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
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: HRC's email problems just got worse [View all]The Polack MSgt
(13,188 posts)32. Evidently, repeating right wing talking points are ok in the service of Sanders
Accusing someone of being a right winger is allowed if it's a Sanders fan accusing a Clinton fan.
Accuse a Sanders fan with the same language and that's worth a hide...
On Wed May 25, 2016, 11:42 AM an alert was sent on the following post:
Take your pro-Trump trolling to the Primaries forum
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7855903
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
Accusing posters of RW proclivities is highly uncivil.
JURY RESULTS
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Wed May 25, 2016, 11:46 AM, and the Jury voted 5-2 to HIDE IT.
Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Can't directly accuse DUer of being right wing troll without more evidence than just a distorted, inflammatory OP, which is common among supporters of both candidates.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Sauce for the goose sauce for the gander.
Sanders supporters cannot possibly believe that calling some one a right winger is an alertable statement. That has been their favorite thing for 6 months now
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I can't hide a post that is obviously correct. There is no reason for the OP, that should be hidden.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Accuse a Sanders fan with the same language and that's worth a hide...
On Wed May 25, 2016, 11:42 AM an alert was sent on the following post:
Take your pro-Trump trolling to the Primaries forum
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7855903
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
Accusing posters of RW proclivities is highly uncivil.
JURY RESULTS
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Wed May 25, 2016, 11:46 AM, and the Jury voted 5-2 to HIDE IT.
Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Can't directly accuse DUer of being right wing troll without more evidence than just a distorted, inflammatory OP, which is common among supporters of both candidates.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Sauce for the goose sauce for the gander.
Sanders supporters cannot possibly believe that calling some one a right winger is an alertable statement. That has been their favorite thing for 6 months now
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I can't hide a post that is obviously correct. There is no reason for the OP, that should be hidden.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
TopBack to the top of the page
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
ShareGet links to this post
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
Cannot edit, recommend, or reply in locked discussions
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
63 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Always check out the author before reading a piece if I have never heard of them
snooper2
May 2016
#1
I'm a bit surprised you haven't heard of Cillizza...he's on teevee and been around for some time.
snappyturtle
May 2016
#13
Technically, as head of agency, she did violate the Federal Records Act. That's in the report.
leveymg
May 2016
#48
Just got worse ? Did we learn anything today that we didn't already know ? No, we did not.
Trust Buster
May 2016
#5
Same poster yesterday was running around excusing all of Cornel's questionable remarks
Egnever
May 2016
#39
Evidently, repeating right wing talking points are ok in the service of Sanders
The Polack MSgt
May 2016
#32
As of today, the State Dept has found she violated the Federal Records Act, the Intel Commun IG has
leveymg
May 2016
#50
There appears to have been some cherry-picking in your selection. Here's the previous paragraph:
leveymg
May 2016
#60
I too pretend that people who disagree with me do so due to living in a bubble
LanternWaste
May 2016
#19
It just isn't that big of a deal to me. She was damned if she did, damned if she didn't.
dawg
May 2016
#22
Every day, someone alleges "this will be the factor that brings her down!"
LanternWaste
May 2016
#17
The article doesn't say she broke law. She broke department policy, which is not a law. n/t
pnwmom
May 2016
#37
She followed the same procedures as her predecessors. John Kerry has made good changes,
pnwmom
May 2016
#62