Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
FourScore
FourScore's Journal
FourScore's Journal
March 28, 2016
Pretty damning stuff. Somebody definitely hacked the election, although, unfortunately, no concrete proof. I believe a full FBI investigation needs to be instigated, and Bernie should sue the state of AZ.
https://anonymousinvestigationsblog.wordpress.com/2016/03/26/anonymous-report-was-arizonas-voter-registration-database-hacked/
An excerpt:
These are glaring results.
Can also follow on twitter here: https://twitter.com/HiveComm/with_replies
EDIT: This was their initial release on March 26:
:large
Anonymous has released a report pertaining to alleged hacking of the AZ election
(If interested, please help to keep this kicked for wider viewership. It is getting lots of recs, but dropping like a stone. I find it particularly important that voters in NY and CA be on the alert and check out their voter registration. Thank you.)Pretty damning stuff. Somebody definitely hacked the election, although, unfortunately, no concrete proof. I believe a full FBI investigation needs to be instigated, and Bernie should sue the state of AZ.
https://anonymousinvestigationsblog.wordpress.com/2016/03/26/anonymous-report-was-arizonas-voter-registration-database-hacked/
An excerpt:
Concerned that we might only be hearing one side of the story, Anonymous has used our very best online research methods in an attempt to discover what the reach of this potentially rather substantial scandal may be. We searched deeply on multiple social media sites, using a wide variety of search terms. We looked into every news story we could reasonably find reporting on this phenomenon. We engaged directly with a few Republicans and Hillary Clinton supporters on Twitter. We tried various general Google searches. We were looking very closely at specific reports where individuals said either that they or someone they knew directly (a relative, friend, or person they were at the polls with) had experienced having their voter registration changed without their knowledge. Where we were able to have direct contact with Democrats making such claims, we asked whether they supported Sanders or Clinton. While these results are far from comprehensive (there are likely well over a thousand of these little reports out there), we have done our best to get an accurate sampling. As reported on Twitter, these are our results:
?w=840
SNIP
...Arizona’s Secretary of State website stores its data in SQL databases. Properly maintained (a big question given Arizona’s constant penny wise, pound foolish budgeting), SQL databases can be defended against hackers with a moderate or lesser skill level. But SQL databases in general have been known to have a particular, structural flaw for decades. SQL Injection, where random data is entered into a data entry field, can trigger an SQL database to give up most or all of its goods to an unauthorized user. SQL Injection is nearly always the first line of attack a hacker learns, and at its most basic level, it can literally be taught to a toddler . A Vice article from November is entitled “The History of SQL Injection, the Hack That Will Never Go Away.” It notes that SQL Injection repeatedly takes the number one spot in Open Web Application Security Project Foundation’s triennial report on threats that websites face...
SNIP
...At this point, it is clear that some of the cases, like Ms. Robertson’s, stem from ridiculous new procedures put in place by Arizona’s Secretary of State and Motor Vehicles Division. That said, other cases like Bianca’s, clearly do not fit that pattern, and the apparent overwhelming impact on Sanders supporters cannot be explained by a glitch that should have hit all parties and candidate supporters in roughly equal numbers.
The numbers in Pima County and Maricopa are particularly glaring. Reports of five-inch thick piles of provisional ballots and up to 2/3 of ballots in a particular voting location in Pima are quite suspicious. Numbers Anonymous is using internally to monitor election results across the country suggest that Sanders should have won student rich, and reliably progressive Pima county comfortably. The lack of polling stations alone in Maricopa County cannot explain how Phoenix, with a Democratic Mayor, could see Republicans show up at the polls on election day to the tune of around 80,000 voters, while Democrats cast a paltry 33,000 votes in Maricopa County on election day...
SNIP
...In that vein, we should note that there are now likewise dozens and dozens of reports of Sanders supporters in places like Pennsylvania and New York, with upcoming closed primaries, finding that their own registrations have been switched. One such report arrived in our inbox on Friday morning, the final day for new voter registrations in New York. The emailer told us that the website for New York was going up and down intermittently. We asked what link they were using. When we checked it, our Tor Browser informed us that the website was insecure, presenting an invalid encryption certificate.
link to Anonymous's AZ switched database:
https://docs.zoho.com/sheet/published.do?rid=b7lrg2140d3169d644b8082fea3207bbb73c5
?w=840
SNIP
...Arizona’s Secretary of State website stores its data in SQL databases. Properly maintained (a big question given Arizona’s constant penny wise, pound foolish budgeting), SQL databases can be defended against hackers with a moderate or lesser skill level. But SQL databases in general have been known to have a particular, structural flaw for decades. SQL Injection, where random data is entered into a data entry field, can trigger an SQL database to give up most or all of its goods to an unauthorized user. SQL Injection is nearly always the first line of attack a hacker learns, and at its most basic level, it can literally be taught to a toddler . A Vice article from November is entitled “The History of SQL Injection, the Hack That Will Never Go Away.” It notes that SQL Injection repeatedly takes the number one spot in Open Web Application Security Project Foundation’s triennial report on threats that websites face...
SNIP
...At this point, it is clear that some of the cases, like Ms. Robertson’s, stem from ridiculous new procedures put in place by Arizona’s Secretary of State and Motor Vehicles Division. That said, other cases like Bianca’s, clearly do not fit that pattern, and the apparent overwhelming impact on Sanders supporters cannot be explained by a glitch that should have hit all parties and candidate supporters in roughly equal numbers.
The numbers in Pima County and Maricopa are particularly glaring. Reports of five-inch thick piles of provisional ballots and up to 2/3 of ballots in a particular voting location in Pima are quite suspicious. Numbers Anonymous is using internally to monitor election results across the country suggest that Sanders should have won student rich, and reliably progressive Pima county comfortably. The lack of polling stations alone in Maricopa County cannot explain how Phoenix, with a Democratic Mayor, could see Republicans show up at the polls on election day to the tune of around 80,000 voters, while Democrats cast a paltry 33,000 votes in Maricopa County on election day...
SNIP
...In that vein, we should note that there are now likewise dozens and dozens of reports of Sanders supporters in places like Pennsylvania and New York, with upcoming closed primaries, finding that their own registrations have been switched. One such report arrived in our inbox on Friday morning, the final day for new voter registrations in New York. The emailer told us that the website for New York was going up and down intermittently. We asked what link they were using. When we checked it, our Tor Browser informed us that the website was insecure, presenting an invalid encryption certificate.
link to Anonymous's AZ switched database:
https://docs.zoho.com/sheet/published.do?rid=b7lrg2140d3169d644b8082fea3207bbb73c5
These are glaring results.
