a thoughtful web.
Good ideas and conversation. No ads, no tracking.   Login or Take a Tour!
comment by user-inactivated
user-inactivated  ·  3045 days ago  ·  link  ·    ·  parent  ·  post: Leaked emails show how Democrats screwed Sanders

Sensationalist? The only sources here were the second-hand information through the intercept and a reference to an article within the Post about a Facebook post of a selfie. Plus, the Intercept themselves ran this update:

    [UPDATE at 1:03 p.m. ET: Marshall emails to say “I do not recall this. I can say it would not have been Sanders. It would probably be about a surrogate.” We have asked him who that surrogate could possibly be.]

So, sensationalist is definitely on the table. Granted, it could be the usual, "I have no ideas what you're talking about...."

Running through the links, here is the database referenced. Running the word "Jew" doesn't really come up with much on the topic.





user-inactivated  ·  3045 days ago  ·  link  ·  

I haven't bothered to read the New York Post story linked, but I'm assuming that the source you are trying to find is:

https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/11508

Edit

Fuck it. I clicked on the link.

Here are the emails for the rest of the post.

Chuck Todd email:

https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/10945

https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/3861

Craigslist:

https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/13313

Donuts:

https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/14963

Roy Black:

https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/2077

Hamilton:

https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/14321

Edit Edit (On a personal note)

Hey, neat, they're aware my pension is fucked!

https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/12022

user-inactivated  ·  3045 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Hm. Looks like I didn't specify my comment was centered around Sanders, and explicitly state some bits. I'll have to include those in the future. Thanks for the check.

On a note of the emails you brought up, I'm like to think along the lines of sp00ns. Surprised much of this was news to people. There's a reason congressional approval ratings are so low. The fact that they explicitly state this much info in their emails only adds to the bit.

And on a complete side, not really one to care for the whole Clinton email debacle. This gives me pause to that notion. Not likely to take up arms as it were, but if this is the content of the system tasked with anointing a presidential candidate, then what would be in those emails of the candidate to be?