Stealing John Podesta's emails to discredit him, and through him Hillary Clinton.
The American trail of carnage
- Thread starter ClimateSanity
- Start date
Stealing John Podesta's emails to discredit him, and through him Hillary Clinton.
ClimateSanity
New member
People have a right to know the level of corruption in their government. Whoever stole them, did the country a favor. If we had a real press in this country, they would have been all over those emails...instead, they are all over false statements from their incestuous sources in places like the FBI and CIA.
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
What specifically is the most important thing you learned from John Podesta's emails?
The press did report on the emails, if you recall, once they were released. That still doesn't absolve the original crime.
ClimateSanity
New member
There is not one in particular that stands out but
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
Yeah...I can see they really provided a lot of clarity to you.
So, you mean to tell me that you believe they exposed corruption, but you can't name any particular thing that they revealed?
It's as if simply having your email account hacked is proof of corruption in your mind, regardless of the contents of those emails.
ClimateSanity
New member
What specifically is the most important thing you learned from John Podesta's emails?...rexlunae
There is not one in particular that stands out but in truth their significance goes far beyond mere scandal: they are a window into the soul of the Democratic party and into the dreams and thoughts of the class to whom the party answers.
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
There is not one in particular that stands out but in truth their significance goes far beyond mere scandal: they are a window into the soul of the Democratic party and into the dreams and thoughts of the class to whom the party answers.
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
It's hard to take your corruption claims seriously when they're so vague. I don't think you learned anything from the emails. I think you are just clinging to that as a post hoc rationalization for how you're inclined to feel anyway, which is why you never bothered to find out what was in them. It didn't matter. It could have been Podesta's grocery list, and you'd take it as evidence of deep corruption.
ClimateSanity
New member
Continuing from post#26
but in truth their significance goes far beyond mere scandal: they are a window into the soul of the Democratic party and into the dreams and thoughts of the class to whom the party answers.
The class to which I refer is not rising in angry protest; they are by and large pretty satisfied, pretty contented. Nobody takes road trips to exotic West Virginia to see what the members of this class looks like or how they live; on the contrary, they are the ones for whom such stories are written. This bunch doesn’t have to make do with a comb-over TV mountebank for a leader; for this class, the choices are always pretty good, and this year they happen to be excellent.
They are the comfortable and well-educated mainstay of our modern Democratic party. They are also the grandees of our national media; the architects of our software; the designers of our streets; the high officials of our banking system; the authors of just about every plan to fix social security or fine-tune the Middle East with precision droning. They are, they think, not a class at all but rather the enlightened ones, the people who must be answered to but who need never explain themselves.
‘We learned to fight back’: Dreamers campaign against Donald Trump
Let us turn the magnifying glass on them for a change, by sorting through the hacked personal emails of John Podesta, who has been a Washington power broker for decades. I admit that I feel uncomfortable digging through this hoard; stealing someone’s email is a crime, after all, and it is outrageous that people’s personal information has been exposed, sinceWikiLeaks*doesn’t seem to have redacted the emails in any way. There is also the issue of authenticity to contend with: we don’t know absolutely and for sure that these emails were not tampered with by whoever stole them from John Podesta. The supposed authors of the messages are refusing to confirm or deny their authenticity, and though they seem to be real, there is a small possibility they aren’t.
With all that taken into consideration, I think the WikiLeaks releases furnish us with an opportunity to observe the upper reaches of the American status hierarchy in all its righteousness and majesty.
The dramatis personae of the liberal class are all present in this amazing body of work: financial innovators. High-achieving colleagues attempting to get jobs for their high-achieving children. Foundation executives doing fine and noble things. Prizes, of course, and high academic achievement.
Certain industries loom large and virtuous here. Hillary’s ingratiating speeches to Wall Street are well known of course, but what is remarkable is that, in the party of Jackson and Bryan and Roosevelt, smiling financiers now seem to stand on every corner, constantly proffering advice about this and that. In one now-famous email chain, for example, the reader can watch current US trade representative Michael Froman, writing from a Citibank email address in 2008,*appear to name*President Obama’s cabinet even before the great hope-and-change election was decided (incidentally, an important clue to understanding why that greatest of zombie banks was never put out of its misery).