Can also follow on twitter here: https://twitter.com/HiveComm/with_replies
EDIT: This was their initial release on March 26:
:large
March 27, 2016
:
https://twitter.com/HiveComm/with_replies
AZ House of Representatives is HEARING public TESTIMONY regarding ELECTION - MONDAY 10:00
:
https://twitter.com/HiveComm/with_replies
March 24, 2016
By Auburn Parks
Wednesday Mar 23, 2016 · 9:54 AM EST
People love narratives. And the media love narratives. So lets compare two possible narratives going into the next Dem primary (either 2020 if HRC loses to Trump or 2024 if she becomes the president (keep in mind that these are political narratives, they are not necessarily true)
Narrative 1:
Bernie drops out of the race today after failing to win Arizona and gives an impassioned speech imploring his followers to vote for HRC in the primaries moving forward. Given HRC’s current lead in elected delegates of 58% to 42%, we could realistically expect her to further expand that margin in the back half of the primary to maybe 25% of elected delegates, throw in the superdelegates (15% of total delegates) and she ends up winning the nomination by about 40%.
In this scenario, the establishment will have the narrative that a progressive candidate is simply not viable in the next primary. And they will be able to point to the 40 pt blowout that Bernie suffered at the hands of HRC as evidence for why this narrative is self-evident. And sadly, a great many people will believe the narrative simply because they believe the authority figures that tell it. In a similar way that Bernie has been crushed by the false narrative that he is “radical” when his positions are right smack dab in the center of the 1960’s70’s Dem party platform (his policy positions are also supported by majorities when looking at the polling on Medicare for all, raising taxes on .1%, eliminating student debt servitude, reigning in Wall st, and investing in infrastructure). He’s also been hurt by the false narrative that HRC is more electable when no objective measures support that story. But again, truth is not the purpose of political narratives, politics is the purpose. So even though the narrative of progressive Dem candidates not being credible would be objectively false, the story would be easy to tell, and easy to believe if HRC wins the nomination by 40 pts. And this is exactly the story that Corporate Dem establishment would like to tell.
Now narrative 2:
Bernie stays in the race, fighting tooth and nail all the way til the convention and ends up losing the elected delegate count by 5%, throw in a more split superdelegate count (maybe 80-20) and HRC would end up winning the nomination by just 15%. In this scenario, the narrative would favor our progressive side and it would go a little something like this… HRC was the most well known Dem candidate in decades, had the most universal support of the establishment of any recent Dem candidate, had the largest and best funded organization of any Dem primary candidate. And even with all those hugely powerful elements in her corner, she still only managed to beat by 5 pts a largely unknown, self described socialist, old white Jew from uber-liberal snowy white Vermont.
In my mind, the political narrative possibilities of the two above scenarios are extremely powerful and important moving forward. And scenario 2 would be just as extremely unwelcome by the corporate Dem shills that support the status quo and HRC, as it would be a boon to progressives moving forward. And I think this is the primary reason why TPTB want Bernie to drop out of the race right now, its in their best interest interest moving forward.
http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/3/23/1505246/-The-real-reason-the-Dem-Establishment-wants-Bernie-to-get-out-of-the-Race
The real reason the Dem Establishment wants Bernie to get out of the Race
The real reason the Dem Establishment wants Bernie to get out of the Race.By Auburn Parks
Wednesday Mar 23, 2016 · 9:54 AM EST
People love narratives. And the media love narratives. So lets compare two possible narratives going into the next Dem primary (either 2020 if HRC loses to Trump or 2024 if she becomes the president (keep in mind that these are political narratives, they are not necessarily true)
Narrative 1:
Bernie drops out of the race today after failing to win Arizona and gives an impassioned speech imploring his followers to vote for HRC in the primaries moving forward. Given HRC’s current lead in elected delegates of 58% to 42%, we could realistically expect her to further expand that margin in the back half of the primary to maybe 25% of elected delegates, throw in the superdelegates (15% of total delegates) and she ends up winning the nomination by about 40%.
In this scenario, the establishment will have the narrative that a progressive candidate is simply not viable in the next primary. And they will be able to point to the 40 pt blowout that Bernie suffered at the hands of HRC as evidence for why this narrative is self-evident. And sadly, a great many people will believe the narrative simply because they believe the authority figures that tell it. In a similar way that Bernie has been crushed by the false narrative that he is “radical” when his positions are right smack dab in the center of the 1960’s70’s Dem party platform (his policy positions are also supported by majorities when looking at the polling on Medicare for all, raising taxes on .1%, eliminating student debt servitude, reigning in Wall st, and investing in infrastructure). He’s also been hurt by the false narrative that HRC is more electable when no objective measures support that story. But again, truth is not the purpose of political narratives, politics is the purpose. So even though the narrative of progressive Dem candidates not being credible would be objectively false, the story would be easy to tell, and easy to believe if HRC wins the nomination by 40 pts. And this is exactly the story that Corporate Dem establishment would like to tell.
Now narrative 2:
Bernie stays in the race, fighting tooth and nail all the way til the convention and ends up losing the elected delegate count by 5%, throw in a more split superdelegate count (maybe 80-20) and HRC would end up winning the nomination by just 15%. In this scenario, the narrative would favor our progressive side and it would go a little something like this… HRC was the most well known Dem candidate in decades, had the most universal support of the establishment of any recent Dem candidate, had the largest and best funded organization of any Dem primary candidate. And even with all those hugely powerful elements in her corner, she still only managed to beat by 5 pts a largely unknown, self described socialist, old white Jew from uber-liberal snowy white Vermont.
In my mind, the political narrative possibilities of the two above scenarios are extremely powerful and important moving forward. And scenario 2 would be just as extremely unwelcome by the corporate Dem shills that support the status quo and HRC, as it would be a boon to progressives moving forward. And I think this is the primary reason why TPTB want Bernie to drop out of the race right now, its in their best interest interest moving forward.
http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/3/23/1505246/-The-real-reason-the-Dem-Establishment-wants-Bernie-to-get-out-of-the-Race
March 24, 2016
By delphine
Wednesday Mar 23, 2016 · 1:44 PM EST
Script from Yavapai County Recorder's Office in Arizona
There are several myths left floating around regarding yesterday’s flawed election in Arizona:
http://usuncut.com/politics/5-examples-voter-suppression-arizona-primary/
So what is the solution?
First and foremost, assuming the DNC does not fight for the rights of Democrats to have fair elections, the Sanders campaign and/or the Arizona Democratic Parter should take steps to protect and preserve the provisional ballots, and people should be told to keep their copies.
Second, attorneys should be brought in to represent voters who can prove the computer record is incorrect, so that their provisional votes can count despite the edict in the image above.
A class action lawsuit by disenfranchised voters should be brought to insist that there are sufficient polling places for them to vote in a reasonable time frame. A separate complaint alleging disenfranchisement on racial basis (lack of polling places in heavily Hispanic areas) should be brought to the Justice Department.
The court should be asked to decide whether anyone who was in line and turned away without voting at all should be given another chance to vote. Apparently they did order that in IL but it was overturned and now it is before the appeals court.
This isn’t about partisan politics or Bernie/Hillary. This is about voting rights. Maybe this IS the hill to stand on, to finally start addressing these travesties.
http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/3/23/1505343/-Myths-About-Election-Irregularities-and-Suppression-in-Arizona
Myths About Election Irregularities and Suppression in Arizona
Myths About Election Irregularities and Suppression in ArizonaBy delphine
Wednesday Mar 23, 2016 · 1:44 PM EST
Script from Yavapai County Recorder's Office in Arizona
There are several myths left floating around regarding yesterday’s flawed election in Arizona:
It was just a few hours (or it’s the voters’ fault)
FALSE
Lines were so long people literally spent an entire work day waiting in line. In Maricopa County, every polling location had to accommodate 20,000 voters.
