Obsession over Hillary emails = shilling for Judicial Watch and Citizens United.

[JaneyVee]

Its amazing who progressives will put on a cape for. So as of now, Bernie fans entire fantasy scenario/outcome rests upon an ultra conservative, rightwing group with ties to hate groups and white supremacists.

Meanwhile, some of these same progressives are also threatening to not vote for the candidate who has garnered overwhelming support from minorities, women, and communities of color. Which undoubtedly would harm minorities, women, and communities of color the most.

This has been an eye opening election cycle to say the least. Not only for whom the capes are put on for, but also for whom the capes are taken off for.

[hrmjustin]

1. Their masks are coming off.

[StayFrosty]

2. People that actually have something to lose won't stay home

On election night

Anyone that says Hillary is equal to or worse than Donald Trump has mental issues

Minorities and Muslims simply don't have the privilege to stay home and let Trump win

[JaneyVee]

3. Privilege is right. Will the privilege be put aside for solidarity with allies?

I guess we'll see.

[Fawke Em]

7. As the mother of half-Palesinian child, her wicked approach to Palestinians scares me

more than Trump.

Hillary doesn't even acknowledge them as people.

You'd have to have mental issues not to understand that after her uber hawk speech to AIPAC.

[StayFrosty]

17. It's all speculation

Of what she might do that's all they can attack her with.

Meanwhile you've got an orange clown on the right that has actually said he would bomb the crap out of the middle east and take their oil

I stand by my point that anyone that thinks Hillary is worse than, or equal to Trump has mental issues

[angrychair]

57. Hardly speculation

Just ask Honduras

[Fawke Em]

4. Concern over an unprotected server=concern our nation's defense secrets are in the hands of hackers.

Please learn the difference.

I don't give a shit about her emails. I care that her server contained national defense secrets that the Russians or the the Chinese now have in their possession.

[JaneyVee]

11. Snowden stole national security secrets and went to Russia.

[Fawke Em]

15. Snowden isn't running for president.

[JaneyVee]

20. But the only proof of national security secrets being exploited is by Snowden.

Not Hillary. So you are mad at a hypothetical scenario.

[insta8er]

39. The sheer ignorance in your rebuttal is astounding, you have heard something yet don't know the

full scope of it. Meanwhile you want to pass of that little knowledge as fundamentals in a defense of something indefensible, pulling in Snowden shows the sheer lack of understanding of the issues at hand. As another poster pointed out, Snowden is not running for President. If you would just take the time to educate yourself in the substance matter, you would make it so much more enjoyable for others on this board. Spewing hatred in itself is not going to make your candidate that much more attractive, in fact in my case your defense for her actually proves several points why she is such a danger not only to this country, but also to the world.

[synergie]

60. More projection. If you're going to pretend to care about national security, you cannot

attack someone whose server was not hacked and who did not do what you falsely accuse of her of doing, your defense of Snowden speaks to your own ignorance here and quite a lot of hypocrisy.

Perhaps if you would take your own advice and learn some facts, you might be able to engage in less ignorant, less angry, more pleasant interactions that don't "spew hate" and actually acknowledge substance, rather than simply attacking and abusing those who bring up points you either do not understand or cannot argue. Personal attacks are not the way to make the board enjoyable for people, nor does engaging in them make your false statements any less false, nor do they do much for the candidate you claim to support.

Your attack of this poster in the tone and with the terminology you use, which seems to be devoid of both facts and understanding proves that Bernie and his supporters are indeed a danger to the country and the world, like their counterparts engaging in the exactly the same behavior and rhetoric on the right.

The world believes that Bernie and Trump are angry men with little understanding of how the world works, and they're terrified that either of them might gain power, that's why rational people the world over, are pulling for Clinton.

[840high]

63. You don't know her

server was not hacked.

[insta8er]

66. Clearly you seem to hold the knowledge that her server was not hacked.

Yet we have several accounts of someone who is actually in Jail for hacking, that he did. But I understand that you discard this inconvenient fact.
My defense for Snowden comes from a background in IT (1996 till now) having worked for Microsoft, McAfee, HP, Olivetti and several more. Where does your knowledge come from? (this is not an attack, you implied ignorance and hypocrisy on my part when it came to Snowden).

