something objectionable.

If this guy had gone in front of a huge crowd and attacked Bernie for not believing in god, that would be a whole different story. And Jeff Weaver admitted this on MSNBC, he said that if you leaked all of his internal emails from the campaign you'd find some nasty stuff in there too. Of course. Because people are human.

[Scalded Nun]

47. The apologists on this site are really coming out of the woodwork

to justify and rationalize DWS/DNC actions. Everything from false equivalencies to toddler defenses to false claims of slander. Remember, it is not slander if it is the truth.

Judging from the volume of just the nasty and conniving emails there must have been quite a lot of pissed-off, shitfaced folks sitting at keyboards.

[giftedgirl77]

59. Lol, so are the haters of all things related to Democrats.

Weird how ppl just show up to voice their outrage hih?

[pnwmom]

69. Which of her emails specifically were offensive? Brad Marshall wrote an offensive one about atheists

but I don't think, for example, an email that says "LOL" is offensive. (Written because DSW disagreed with Weaver's claim that they had agreed on a California debate.)

So which ones did DSW write that we should tar and feather her for?

[joedogs]

48. makes me wonder if i should stay a democrat after this

I 'm now questioning my view on staying in the democratic party after 45 years of voting democrat and supporting the party. to find out they would rig the process makes me puke, I was a president of a local union one of the largest in the country, if I went to the national board and got them to rig the election in my favor not only would I be banned from ever holding office I think me and a few others would be going to prison. and as far as the evidence pointing to Putin. I start to question that or anything the democratic party would have to say after this. There will be those like the poster ranting he who is without sin BULLSHIT you fucking rigged the election . nobody with any god given sense would ever believe anything that came out of the DNC after this.

[DanTex]

57. Rigged election, LOL.

Looks like you're new here. Here's a tip. Conspiracy theories about rigged elections and moon landings belong in the Creative Speculation forum.

[Onyrleft]

49. You know it was actually Jesus

Who said, "Let he among you who is without sin cast the first stone. OUCH!! Dad dammit mom!".

[quaker bill]

50. Then I will cast it

I have worked in a position that requires political neutrality and evenhandedness for close to 25 years. I have written well beyond 20,000 e-mails, and well beyond 20,000 letters, and prepared any number of other types of documents. There is nothing in my record like this.

How do I know? I settle environmental disputes and enforce environmental law for a living. A community group that did not get all the results it desired, contacted the media and accused me of bias and corruption. In response I had a small team of investigative journalists ask for access to all my records. The law here requires complete transparency and full access by the media. So they spent 2 weeks in a conference room down the hall going though 1000's of my e-mails and probably a cubic yard or so of paper files. Every so often they would ask me to come down and explain something they found, usually with technical questions.

They found nothing to publish, and after two weeks the editor pulled them out and reassigned them to other issues.

Professionally it really is pretty easy. First, if the position requires neutrality and evenhandedness, then you do that. Second, if you don't want a sentiment pubished, don't write it, and certainly never press the "send" button on anything you would not be comfortable seeing with your name on it, on page 1.

Stone cast

[BlueMTexpat]

54. The emails being featured

predominantly were not even written by DWS.

Are you sure that you have never -ever - over that 25-year time span you mention received an email written by someone else that might have been just a teensy bit non-neutral? If you did and you were then held responsible for that email, it would be much more akin to the DWS situation today.

[Proud Public Servant]

52. I can honestly say

That I am not, and could not be, embarrassed but anything I ever sent in a work email. Gmail, sure, but at work I do my job, do it well, and do it respectfully. Maybe that's why I'm not a DC power player.

[BlueMTexpat]

55. How about what you

received?

[DanTex]

64. So you think it would be different if it was sent on gmail.

It's not so much the content that matters, but which email provider was used to send said content. Strange.

[Proud Public Servant]

66. Of course it matters

I don't care if some DNC staffer trashes the Sanders campaign to a friend in a personal email; hell, I'd expect that. I do care if they're doing it as part of their job. That seems fairly obvious.

[BlueMTexpat]

53. Thanks, DanTex!

This situation has flushed out a bunch of Ignore List candidates for me. Today has been record-breaking, in fact.

[Sivart]

63. This is the very worst, most lame excuse in the book.....

This crap is making our party look like amateurs. There is no excuse for it. A professional knows better. All professionals know better.

[DanTex]

65. I agree they should know better. Everyone in public life or even an executive level private sector

job needs to understand that emails are not secure. At all. If you don't want something leaked to the whole world on the internet, don't put it in an email.