The far-sighted innovators of Silicon Valley are also here in force, interacting all the time with the leaders of the party of the people. We watch as Podesta appears toemail*Sheryl Sandberg. He makes plans tovisit*Mark Zuckerberg (who, according to one missive, wants to “learn more about next steps for his philanthropy and social action”). Podesta exchanges emails with an entrepreneur about an ugly race now unfolding for Silicon Valley’s seat in Congress; this man, in turn, appears to forward to Podesta the remarks of yet another Silicon Valley grandee, whocomplains*that one of the Democratic combatants in that fight was criticizing billionaires who give to Democrats. Specifically, the miscreant Dem in question was said to be:
“… spinning (and attacking) donors who have supported Democrats. John Arnold and Marc Leder have both given to Cory Booker, Joe Kennedy, and others. He is also attacking every billionaire that donates to [Congressional candidate] Ro [Khanna], many whom support other Democrats as well.”
Attacking billionaires! In the year 2015! It was, one of the correspondents appears to write, “madness and political malpractice of the party to allow this to continue”.
There are wonderful things to be found in this treasure trove when you search the gilded words “Davos” or “Tahoe”. But it is when you search “Vineyard” on the WikiLeaks dump that you realize these people truly inhabit a different world from the rest of us. By “vineyard”, of course, they mean Martha’s Vineyard, the ritzy vacation resort island off the coast of Massachusetts where presidents Clinton and Obama spent most of their summer vacations. The Vineyard is a place for the very, very rich to unwind, yes, but as we learn from these emails, it is also a place of high idealism; a land of enlightened liberal commitment far beyond anything ordinary citizens can ever achieve.
Consider, for example, the 2015*email*from a foundation executive to a retired mortgage banker (who then seems to have forwarded the note on to Podesta, and thus into history) expressing concern that “Hillary’s image is being torn apart in the media and there’s not enough effective push back”. The public eavesdrops as yet another financier*invites*Podesta to a dinner featuring “food produced exclusively by the island’s farmers and fishermen which will be matched with specially selected wines”. We learn how a Hillary campaign aiderecommended*that a policy statement appear on a certain day so that “It wont get in the way of any other news we are trying to make – but far enough ahead of Hamptons and Vineyard money events”. We even read the*pleadings*of a man who wants to be invited to a state dinner at the White House and who offers, as one of several exhibits in his favor, the fact that he “joined the DSCC Majority Trust in Martha’s Vineyard (contributing over $32,400 to Democratic senators) in July 2014”.
How does the US electoral college work?
(Hilariously, in another*email chain, the Clinton team appears to scheme to “hit” Bernie Sanders for attending “DSCC retreats on Martha’s Vineyard with lobbyists”.)
Then there is the apparent nepotism, the dozens if not hundreds of mundane emails in which petitioners for this or that plum Washington job or high-profile academic appointment politely appeal to Podesta – the ward-heeler of the meritocratic elite – for a solicitous word whispered in the ear of a powerful crony.
This genre of Podesta email, in which people try to arrange jobs for themselves or their kids, points us toward the most fundamental thing we know about the people at the top of this class: their loyalty to one another and the way it overrides everything else. Of course Hillary Clinton staffed her state department with investment bankers and then did speaking engagements for investment banks as soon as she was done at the state department. Of course she*appears to think*that any kind of bank reform should “come from the industry itself”. And of course no elite bankers were ever prosecuted by the Obama administration. Read these emails and you understand, with a start, that the people at the top tier of American life all know each other. They are all engaged in promoting one another’s careers, constantly.
Everything blurs into everything else in this world. The state department, the banks, Silicon Valley, the nonprofits, the “Global CEO Advisory Firm” that*appears*to have solicited donations for the Clinton Foundation. Executives here go from foundation to government to thinktank to startup. There are honors. Venture capital. Foundation grants. Endowed chairs. Advanced degrees. For them the door revolves. The friends all succeed. They break every boundary.