FALSE
Lines were so long people literally spent an entire work day waiting in line. In Maricopa County, every polling location had to accommodate 20,000 voters.
All democrats were affected equally by the lack of polling places.
FALSE.
Latino communities suffered disproportionately due to lack of polling places in their neighborhoods. Maricopa County is 40% Latino. Pima County had twice as many polling locations open than Maricopa County, with 1/3rd as many voters.
FALSE.
Latino communities suffered disproportionately due to lack of polling places in their neighborhoods. Maricopa County is 40% Latino. Pima County had twice as many polling locations open than Maricopa County, with 1/3rd as many voters.
Provisional ballots will eventually be counted.
FALSE.
The SoS expressly stated that if you are listed as anything but Democrat in their system (even if it’s wrong), your provisional ballot will not be counted. The Script that Yavapai’s County Recorder’s Office uses:
“Every provisional ballot is checked for eligibility. If you are registered as independent, other, party not designated, or libertarian, you are not eligible for this election and therefore, by law, your vote cannot be counted. If you are registered as a Democrat, Green, or Republican, and your ballot is otherwise eligible, then your provisional ballot will be counted.”
FALSE.
The SoS expressly stated that if you are listed as anything but Democrat in their system (even if it’s wrong), your provisional ballot will not be counted. The Script that Yavapai’s County Recorder’s Office uses:
“Every provisional ballot is checked for eligibility. If you are registered as independent, other, party not designated, or libertarian, you are not eligible for this election and therefore, by law, your vote cannot be counted. If you are registered as a Democrat, Green, or Republican, and your ballot is otherwise eligible, then your provisional ballot will be counted.”
This only affected independents who switched to democrat to vote for Sanders.
FALSE.
Lifetime Democrats were erroneously listed as Independent, Republican, Libertarian, and “no affiliation”. None of their votes will count. People brought their hard copy voter ID with the correct affiliation and were still not allowed to vote with a regular ballot. It won’t be easy to fight this even if the computer is wrong.
FALSE.
Lifetime Democrats were erroneously listed as Independent, Republican, Libertarian, and “no affiliation”. None of their votes will count. People brought their hard copy voter ID with the correct affiliation and were still not allowed to vote with a regular ballot. It won’t be easy to fight this even if the computer is wrong.
It’s not that many votes.
FALSE.
In Yavapai County, 2/3rds of voters in one precinct were mistakenly identified as independent. All of them were given provisional ballots (which as we now know, will not be counted). The election day technician in Yavapai indicates that “this is the same exact thing that voters have been experiencing in Pima and Maricopa County all day.”
FALSE.
In Yavapai County, 2/3rds of voters in one precinct were mistakenly identified as independent. All of them were given provisional ballots (which as we now know, will not be counted). The election day technician in Yavapai indicates that “this is the same exact thing that voters have been experiencing in Pima and Maricopa County all day.”
This is a partisan issue from Bernie “whiners”.
FALSE.
This is a voting rights issue. Do we expect free and fair elections in the US or not? Do we say “well this happens everywhere, oh well?” or do we fight for everyone’s right to vote? Do we continue to put up with this simply because we like the outcome? How much did we love the outcome in FL? Would we like democrats to be able to elect Democrats to their state and federal offices in all states — doesn't that mean they need to be able to vote fairly?
FALSE.
This is a voting rights issue. Do we expect free and fair elections in the US or not? Do we say “well this happens everywhere, oh well?” or do we fight for everyone’s right to vote? Do we continue to put up with this simply because we like the outcome? How much did we love the outcome in FL? Would we like democrats to be able to elect Democrats to their state and federal offices in all states — doesn't that mean they need to be able to vote fairly?
It won’t change anything anyway
Unknown
In Yavapai County, the total number of votes counted was 8,401 to 7,108. Presumably many of those votes were case by mail. Assuming 60% of them were votes by mail, that means about 6,000 were cast yesterday. If 2/3rds of people hoping to vote as Democrats were turned away due to computer glitch, that could be up to 12,000 voters who were unable to vote — almost as many as the current total.
Maricopa has 218,587 votes and Pima has 98,324 votes. Using this same analysis, 40% of these votes is 126,764. If this represents 1/3rd of voters who tried to vote yesterday (because the other 2/3rds were turned away because of incorrect affiliation in the computer record), then that’s 253,528 voters turned away.
If only 10% were turned away, meaning that 126,764 represents 90% of votes, then more than 14,000 voters were unable to vote yesterday.
The candidates are separated by 72,299 votes.
It could make a difference in the number of delegates apportioned.
Unknown
In Yavapai County, the total number of votes counted was 8,401 to 7,108. Presumably many of those votes were case by mail. Assuming 60% of them were votes by mail, that means about 6,000 were cast yesterday. If 2/3rds of people hoping to vote as Democrats were turned away due to computer glitch, that could be up to 12,000 voters who were unable to vote — almost as many as the current total.
Maricopa has 218,587 votes and Pima has 98,324 votes. Using this same analysis, 40% of these votes is 126,764. If this represents 1/3rd of voters who tried to vote yesterday (because the other 2/3rds were turned away because of incorrect affiliation in the computer record), then that’s 253,528 voters turned away.
If only 10% were turned away, meaning that 126,764 represents 90% of votes, then more than 14,000 voters were unable to vote yesterday.
The candidates are separated by 72,299 votes.
It could make a difference in the number of delegates apportioned.
http://usuncut.com/politics/5-examples-voter-suppression-arizona-primary/
So what is the solution?
First and foremost, assuming the DNC does not fight for the rights of Democrats to have fair elections, the Sanders campaign and/or the Arizona Democratic Parter should take steps to protect and preserve the provisional ballots, and people should be told to keep their copies.
Second, attorneys should be brought in to represent voters who can prove the computer record is incorrect, so that their provisional votes can count despite the edict in the image above.
A class action lawsuit by disenfranchised voters should be brought to insist that there are sufficient polling places for them to vote in a reasonable time frame. A separate complaint alleging disenfranchisement on racial basis (lack of polling places in heavily Hispanic areas) should be brought to the Justice Department.
The court should be asked to decide whether anyone who was in line and turned away without voting at all should be given another chance to vote. Apparently they did order that in IL but it was overturned and now it is before the appeals court.