As I stated above I know the facts, and they have a foundation of several decades in the industry..where are your credentials?
When it comes to the OP, she had to rely on you? to come and give a rebuttal? The OP in question is known for some of the more asinine attacks and posts on this board. So please spare me the pitty party on behalf of her. If she feel she can dish it out then she also has to take it when returned in kind.
You say False statements, so far you have turned up 1 point that relates to "the server was not hacked" where there are multiple accounts and reports contrary to that.

I am sorry that you don't like the tone, a tone that she has been setting on this board for several weeks. So please spare me your empathy she doesn't need it.

Looking at your response and the sheer disregarding of the information that is out there I would say it is you that has a somewhat limited world view.

I look forward to your comeback, as I sense your need for a rebuttal and a "win" for your OP.

[840high]

62. Well put. Thank you.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

5. There's probably a number of Republicans who are also here doing it......

[YouDig]

6. People going on about the emails are not progressives.

[Fawke Em]

9. You're right.

Progressives, like me, are concerned about her UNPROTECTED SERVER AND WHO HACKED IT.

I don't care about her emails. The emails were just the vehicle used to put the sensitive information on the hackable server.

[YouDig]

13. Why do you care about that? It's pointless except for as a way for the right-wing

to score points against Hillary. The only reason anyone talks about it is to help the GOP win in November.

[Fawke Em]

22. Why do I care?

Well, for several reasons.

1. There are protocols and laws in place to protect our nation's secrets - electronically or otherwise. People who hold security clearances should follow those protocols and laws for the security of our nation.
2. What she's already admitted would be enough to strip the average security clearance holder of that clearance and would possibly result in charges.
3. She did not have to have the intent to commit a crime to commit one. By sending and receiving sensitive and/or classified information on an essentially unsecure server - one that wasn't even encrypted for the first three months while she and her Blackberry that was connected to that server and could be easily intercepted were flying all over Asia - she unintentionally mishandled national defense data.
4. Because people who make such horrible decisions shouldn't be even considered for president. It's not a matter of helping the GOP, but protecting the COUNTRY from such poor judgment.

[YouDig]

27. You must have been really upset by the Snowden and Wikileaks stuff.

Positively livid. Because compared to that, this is nothing. Even if her server got hacked, which all signs point to it didn't, the content of it is nothing compared to what Snowden or Manning leaked. A few retroactively classified emails? It's a joke.

Snowden and Manning were real breaches of national security, but hey, look, we're still here. I'm not saying it was justifiable what they did, but it puts the Hillary thing in perspective.

[Fawke Em]

30. I'd answer this, but first I want you to do some research

on our country's horrible record on protecting whistle-blowers then realize that Clinton was not acting in a whistle-blower capacity. She just wanted to use her Blackberry for her own convenience and got the added bonus of being able to hide her emails from FOIA requests.

Intent does sometimes matter (even if it's not necessary to charge a crime).

[YouDig]

44. So you won't answer.

Snowden intentionally put highly classified information in the open. Hillary unintentionally put non-classified information at slightly higher risk, although even that is arguable. In light of all the leaks of US Gov info we've seen, it's not unlikely that her emails were safer on a private server than on a State Dept server.

After all, there's no evidence that she was actually breached, whereas we all know how many times the Government has been breached.

[Sparkly]

49. Yup.

True. And the Petraeus comparisons are even more ridiculous.

[Sparkly]

48. Let's review.

She did not send any classified materials. She didn't store them. They are now in the public domain, thanks to rightwing Judicial Watch. Her server was no less secure than any dot-gov system -- neither are considered secure for classified transmission. She did use the proper channels when she dealt with classified material. She was not hacked. If you're concerned that everything's been revealed, blame Judicial Watch and the FOIA. If you're concerned that something's been hidden, see Judicial Watch and FOIA.