But the One Big Boundary remains. Yes, it’s all supposed to be a meritocracy. But if you aren’t part of this happy, prosperous in-group – if you don’t have John Podesta’s email address – you’re out
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
but in truth their significance goes far beyond mere scandal: they are a window into the soul of the Democratic party and into the dreams and thoughts of the class to whom the party answers.
The class to which I refer is not rising in angry protest; they are by and large pretty satisfied, pretty contented. Nobody takes road trips to exotic West Virginia to see what the members of this class looks like or how they live; on the contrary, they are the ones for whom such stories are written. This bunch doesn’t have to make do with a comb-over TV mountebank for a leader; for this class, the choices are always pretty good, and this year they happen to be excellent.
They are the comfortable and well-educated mainstay of our modern Democratic party. They are also the grandees of our national media; the architects of our software; the designers of our streets; the high officials of our banking system; the authors of just about every plan to fix social security or fine-tune the Middle East with precision droning. They are, they think, not a class at all but rather the enlightened ones, the people who must be answered to but who need never explain themselves.
‘We learned to fight back’: Dreamers campaign against Donald Trump
Let us turn the magnifying glass on them for a change, by sorting through the hacked personal emails of John Podesta, who has been a Washington power broker for decades. I admit that I feel uncomfortable digging through this hoard; stealing someone’s email is a crime, after all, and it is outrageous that people’s personal information has been exposed, sinceWikiLeaks*doesn’t seem to have redacted the emails in any way. There is also the issue of authenticity to contend with: we don’t know absolutely and for sure that these emails were not tampered with by whoever stole them from John Podesta. The supposed authors of the messages are refusing to confirm or deny their authenticity, and though they seem to be real, there is a small possibility they aren’t.
With all that taken into consideration, I think the WikiLeaks releases furnish us with an opportunity to observe the upper reaches of the American status hierarchy in all its righteousness and majesty.
The dramatis personae of the liberal class are all present in this amazing body of work: financial innovators. High-achieving colleagues attempting to get jobs for their high-achieving children. Foundation executives doing fine and noble things. Prizes, of course, and high academic achievement.
Certain industries loom large and virtuous here. Hillary’s ingratiating speeches to Wall Street are well known of course, but what is remarkable is that, in the party of Jackson and Bryan and Roosevelt, smiling financiers now seem to stand on every corner, constantly proffering advice about this and that. In one now-famous email chain, for example, the reader can watch current US trade representative Michael Froman, writing from a Citibank email address in 2008,*appear to name*President Obama’s cabinet even before the great hope-and-change election was decided (incidentally, an important clue to understanding why that greatest of zombie banks was never put out of its misery).
The far-sighted innovators of Silicon Valley are also here in force, interacting all the time with the leaders of the party of the people. We watch as Podesta appears toemail*Sheryl Sandberg. He makes plans tovisit*Mark Zuckerberg (who, according to one missive, wants to “learn more about next steps for his philanthropy and social action”). Podesta exchanges emails with an entrepreneur about an ugly race now unfolding for Silicon Valley’s seat in Congress; this man, in turn, appears to forward to Podesta the remarks of yet another Silicon Valley grandee, whocomplains*that one of the Democratic combatants in that fight was criticizing billionaires who give to Democrats. Specifically, the miscreant Dem in question was said to be:
“… spinning (and attacking) donors who have supported Democrats. John Arnold and Marc Leder have both given to Cory Booker, Joe Kennedy, and others. He is also attacking every billionaire that donates to [Congressional candidate] Ro [Khanna], many whom support other Democrats as well.”
Attacking billionaires! In the year 2015! It was, one of the correspondents appears to write, “madness and political malpractice of the party to allow this to continue”.