This isn’t about partisan politics or Bernie/Hillary. This is about voting rights. Maybe this IS the hill to stand on, to finally start addressing these travesties.
http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/3/23/1505343/-Myths-About-Election-Irregularities-and-Suppression-in-Arizona
March 23, 2016
EDITED to add the original source: https://www.facebook.com/joleen.swan.1/videos/1786592341563944/
SECOND EDIT: Apparently, these sorts of ads are allowed at caucuses. The issue here is that the Hillary ad was much longer and ran multiple times while the Bernie one was very short and only ran once. This angered a number of people. On top of that, Joleen LaPierre (the woman who taped and posted the video), stated from the caucus last night:
Hillary Ads Ran FULL BLAST at IDAHO CUACUS on EVERY Screen
EDITED to add the original source: https://www.facebook.com/joleen.swan.1/videos/1786592341563944/
SECOND EDIT: Apparently, these sorts of ads are allowed at caucuses. The issue here is that the Hillary ad was much longer and ran multiple times while the Bernie one was very short and only ran once. This angered a number of people. On top of that, Joleen LaPierre (the woman who taped and posted the video), stated from the caucus last night:
"So this is so fucked up, they gave everybody a band to wear and everyone is voting, they say that you can go home after you cast your first vote and after you get your wristband. But then the reading material that I'm reading says that they may do a second and third vote so they're basically telling people to cast their first vote and then go home and then they can potentially vote a second or third time."
She tried to convince everyone to stay. all of this can be read at the facebook link.
March 23, 2016
I thought news agencies ARE SUPPOSED to WAIT until ALL the polls had closed BEFORE they CALL.
They never call if people are in line still because the voters will give up and go home.
What is happening today is so outrageous!
The fix is in.
March 21, 2016
By Leslie Salzillo
Sunday Mar 20, 2016 · 4:11 PM EST
?1458503533
After going after the likes of the KKK, ISIS, and Donald Trump, the entity known as Anonymous is now threatening to expose Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz. On March 15, the “hacktivists” released a YouTube video telling the world Cruz is harboring secrets of which his religious zealot followers might not approve.
Here is the video.
In the beginning, Anonymous attacks Cruz for committing voter fraud and lying.
At the end, Anonymous gives Cruz an ultimatum.
It's very believable that Ted Cruz is harboring some dark secrets. And many would love to know just how dark and dirty it gets. But there is most likely a majority who would simply love to see this insidious and dishonest politician leave office/politics — for good. If Anonymous causes this to happen, more power to them.
http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/3/20/1504102/-Anonymous-threatens-to-expose-Ted-Cruz-s-alleged-prostitution-activity-if-he-doesn-t-leave-the-race
Anonymous THREATENS TO EXPOSE Ted Cruz's alleged PROSTITUTION ACTIVITY if he doesn't leave the race
Anonymous threatens to expose Ted Cruz's alleged prostitution activity if he doesn't leave the raceBy Leslie Salzillo
Sunday Mar 20, 2016 · 4:11 PM EST
?1458503533
After going after the likes of the KKK, ISIS, and Donald Trump, the entity known as Anonymous is now threatening to expose Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz. On March 15, the “hacktivists” released a YouTube video telling the world Cruz is harboring secrets of which his religious zealot followers might not approve.
Here is the video.
In the beginning, Anonymous attacks Cruz for committing voter fraud and lying.
“Almost every word that comes out of your mouth is a complete lie.”
At the end, Anonymous gives Cruz an ultimatum.
”Have you heard of the expression “candy wrappers”? Do you recall visiting prostitutes? Mr. Cruz, we are now demanding you exit this race immediately or Anonymous will release all of the information that we have found. You’re so called underground acts that you think were done in the dark, will be brought out for all the public to see. It will be sent to every media outlet to publicize your disgusting behavior. We assure you it will go viral on every social media platforms in a matter of minutes.”
It's very believable that Ted Cruz is harboring some dark secrets. And many would love to know just how dark and dirty it gets. But there is most likely a majority who would simply love to see this insidious and dishonest politician leave office/politics — for good. If Anonymous causes this to happen, more power to them.
http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/3/20/1504102/-Anonymous-threatens-to-expose-Ted-Cruz-s-alleged-prostitution-activity-if-he-doesn-t-leave-the-race
March 20, 2016
By Cato come back
Sunday Mar 20, 2016 · 6:54 AM EST
I couldn’t get to the rally in Phoenix today, and I feel really bad. I wanted to be one of those 8,255 people cheering you on — letting you know that there are still so many of us pushing for you. But, I was exhausted.
I just moved again this week. It just keeps getting harder and harder to do this at my age (I’m past 60 and that’s as much as I will admit). I had to “borrow” money (which I will never be able to pay back) from my kids again to come up with the deposit for my new rental. I work hard, but it is always juggling low paying jobs and I’m never quite able to get ahead. Since Arizona is a right-to-work state, there are few unions to push for a minimum wage of $15/hour. And with the ACA employer mandate, the company where I work won’t give part time people more than 30 hours/week — sometimes my weekly hours are down at 8. It is difficult to schedule my second job (I do housekeeping) because the first job changes hours all of the time. And I’m tired.
I managed to drag myself to my son-in-law’s birthday party this evening. I didn’t want to disappoint him. I thought, “I’ll just go for an hour and then go home to bed.” But, surprisingly, I stayed until 2 AM.
Why did I have the energy to keep going?
Because among the guests at the party, there were millennials who were Berners — passionate young people who have heard the call.
They knew more about what was REALLY going on in politics than most of the people I know who are my age. Every one of them had stories about their fears of climate change. One young man was almost in tears with a story of watching the glaciers melt when he was in Alaska. Another spoke solemnly of how there just aren’t enough progressive people to actually force progress, and, he was hoping that it wasn’t too late to save the planet. A tiny young woman stood up and raised her fists when talking about how much we have to fight for the changes — and she could recite ‘chapter and verse’ on how badly the country needs Bernie Sanders.
The conversation went in all directions with 15 participants speaking rationally about two-party systems, democratic socialism, constitutional amendments, and the issues facing our country today — what is wrong and what is right. I was exhilarated! I was back in the 1960’s with deja vu all over again. Only this time, this young generation has so much more to offer. They have the world at their fingertips with social media and they don’t seem to rely on any ONE source for their news — they have a very broad view of the ‘real’ world (and the WHOLE world, not just their piece of it). And all 15 of these millennials were Berners!
So, I got to go to a Bernie rally, after all. Maybe Bernie couldn’t hear me screaming my support, but, I hope that he hears me telling him: there is more screaming of support than you would have heard at the coliseum in Phoenix today.
And now I’m going to sleep, satisfied that there is a whole generation gearing up for a political revolution!
Go, Bernie!
http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/3/20/1503986/-I-m-sorry-Bernie
I'm sorry, Bernie.
I'm sorry, Bernie.By Cato come back
Sunday Mar 20, 2016 · 6:54 AM EST
I couldn’t get to the rally in Phoenix today, and I feel really bad. I wanted to be one of those 8,255 people cheering you on — letting you know that there are still so many of us pushing for you. But, I was exhausted.
I just moved again this week. It just keeps getting harder and harder to do this at my age (I’m past 60 and that’s as much as I will admit). I had to “borrow” money (which I will never be able to pay back) from my kids again to come up with the deposit for my new rental. I work hard, but it is always juggling low paying jobs and I’m never quite able to get ahead. Since Arizona is a right-to-work state, there are few unions to push for a minimum wage of $15/hour. And with the ACA employer mandate, the company where I work won’t give part time people more than 30 hours/week — sometimes my weekly hours are down at 8. It is difficult to schedule my second job (I do housekeeping) because the first job changes hours all of the time. And I’m tired.