This is insane.

[JonLeibowitz]

36. Yes, and people should have been upset at MLK for civil disobedience too

Good thing they put him in jail in Birmingham! He broke the law!

Point being that whistleblowers (admittedly Snowden has done more than that via revealing details of the global spy network, not all of which is illegal) and those who engage in civil disobediance are not a valid reason for excusing dangerous behavior by HRC.

[YouDig]

41. What Snowden did was a million times more dangerous than Hillary's email server.

Anyone attacking Hillary for "jeopardizing national security" (which she didn't) while defending Snowden is so hypocritical it is difficult to fathom.

Hillary may have unintentionally put non-classified information at slightly more risk of hacking, although it's arguable, in light of all the leaks, whether her info was more or less secure on a private server versus a government server. Snowden intentionally leaked huge amounts of highly classified information, on purpose. There are pretty much zero national security experts who don't think that Snowden harmed the nation's security. Which is the same number of non-FOX-News-working national security experts who think Hillary did.

[insta8er]

42. It is rather amusing, your candidate is actively courting the right wing..on walstreet but also

on main street, in one post you (your fellow cheerleaders) point out how great this is (big tent etc.) but when negatives are mentioned about your candidate they get a condemnation of "right wing smears". So what is it? do you want to be in bed with the right wing (like your candidate). Or don't you? from where I am standing you cannot have it both ways.

[YouDig]

45. It's not amusing it's political strategy. She's courting moderate Republicans,

as well she should, because if she gets them, she wins.

The email stuff is nutty right-wing stuff.

[insta8er]

46. Thank you for putting this so clearly in the right context. You just proven my case.

It fits, if it fits the narrative.

1. Getting money from the right wing bankers who have tanked our economy once before, and who we had to subsequently bail out with our tax money. <<<<<OK
2. When democratic party members bring up negative issues about their candidate <<<<<<Right wing stuff.

I can see the reasoning, I don't understand it. But I can see how you reason these points. Thank you!

[YouDig]

50. Helping Trump and the GOP is right-wing. Even if the people doing it

are claiming to be "progressive." They aren't actually progressives.

[insta8er]

51. And you know this because? you are making some bold statements that you don't have

anything to back up with.

[YouDig]

54. How do I know that helping Trump is right-wing?

Or how do I know that people doing right-wing things like helping Trump are not progressives?

Either way, it's not complicated.

[insta8er]

55. Yes I can see your reasoning. Not in line with your philosophy "right wing" in line "not"

Very clear, so clear a 5 year old would understand it. Thank you! And the part of helping Trump you just threw in there for good measure..because it could be basically anything. As long as it is anti your candidate.

[YouDig]

59. You're welcome. Vote Democratic in November. No Trump!

[insta8er]

61. I never was, but according to your reasoning I am a Trump guy.

Because I don't trust the shapeshifter candidate that tells me she is one of us, but likes to pall around with the guys from the other side of the aisle. I raise your suspicion for being a Trump guy when I say something about that, but you seem to be fully onboard with her palling around with known right wing DB's.

[CoffeeCat]

78. You are being reckless and irresponsible with your talking points

Hillary Clinton and the year-long investigation surrounding her unsecure, homebrew server---that even President Obama didn't know about--is a DEMOCRATIC issue.

Hillary Clinton is the frontrunner and it's possible that the FBI could present evidence and a case for indictment. This would mean the end of her campaign.

Fuck the Republicans. Who cares what the "right wing" says about this FBI investigation! This is a Democratic issue that Hillary Clinton brought into our party. The Democratic party could be left without a frontrunner, very close to the date of the Convention--if she is forced to drop out of the race.

That's not a right wing issue.

That's an issue that all good Democrats should be facing, discussing and dealing with. Like adults. Are you that deluded by a cult-of-personality mentality--that you can't even see that Democrats should understand this investigation and prepare for the outcomes?

You're hurting our party when you insist that Democrats remain ignorant about critical--and potentially very damaging--issues concerning this FBI investigation into Clinton's server.