There are wonderful things to be found in this treasure trove when you search the gilded words “Davos” or “Tahoe”. But it is when you search “Vineyard” on the WikiLeaks dump that you realize these people truly inhabit a different world from the rest of us. By “vineyard”, of course, they mean Martha’s Vineyard, the ritzy vacation resort island off the coast of Massachusetts where presidents Clinton and Obama spent most of their summer vacations. The Vineyard is a place for the very, very rich to unwind, yes, but as we learn from these emails, it is also a place of high idealism; a land of enlightened liberal commitment far beyond anything ordinary citizens can ever achieve.
Consider, for example, the 2015*email*from a foundation executive to a retired mortgage banker (who then seems to have forwarded the note on to Podesta, and thus into history) expressing concern that “Hillary’s image is being torn apart in the media and there’s not enough effective push back”. The public eavesdrops as yet another financier*invites*Podesta to a dinner featuring “food produced exclusively by the island’s farmers and fishermen which will be matched with specially selected wines”. We learn how a Hillary campaign aiderecommended*that a policy statement appear on a certain day so that “It wont get in the way of any other news we are trying to make – but far enough ahead of Hamptons and Vineyard money events”. We even read the*pleadings*of a man who wants to be invited to a state dinner at the White House and who offers, as one of several exhibits in his favor, the fact that he “joined the DSCC Majority Trust in Martha’s Vineyard (contributing over $32,400 to Democratic senators) in July 2014”.
How does the US electoral college work?
(Hilariously, in another*email chain, the Clinton team appears to scheme to “hit” Bernie Sanders for attending “DSCC retreats on Martha’s Vineyard with lobbyists”.)
Then there is the apparent nepotism, the dozens if not hundreds of mundane emails in which petitioners for this or that plum Washington job or high-profile academic appointment politely appeal to Podesta – the ward-heeler of the meritocratic elite – for a solicitous word whispered in the ear of a powerful crony.
This genre of Podesta email, in which people try to arrange jobs for themselves or their kids, points us toward the most fundamental thing we know about the people at the top of this class: their loyalty to one another and the way it overrides everything else. Of course Hillary Clinton staffed her state department with investment bankers and then did speaking engagements for investment banks as soon as she was done at the state department. Of course she*appears to think*that any kind of bank reform should “come from the industry itself”. And of course no elite bankers were ever prosecuted by the Obama administration. Read these emails and you understand, with a start, that the people at the top tier of American life all know each other. They are all engaged in promoting one another’s careers, constantly.
Everything blurs into everything else in this world. The state department, the banks, Silicon Valley, the nonprofits, the “Global CEO Advisory Firm” that*appears*to have solicited donations for the Clinton Foundation. Executives here go from foundation to government to thinktank to startup. There are honors. Venture capital. Foundation grants. Endowed chairs. Advanced degrees. For them the door revolves. The friends all succeed. They break every boundary.
But the One Big Boundary remains. Yes, it’s all supposed to be a meritocracy. But if you aren’t part of this happy, prosperous in-group – if you don’t have John Podesta’s email address – you’re out
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
It really is good form, if you're going to use a large block of copypasta, to at least drop a link. Or a citation. Or some form of attribution.
The charge that you leveled was corruption, but then you post a big blurb of class resentment. And you don't think it's at all strange that your designated paladin just finished trying to ram through a huge Medicaid (i.e. health care for the poor) cut through Congress? Or that your chosen savior is the guy raised in wealth and privilege against a woman who really did come from nothing? A guys who never did one thing to help someone who didn't share his name and his blood?
There are reasons to be skeptical and critical of the power structure in this country, and there are even reasons to criticize Hillary Clinton's and the Democrats' sometimes cozy relations to them. But to think that Trump is your salvation...it just defies any logic.
ClimateSanity
New member
Read these emails and you understand, with a start, that the people at the top tier of American life all know each other. They are all engaged in promoting one another’s careers, constantly.
With that as the context, is it hard to imagine corruption is the status quo among these people?
The press never brought this context out because they are part and parcel of the class to which this article speaks. When I saw how these people operate, corruption just screams out at me....it's an obvious byproduct of such a culture of that class.