I managed to drag myself to my son-in-law’s birthday party this evening. I didn’t want to disappoint him. I thought, “I’ll just go for an hour and then go home to bed.” But, surprisingly, I stayed until 2 AM.
Why did I have the energy to keep going?
Because among the guests at the party, there were millennials who were Berners — passionate young people who have heard the call.
They knew more about what was REALLY going on in politics than most of the people I know who are my age. Every one of them had stories about their fears of climate change. One young man was almost in tears with a story of watching the glaciers melt when he was in Alaska. Another spoke solemnly of how there just aren’t enough progressive people to actually force progress, and, he was hoping that it wasn’t too late to save the planet. A tiny young woman stood up and raised her fists when talking about how much we have to fight for the changes — and she could recite ‘chapter and verse’ on how badly the country needs Bernie Sanders.
The conversation went in all directions with 15 participants speaking rationally about two-party systems, democratic socialism, constitutional amendments, and the issues facing our country today — what is wrong and what is right. I was exhilarated! I was back in the 1960’s with deja vu all over again. Only this time, this young generation has so much more to offer. They have the world at their fingertips with social media and they don’t seem to rely on any ONE source for their news — they have a very broad view of the ‘real’ world (and the WHOLE world, not just their piece of it). And all 15 of these millennials were Berners!
So, I got to go to a Bernie rally, after all. Maybe Bernie couldn’t hear me screaming my support, but, I hope that he hears me telling him: there is more screaming of support than you would have heard at the coliseum in Phoenix today.
And now I’m going to sleep, satisfied that there is a whole generation gearing up for a political revolution!
Go, Bernie!
http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/3/20/1503986/-I-m-sorry-Bernie
March 20, 2016
By Jackxter
Saturday Mar 19, 2016 · 6:25 AM EST
Let me be terse in my introduction so I can get straight to the juicy bits (and because it’s 5:00 AM here and I’m about ready to pass out). Anyway, I’ve skimmed articles on this website before but never gotten into its internal politics. I know there has been a lot of flak thrown between both the Clinton and Sanders camps and I want no part in it. I come here to simply set the record straight as a person who has near-obsessively observed the interesting, twisting patterns of the presidential race.
This article is not meant to be an attack on Hillary supporters or Hillary Clinton herself, nor is it meant to discourage them. That being said, if you are a Hillary supporter, since this article may do so, it would probably be wise to stop reading now. This article is meant to encourage Sanders supporters, as I fear many may be demoralized at the moment, not do the opposite to you.
Now, let’s get down to business. To begin, let me lay down some obvious and some not-so-obvious points.
1. Bernie Sanders has won every state with an African American demographic below 8% with the exception of Iowa, a virtual tie. This is not meant to be a racist statement: African Americans simply tend to go for Hillary instead of Bernie, and that’s greatly affected the race.
2. Bernie has either won or come within a 5% margin of victory or outright won in every state except Virginia with an above average (of the national average) amount of internet users , or put another way, above average high-speed internet infrastructure. [Related Data] — Page 11 gives the clearest view.
3. In every state (save for Iowa) with a combination of these two factors, Bernie has won by 15%+ margins.
4. Bernie has had a youth turnout in recent states at near President Obama levels. In Illinois, a state that has a large African American population and one that Bernie *lost* while Obama won, nearly 547,600 of people between the ages of 18-35 compared to Obama’s 633,000 turned out to vote for the respective candidates. It can be reasoned that Bernie will do better in states where the average age of the population is below the national median. [Related Data] (Note: Minor factor)
5. Contrary to what one may expect, Bernie has either won or come close in every state except Virginia that has an above average household income above the United States average. [Related Data]. (Note: Minor factor)
Note: Hillary has done well with Hispanics in Texas and Florida yet not in Nevada. It is not yet known where they will go in the Southwest. This is going to be a real wildcard in the race, though it won’t be as big of a factor working against Bernie as the African American vote given what we know so far. If they turn out en masse for Hillary, it’ll decrease Sanders’ chances in New Mexico, Peurto Rico, and Arizona, and decrease his victory gain in California.
Because of all this, one can make a semi-accurate prediction of where the rest of the race will go. Obviously, this is only an estimation, and how much he loses or wins in the remaining states will determine if he wins or not, but let me give you a picture on what will likely happen and list the factors that work for Bernie. The only thing that could possibly change this is if Hillary’s campaign does really well or bombs in some regard and likewise with Bernie.
Arizona: Bernie will either win or lose by a 5% margin. [Factor 1, 4]
Idaho: Bernie will win by a 15%+ margin. [Factor 1, 4]
Utah: Bernie will win by a 15%+ margin. [Factor 3, 4, 5]
Alaska: Bernie will win by a 15%+ margin. [Factor 3, 4, 5]
Hawaii: Bernie will win by a 15%+ margin. [Factor 3, 5]
Washington: Bernie will win by a 15%+ margin. [Factor 3, 4, 5]
Wisconsin: Bernie will win by a 15%+ margin. [Factor 3, 5]
Wyoming: Bernie will win by a 15%+ margin. [Factor 3, 4, 5]
New York: Bernie will either win or lose between 5% him or 10% Clinton. [Factor 2]
Connecticut: Bernie will win or lose within a 5% margin. [Factor 2, 5]
Delaware: Bernie will lose by around a 15%+ margin. [Factor 5]
Maryland: Bernie will win or lose by around a 5% margin. [Factor 2, 5]
Pennsylvania: Bernie will win or lose within a 5% margin. [Factor 2, 5]
Rhode Island: Bernie will win by a 15%+ margin. [Factor 3, 5]
Indiana: Bernie will lose by around 10-15% [Factor 4]
Guam: Bernie will lose by around a 10%+ margin. [A major lack of internet connectivity cancels out Factor 1]
West Virginia: Bernie will win or tie within a margin of 5%. [Factor 1]
Kentucky: Bernie will win or lose within a factor of 5%. [Factor 1]
Oregon: Bernie will win by a margin of 15%+ [Factor 3, 5]
Virgin Islands: Bernie will lose by a 10%+ margin. [A major lack of internet connectivity cancels out Factor 1]
Puerto Rico: Bernie will win or lose within a 5% margin. [Factor 1]
California: Bernie will win by a margin of 20%+ [Factor 3, 4, 5]
Montana: Bernie will win by a margin of 10%+ [Factor 1]
New Jersey: Bernie will win or lose within a margin of 5%. [Factor 2, 5]
New Mexico: Bernie will win or lose within a margin of 5%. [1, 4]
North Dakota: Bernie will win by a margin of 15%+ [Factor 3, 4, 5]
South Dakota: Bernie will win by a margin of 15%+ [Factor 1, 5]
District of Columbia: Bernie will lose by around 10%+ [Factor 5]
There you have it, folks. On the lower end of optimistic projections, Bernie wins by a tight 30 delegates. However, it’s very likely that, taking states that he has the potential to win big in similar to Kansas, he could score higher. Scoring high in small states and losing by, say, 5% in New York/Pennsylvania would still earn him a win. There’s also the scenario in which he knocks Clinton out of the water in Washington and Oregon, which is something that any Clinton fan still reading this should probably be worried about given how progressive those two states are.