[Bjorn Against]

8. This is very ironic coming from a person who linked to Stormfront

I have never seen a Bernie supporter link to Stormfront, that was you who did that. You used Stormfront as a way of attacking a Jewish candidate who lost family in the Holocaust. And you have the nerve to accuse Bernie supporters of latching on to White Supremecists when the evidence shows that it is you who reads white supremecist sites?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=486255

[Chasstev365]

12. Well played and so true!

[nadinbrzezinski]

14. Ok, why does that actually not surprise me?

I guess it was stormfront day

[JaneyVee]

18. Im Jewish and...

Had no idea what stormfront was. Poster I was responding to literally told me to go to stormfront. A poster on DU told me (a Jew) to go to Stormfront.

If someone on DU told an Af-American to go to the kkk site, whose side would you be on?

[Bjorn Against]

21. Your other comments on that thread suggest you knew exactly what Stormfront was

The comment that supposedly "told you to go to Stormfront" was in response to a post in which you said that Bernie supporters were the worst people on the internet. The person was clearly making the point that the people on Stormfront are worse than Bernie supporters, he was not literally telling you to go there nor is there anything to suggest that he knew you were Jewish.

[JaneyVee]

24. That comment was in response to op. Try connecting the dots.

And I notice you dont mind protecting Bernies Jewishness but are silent when mine was offended first. Again, I had never heard of it, nor do I ever want to again.

Put on the cape.

[Bjorn Against]

33. I never even knew you were Jewish until right now

I do not think that anyone should be linking to Stormfront to attack a Jewish candidate, being Jewish yourself does not make it acceptable to link to a white supremecist site.

[JaneyVee]

73. So wheres my apology?

I was the one who was told to go there, i did quickly from my phone, the first thread I found was one which was kinda praising Bernie on guns and immigration while slamming Hillary. Didnt stay long enough to care what site it was, thought it was just another progressive anti-Hillary site. There ya go. The full explanation. Me, a Jew, was told to go to an antisemetic site. Was on my phone. Not exactly optimal reading situation, nor did i care. Still dont.

[Bjorn Against]

74. You want me to apologize to you because you linked to Stormfront?

Sorry I don't apologize to people who link to Stormfront to attack a Jewish candidate.

[JaneyVee]

76. But you linked to a link to Stormfront...

And you keep bringing it up to harass me with it, even though you now know Im Jewish.

[Bjorn Against]

77. The Stormfront link is all yours, I did not post it

I don't believe that anyone should get a free pass for using Stormfront to attack a Jewish candidate.

[bvf]

68. You actually linked to Stormfront?

You honestly think anybody believes you didn't know what it was?

That would be impossible to believe even if you had spent absolutely no time on the web before joing DU, AND had never visited even a single website other than this.

Over 18,000 posts here and had no clue??

Just stop it.

[Hare Krishna]

53. Emailing the Elders of the Tribe.. brb

...

[nadinbrzezinski]

72. You should have taken at least a minute to read the site you were intending to link to

and most Jews I know can identify white supremacy and antisemitic thoughts maybe in two minutes. Some people really have their radar not fully working.

[IdaBriggs]

58. Wow. Thank you for sharing that.

The credibility of the OP is at very low points (unless there was an apology?).

[840high]

65. I remember that.

[jillan]

75. Bingo! I would not be surprised if this poster despises Bernie as much as she does because of his

religion.

[Ned_Devine]

10. I know! Why did the right wingers delete those emails?! So crafty and devious

[Autumn]

16. Bernie is not a part of this, I wouldn't give a fuck who her opponent could be

If Bernie were never born, if he were never in the picture Hillary would still be Hillary, doing stupid shit. Hillary and Hilary's actions are the fucking problem. No one else. If she loses, the harm minorities, women, and communities of color suffer is square on her, no one else. That's on her fucking back.