In conclusion, You can say he’s doomed all you want, but the patterns of the race give Sanders a fair chance as long as his supporters keep pushing. To any Bernie fans still dazed by the hit on the 15th, time to put some pep in your step soldiers! You’ve got phone banking to do!
Important Note: I made an error when I was tallying up delegates. Bernie will need to win either Washington or Oregon by 25% to break away from Hillary. Preferably, he’ll need to win one of those two states by either larger margins or a number of the smaller states by larger margins in order to negate potential losses in New York/Pennsylvania.
Bonus Section: Comment Section Myth Busting.
Myth #1: Bernie does terrible among Democrats! He’s only good in states where Independents can save his butt!
Fact #1: Not true. Bernie has won in Nebraska, Maine, Oklahoma, Colorado, and Kansas. These are all either closed caucuses or closed primaries. Only Democrats can vote in them.
Myth #2: Bernie underperformed in the most recent primaries and he’ll do it again!
Fact #2: Nope. In Illinois and Missouri, he overperformed aggregate polling by a small amount. In North Carolina he overperformed by a large amount. Only in Florida and Ohio did he underperform, but only by a small amount.
Myth #3: Bernie’s gonna lose Arizona cus he’s down in the polls! He’s also going to lose California!
Fact #3: He’s down in the poll. One poll. In Arizona. And we all know how much singular polls can predict this primary season. And yes, Sanders is down in the polls in California… the last one taken at the beginning of January.
http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/3/19/1503653/-A-Look-at-the-Patterns-of-the-Democratic-Primary-and-Why-They-Support-a-Sanders-Comeback
A Look at the Patterns of the Democratic Primary and Why They Support a Sanders Comeback
A Look at the Patterns of the Democratic Primary and Why They Support a Sanders ComebackBy Jackxter
Saturday Mar 19, 2016 · 6:25 AM EST
Let me be terse in my introduction so I can get straight to the juicy bits (and because it’s 5:00 AM here and I’m about ready to pass out). Anyway, I’ve skimmed articles on this website before but never gotten into its internal politics. I know there has been a lot of flak thrown between both the Clinton and Sanders camps and I want no part in it. I come here to simply set the record straight as a person who has near-obsessively observed the interesting, twisting patterns of the presidential race.
This article is not meant to be an attack on Hillary supporters or Hillary Clinton herself, nor is it meant to discourage them. That being said, if you are a Hillary supporter, since this article may do so, it would probably be wise to stop reading now. This article is meant to encourage Sanders supporters, as I fear many may be demoralized at the moment, not do the opposite to you.
Now, let’s get down to business. To begin, let me lay down some obvious and some not-so-obvious points.
1. Bernie Sanders has won every state with an African American demographic below 8% with the exception of Iowa, a virtual tie. This is not meant to be a racist statement: African Americans simply tend to go for Hillary instead of Bernie, and that’s greatly affected the race.
2. Bernie has either won or come within a 5% margin of victory or outright won in every state except Virginia with an above average (of the national average) amount of internet users , or put another way, above average high-speed internet infrastructure. [Related Data] — Page 11 gives the clearest view.
3. In every state (save for Iowa) with a combination of these two factors, Bernie has won by 15%+ margins.
4. Bernie has had a youth turnout in recent states at near President Obama levels. In Illinois, a state that has a large African American population and one that Bernie *lost* while Obama won, nearly 547,600 of people between the ages of 18-35 compared to Obama’s 633,000 turned out to vote for the respective candidates. It can be reasoned that Bernie will do better in states where the average age of the population is below the national median. [Related Data] (Note: Minor factor)
5. Contrary to what one may expect, Bernie has either won or come close in every state except Virginia that has an above average household income above the United States average. [Related Data]. (Note: Minor factor)
Note: Hillary has done well with Hispanics in Texas and Florida yet not in Nevada. It is not yet known where they will go in the Southwest. This is going to be a real wildcard in the race, though it won’t be as big of a factor working against Bernie as the African American vote given what we know so far. If they turn out en masse for Hillary, it’ll decrease Sanders’ chances in New Mexico, Peurto Rico, and Arizona, and decrease his victory gain in California.
Because of all this, one can make a semi-accurate prediction of where the rest of the race will go. Obviously, this is only an estimation, and how much he loses or wins in the remaining states will determine if he wins or not, but let me give you a picture on what will likely happen and list the factors that work for Bernie. The only thing that could possibly change this is if Hillary’s campaign does really well or bombs in some regard and likewise with Bernie.
Arizona: Bernie will either win or lose by a 5% margin. [Factor 1, 4]
Idaho: Bernie will win by a 15%+ margin. [Factor 1, 4]
Utah: Bernie will win by a 15%+ margin. [Factor 3, 4, 5]
Alaska: Bernie will win by a 15%+ margin. [Factor 3, 4, 5]
Hawaii: Bernie will win by a 15%+ margin. [Factor 3, 5]
Washington: Bernie will win by a 15%+ margin. [Factor 3, 4, 5]
Wisconsin: Bernie will win by a 15%+ margin. [Factor 3, 5]
Wyoming: Bernie will win by a 15%+ margin. [Factor 3, 4, 5]
New York: Bernie will either win or lose between 5% him or 10% Clinton. [Factor 2]
Connecticut: Bernie will win or lose within a 5% margin. [Factor 2, 5]
Delaware: Bernie will lose by around a 15%+ margin. [Factor 5]
Maryland: Bernie will win or lose by around a 5% margin. [Factor 2, 5]
Pennsylvania: Bernie will win or lose within a 5% margin. [Factor 2, 5]
Rhode Island: Bernie will win by a 15%+ margin. [Factor 3, 5]
Indiana: Bernie will lose by around 10-15% [Factor 4]
Guam: Bernie will lose by around a 10%+ margin. [A major lack of internet connectivity cancels out Factor 1]
West Virginia: Bernie will win or tie within a margin of 5%. [Factor 1]
Kentucky: Bernie will win or lose within a factor of 5%. [Factor 1]
Oregon: Bernie will win by a margin of 15%+ [Factor 3, 5]
Virgin Islands: Bernie will lose by a 10%+ margin. [A major lack of internet connectivity cancels out Factor 1]
Puerto Rico: Bernie will win or lose within a 5% margin. [Factor 1]
California: Bernie will win by a margin of 20%+ [Factor 3, 4, 5]
Montana: Bernie will win by a margin of 10%+ [Factor 1]
New Jersey: Bernie will win or lose within a margin of 5%. [Factor 2, 5]
New Mexico: Bernie will win or lose within a margin of 5%. [1, 4]
North Dakota: Bernie will win by a margin of 15%+ [Factor 3, 4, 5]
South Dakota: Bernie will win by a margin of 15%+ [Factor 1, 5]
District of Columbia: Bernie will lose by around 10%+ [Factor 5]
There you have it, folks. On the lower end of optimistic projections, Bernie wins by a tight 30 delegates. However, it’s very likely that, taking states that he has the potential to win big in similar to Kansas, he could score higher. Scoring high in small states and losing by, say, 5% in New York/Pennsylvania would still earn him a win. There’s also the scenario in which he knocks Clinton out of the water in Washington and Oregon, which is something that any Clinton fan still reading this should probably be worried about given how progressive those two states are.
In conclusion, You can say he’s doomed all you want, but the patterns of the race give Sanders a fair chance as long as his supporters keep pushing. To any Bernie fans still dazed by the hit on the 15th, time to put some pep in your step soldiers! You’ve got phone banking to do!
Important Note: I made an error when I was tallying up delegates. Bernie will need to win either Washington or Oregon by 25% to break away from Hillary. Preferably, he’ll need to win one of those two states by either larger margins or a number of the smaller states by larger margins in order to negate potential losses in New York/Pennsylvania.
Bonus Section: Comment Section Myth Busting.
Myth #1: Bernie does terrible among Democrats! He’s only good in states where Independents can save his butt!
Fact #1: Not true. Bernie has won in Nebraska, Maine, Oklahoma, Colorado, and Kansas. These are all either closed caucuses or closed primaries. Only Democrats can vote in them.
Myth #2: Bernie underperformed in the most recent primaries and he’ll do it again!
Fact #2: Nope. In Illinois and Missouri, he overperformed aggregate polling by a small amount. In North Carolina he overperformed by a large amount. Only in Florida and Ohio did he underperform, but only by a small amount.
Myth #3: Bernie’s gonna lose Arizona cus he’s down in the polls! He’s also going to lose California!
Fact #3: He’s down in the poll. One poll. In Arizona. And we all know how much singular polls can predict this primary season. And yes, Sanders is down in the polls in California… the last one taken at the beginning of January.
http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/3/19/1503653/-A-Look-at-the-Patterns-of-the-Democratic-Primary-and-Why-They-Support-a-Sanders-Comeback
March 19, 2016
The email was released online:
The rest of the email can be found at here. The NSA official breaks it down:
In an article titled, Why Hillary's Emailgate Matters, Schindler describes the general attitude at Hillary's State Department:
When Hillary arrived at the State Department, she requested a Blackberry like the one the President had, so that she could receive confidential emails on her device. The device is only given to the President and her request was denied. She still tried numerous times to procure such a device. it was repeatedly explained to her that she would have to use the same type of secure government desktop computer as everyone else.
As one anonymous NSA official stated:
THAT is the question the authorities want answered. Like the Goldman Sachs speech transcripts she will not disclose, or the 30,000 emails spanning a 5-month time period that have vanished, what's behind the curtain?
Sources close to the investigation claim that the emails are leading the investigation to the Clinton Foundation. C-Span interviewed former US Attorney for DC Joseph diGenova. At aroung the 20:00 mark he explains that the investigation is now focusing on the Clinton Foundation and how it relates to the server, and any official acts that may have resulted in money being donated to the foundation. Hillary's close aide, Huma Abejin was also on the Foundation payroll while simultaneously working for Secretary Clinton at the State Department. Multiple websites speculate that a grand jury has been convened. Apparently, Loretta Lynch refused to confirm or deny this fact while being interviewed on television.
Rawstory recently published an article that highlights how Clinton's cronyism and political decisions were intertwined. The article actually questions Clinton's sincerity regarding the student debt crisis:
There are more shady dealings described in this article in The New Yorker.
The most fascinating part of this story is the MSM blackout. It is nearly impossible to find news clips or articles about any of this. I fear they are holding onto the information until the general election. I could be wrong and I hope I am, but the entire story is complex and filled with cronyism and entitlement. My biggest fear now is that indictments will begin during the general election.
It's not just about the CLASSIFICATION of the emails - it's about the CONTENT
When the private server issue first hit the scene, I - like Bernie Sanders said - didn't care about her damn emails. I listened to the drip, drip, drip with very little interest. Then, suddenly, something caught my attention: Hillary's response to the fact that Sydney Blumenthal had access to above top secret information without a clearance. Her explanation that "the emails were not classified at the time" really caught my attention. I immediately thought, "Hillary's just not that dumb. She's hiding something." She may be able to fool a lot of people with that act, but anyone, and I mean ANYONE who has worked with classified government documents knows that the "none of the emails were classified at the time" stint is beyond bogus. (Full disclosure - I worked at the American Headquarters and Consulate in West Berlin during the Cold War. I handled sensitive material and held a clearance. I am well aware of protocol.) Without rehashing what many have already stated on this site and others about the hows and whys, I can assure you - Hillary fucked up. Badly. But the thing is, she knew she was breaking protocol at the time, and she either didn't care or she truly believed that the rules didn't apply to her. There's no way around this. It is fact, which left me wondering, could she really be so cavalier? Really?? That's when I began to take a closer look at what was going on. In this process, I have learned some very disturbing facts, facts which leave me gravely concerned.
Let me preface by saying, I do believe that Hillary, like Patraeus, won't get much more than a slap on the wrist for the classified email "scandal". Her closest aides and advisors, however, are about to experience a living hell. My prediction: Huma Adedin, Cheryl Mills and Sydney Blumenthal will be thrown under the bus, along with 6-7 other aides. At minimum: they will be paying enormous legal bills in their near future. Worst case: they will go to jail. Particularly Blumenthal. News articles are already stating that Hillary has now distanced herself from her former confidant.
Other than right wing media sources (which cannot be trusted), there has been very little investigative journalism on this. Just as I was about to give up entirely on my quest, I discovered a series of online articles by John R Schindler, whose bio states that he "is a security expert and former National Security Agency analyst and counterintelligence officer. A specialist in espionage and terrorism, he's also been a Navy officer and a War College professor. He's published four books and is on Twitter at @20committee." Upon further investigation, I learned that he is unapologetically pro-NSA and vehemently anti-Snowden. In general, he is someone with whom I would probably never be friends. However, his articles contain the most in-depth analysis on the internet of what transpired between Hillary, the NSA, classified information, her Blackberry, Sydney Blumenthal and the emails. The story he reveals is very troubling.
...the biggest problem may be in a just-released email that has gotten little attention here, but plenty on the other side of the world. An email to Ms. Clinton from a close Clinton confidant late on June 8, 2011 about Sudan turns out to have explosive material in it. This message includes a detailed intelligence report from Sid Blumenthal, Hillary’s close friend, confidant and factotum, who regularly supplied her with information from his private intelligence service...."
The email was released online:
The rest of the email can be found at here. The NSA official breaks it down:
...Is this an NSA assessment? If so, it would have to be classified at least Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information, a handling caveat that applies to most SIGINT, and quite possibly Top Secret/SCI, the highest normal classification we have. In that case, it was about as far from Unclassified as it’s possible for an email to be.
No surprise, NSA is aflutter this weekend over this strange matter. One Agency official expressed to me “at least 90 percent confidence” that Mr. Blumenthal’s June 8 report was derived from NSA reports, and the Agency ought to be investigating the matter right now.