[JaneyVee]

19. Hillary got this, no need to worry.

[frylock]

26. Then why are you worried?

[AgingAmerican]

34. Why the endless pearl clutching, hand wringing, externalized resentment, and cognitive dissonance?

[Autumn]

35. I'm not worried at all. But you people sure are.

That's why the deflection and premature blame on Bernie, Bernie's supporters or anyone else. You people blame everyone but Hillary. Come's a time when you all need to put responsibility for her fucking actions on her, where it belongs.

[Fawke Em]

28. She does seem to misspeak a lot.

[frylock]

23. If you don't see it on DU, then it doesn't exist.

Gosh. Again, you seem worried.

[cherokeeprogressive]

25. Crock of shit.

[HooptieWagon]

29. Uh, ok. Whatever you say.

[AgingAmerican]

31. Um, it's an FBI investigation

And Hillary LOVES Citizens United, BTW.

[Vote2016]

32. Shilling for the Freedom of Information Act and the Constitution, too

[Warren DeMontague]

37. "Who progressives will put a cape on for"-- How about 'megachurch moms' and bush donors?

[Dem2]

38. Seems anything applies when destroying one's enemy

It is hard to believe the Democrats will do this to each other

[Trust Buster]

40. This best explains how desperate they have become. They support the efforts of Judicial Watch.

Judicial Watch's founder is Larry Klayman. Larry Klayman is the guy who stood outside of the White House during the government shutdown and demanded that the Muslim inside get up off of his knees and come out with his hands up. This is the kind of person that sanders supporters are now working in lock step with. Totally appalling.

[AzDar]

43. Hillary was incredibly irresponsible and possibly criminal when she decided to set up a private

server in her basement. There is NO ONE, no matter how badly you want to shift blame/focus, responsible
for this egregiously stupid act, other than Hillary Clinton.

[mcar]

47. So sad to see

[Triana]

52. I don't give a f*ck about her goddamned emails. I DO give a f*ck a obout...

...her support of TPP and any/all other "free trade" agreements she's ever seen, her support of KeystoneXL, her support of fracking, her support of outsourcing US jobs, her unconditional support of (and millions of money she gets from) Wall St., her refusal to push for SINGLE-PAYER or Universal Healthcare, her only RECENT support of LGBT rights, her mushy-at-best support of Social Security and preventing ANY cuts to it (and her NONEXISTENT SUPPORT for expanding it), the FACT that 10 of the biggest corprat tax dodgers are huge contributors to her campaign and the Clinton Foundation and....should I go on?

F*CK the emails. The problems with Hillary are HELLA bigger and more numerous than that.

[IdaBriggs]

56. I used to wonder how Republicans could ignore the crimes

of Bush Junior. Now I see Clinton supporters doing the same thing. It is extremely sad. There is no analysis, just faith, and "Hillary as the Savior" is a TERRIBLE religion.

[pnwmom]

64. "Join us in our lawsuit to stop Obama's radical agenda." ~ Judicial Watch

People here have been posting Judicial Watch's wing-nut videos almost every day.

The Hillary haters on the left are serving as the echo chamber for the witch-hunters on the right.

[rhett o rick]

67. You mentioned Citizens United which is very ironic. Originally organized to stop Hillary

and now it looks like it will help her defeat the candidate that is supported by the People. And if you believe she will nominate someone that looks to overturn CU, then I bet you believed her when she told you there were WMD in Iraq. There weren't and she was either fooled by Bush or complicit. But I know you don't care who she nominates, you don't care that she supports cluster bombs are are particularly deadly for children, you dont care if she lied about Iraq. You don't care that Black Lives Matter said the following:
“Make no mistake, Hillary Clinton's efforts to push these policies (tough sentencing for drug related crimes that hurt the AA more than anyone) resulted in the continued destruction of Black communities and the swift growth of our mass incarceration crisis.”

You disparage progressives when it has been progressive down thru history that have done more for social justice than the conservatives that you embrace.

[mindwalker_i]

69. "Shut up, shut up, just shut up!"

[oasis]

70. Their e-mail/indictment prayers won't be answered. I have

zero sympathy for the pathetic yearnings of hypocrites.

[SixString]

71. Posts hidden by Jury: 7