There are many questions here. How did Mr. Blumenthal, who had no position in the U.S. government in 2011, and hasn’t since Bill Clinton left the White House 15 years ago, possibly get his hands on such highly classified NSA reporting? Why did he place it an open, non-secure email to Hillary, who after all had plenty of legitimate access, as Secretary of State, to intelligence assessments from all our spy agencies? Moreover, how did the State Department think this was Unclassified and why did it release it to the public?...
No surprise, NSA is aflutter this weekend over this strange matter. One Agency official expressed to me “at least 90 percent confidence” that Mr. Blumenthal’s June 8 report was derived from NSA reports, and the Agency ought to be investigating the matter right now.
There are many questions here. How did Mr. Blumenthal, who had no position in the U.S. government in 2011, and hasn’t since Bill Clinton left the White House 15 years ago, possibly get his hands on such highly classified NSA reporting? Why did he place it an open, non-secure email to Hillary, who after all had plenty of legitimate access, as Secretary of State, to intelligence assessments from all our spy agencies? Moreover, how did the State Department think this was Unclassified and why did it release it to the public?...
In an article titled, Why Hillary's Emailgate Matters, Schindler describes the general attitude at Hillary's State Department:
How such highly classified information from both NSA and CIA wound up in Ms. Clinton’s personal email is a messy question that the FBI is currently unravelling. Don’t expect pretty answers. That her staff at Foggy Bottom treated classification as a nuisance is already apparent, and such guidance, which was flagrantly illegal, could only have come from “the boss.”
Just what a sinkhole of secrets the Secretary of State’s office was during President Obama’s first term, when Ms. Clinton occupied that chair, is frighteningly apparent. Allegations are swirling that her staff systematically copied Top Secret Codeword information off separate, just-for-intelligence computer systems and cut-and-pasted it into “unclassified” emails. This, if true, is an unambiguous felony. There is reason to be cautious about this claim, which is unsubstantiated so far, and would indicate a complex degree of intent: moving Top Secret Codeword information into unclassified emails is not simple, rather a multi-step process, and would leave an audit trail.
Nevertheless, the casual approach of Ms. Clinton and her staff to classified information is already abundantly clear. Cheryl Mills, her chief of staff at Foggy Bottom, was using her personal Blackberry for work, including the transmission of classified email. That alone is a crime. Then, in a move worthy of a dark comedy, Ms. Mills proceeded to lose that Blackberry. This would be a career-ender, at best, for any normal U.S. Government employee. Ms. Mills, a longtime Clinton insider, naturally suffered no penalties of any kind for this astonishing security lapse.
Just what a sinkhole of secrets the Secretary of State’s office was during President Obama’s first term, when Ms. Clinton occupied that chair, is frighteningly apparent. Allegations are swirling that her staff systematically copied Top Secret Codeword information off separate, just-for-intelligence computer systems and cut-and-pasted it into “unclassified” emails. This, if true, is an unambiguous felony. There is reason to be cautious about this claim, which is unsubstantiated so far, and would indicate a complex degree of intent: moving Top Secret Codeword information into unclassified emails is not simple, rather a multi-step process, and would leave an audit trail.
Nevertheless, the casual approach of Ms. Clinton and her staff to classified information is already abundantly clear. Cheryl Mills, her chief of staff at Foggy Bottom, was using her personal Blackberry for work, including the transmission of classified email. That alone is a crime. Then, in a move worthy of a dark comedy, Ms. Mills proceeded to lose that Blackberry. This would be a career-ender, at best, for any normal U.S. Government employee. Ms. Mills, a longtime Clinton insider, naturally suffered no penalties of any kind for this astonishing security lapse.
When Hillary arrived at the State Department, she requested a Blackberry like the one the President had, so that she could receive confidential emails on her device. The device is only given to the President and her request was denied. She still tried numerous times to procure such a device. it was repeatedly explained to her that she would have to use the same type of secure government desktop computer as everyone else.
As one anonymous NSA official stated:
“What did she not want put on a government system, where security people might see it?” the former NSA official asked, adding, “I wonder now, and I sure wish I’d asked about it back in 2009.”
THAT is the question the authorities want answered. Like the Goldman Sachs speech transcripts she will not disclose, or the 30,000 emails spanning a 5-month time period that have vanished, what's behind the curtain?
Sources close to the investigation claim that the emails are leading the investigation to the Clinton Foundation. C-Span interviewed former US Attorney for DC Joseph diGenova. At aroung the 20:00 mark he explains that the investigation is now focusing on the Clinton Foundation and how it relates to the server, and any official acts that may have resulted in money being donated to the foundation. Hillary's close aide, Huma Abejin was also on the Foundation payroll while simultaneously working for Secretary Clinton at the State Department. Multiple websites speculate that a grand jury has been convened. Apparently, Loretta Lynch refused to confirm or deny this fact while being interviewed on television.
Rawstory recently published an article that highlights how Clinton's cronyism and political decisions were intertwined. The article actually questions Clinton's sincerity regarding the student debt crisis:
Student loan debt continues to be one of the largest economic issues plaguing the U.S., with the total amount topping $1.3 trillion. Hillary Clinton’s higher education policy touts debt-free degrees for underprivileged students. But is she being genuine in her efforts to address the issue?
While Hillary loves to rail against shady for-profit colleges on the campaign trail, she does have some financial ties to them that are likely to shape whether or not she holds them accountable for ripping students off.
It was recently revealed through Hillary’s emails that during her first year as Secretary of State she insisted that Laureate Education be included in the guest list for an education policy dinner hosted at the U.S. Department of State.
“It’s a for-profit model that should be represented,” she wrote in the August 2009 email, and as a result, a senior vice president at Laureate was added to the guest list. Several months later, former President Bill Clinton became an honorary chancellor of Laureate International Universities, which turned out to be incredibly lucrative. He was paid a cool $16.5 million between 2010 and 2014 for his role with the for-profit college.
While Hillary loves to rail against shady for-profit colleges on the campaign trail, she does have some financial ties to them that are likely to shape whether or not she holds them accountable for ripping students off.
It was recently revealed through Hillary’s emails that during her first year as Secretary of State she insisted that Laureate Education be included in the guest list for an education policy dinner hosted at the U.S. Department of State.
“It’s a for-profit model that should be represented,” she wrote in the August 2009 email, and as a result, a senior vice president at Laureate was added to the guest list. Several months later, former President Bill Clinton became an honorary chancellor of Laureate International Universities, which turned out to be incredibly lucrative. He was paid a cool $16.5 million between 2010 and 2014 for his role with the for-profit college.
There are more shady dealings described in this article in The New Yorker.
The most fascinating part of this story is the MSM blackout. It is nearly impossible to find news clips or articles about any of this. I fear they are holding onto the information until the general election. I could be wrong and I hope I am, but the entire story is complex and filled with cronyism and entitlement. My biggest fear now is that indictments will begin during the general election.
Profile Information
Member since: Thu Mar 16, 2006, 03:07 PMNumber of posts: 9,704