With that in mind, particular acts of corruption fade in importance except to prove to liberals that it actually happens. This is a lifestyle and the way things operate on a day to day basis. Do you not think Democrat officials being in bed with the press is a fact that people should now?
People already didn't trust the press but these emails should cement it their minds. This alone is valuable info that everyone should be aware of.
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
ClimateSanity
New member
But you want specific acts of corruption? Coming up next.
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
ClimateSanity
New member
Obama lied: he knew about Hillary’s secret server and wrote to her
*** using a pseudonym, cover-up happened (intent to destroy evidence)
*
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/31077#efmAABABT
https://vault.fbi.gov/hillary-r.-clinton/hillary-r.-clinton-part-03-of-04/view
https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/779729882146283521
“Jen you probably have more on this but it looks like POTUS just said he found out HRC was using her personal email when he saw it in the news… we need to clean this up - he has emails from her - they do not say state.gov”
“How is that not classified?” Huma Abedin to FBI when shown email between Clinton & Obama using his pseudonym. Abedin then expressed her amazement at the president’s use of a pseudonym and asked if she could have a copy of the email.”
?
I cannot state how huge this is, it's a cover-up involving the President of the United States. There are a lot of emails implying this, but this email states it very clearly so anyone can understand. *The email proves obstruction of justice and shows how they lied to the FBI, and likely perjury of Congress. This at the very least proves intent by her Chief of Staff.
Obama used executive privilege in their correspondence. Cheryl Mills (who was given immunity) states they need to "clean up" the Clinton/Obama e-mails because they lacked state.gov.
Additionally, Obama on video*publicly denied*knowing about the server.*He also claimed on video*that he learned about the secret server*through the news*like everyone else.*The corruption goes all the way to the top! Obama is*lying to the American public.
Hillary Clinton set up her private server to hide her pay to play deals discovered throughout these leaks, and to prevent FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) requests.*
Paul Combetta was hired to modify the email headers that referred to a VERY VERY VIP individual, i.e.*change the name of who it was from. If you*read Stonetear/Combetta story, it's easy to see this is exactly what he was attempting. He wanted to change header information on already sent mail to show "state.gov" instead of Hillary's private email address. Multiple people informed him of the infeasibility (and illegality) of it, so somewhere in the next 6 days, it was decided that simply eradicating them was the only option left.
The FBI said they could find no intent to break the law, therefore no recommendation of prosecution. *This email proves, in plain language, that there was intention, and knowingly broke the law.
Ask yourselves: Why would they both be communicating on a secret server to each other? Why not through normal proper channels? What were they hiding? We may soon find out.
?
?
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
*** using a pseudonym, cover-up happened (intent to destroy evidence)
*
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/31077#efmAABABT
https://vault.fbi.gov/hillary-r.-clinton/hillary-r.-clinton-part-03-of-04/view
https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/779729882146283521
“Jen you probably have more on this but it looks like POTUS just said he found out HRC was using her personal email when he saw it in the news… we need to clean this up - he has emails from her - they do not say state.gov”
“How is that not classified?” Huma Abedin to FBI when shown email between Clinton & Obama using his pseudonym. Abedin then expressed her amazement at the president’s use of a pseudonym and asked if she could have a copy of the email.”
?
I cannot state how huge this is, it's a cover-up involving the President of the United States. There are a lot of emails implying this, but this email states it very clearly so anyone can understand. *The email proves obstruction of justice and shows how they lied to the FBI, and likely perjury of Congress. This at the very least proves intent by her Chief of Staff.
Obama used executive privilege in their correspondence. Cheryl Mills (who was given immunity) states they need to "clean up" the Clinton/Obama e-mails because they lacked state.gov.
Additionally, Obama on video*publicly denied*knowing about the server.*He also claimed on video*that he learned about the secret server*through the news*like everyone else.*The corruption goes all the way to the top! Obama is*lying to the American public.
Hillary Clinton set up her private server to hide her pay to play deals discovered throughout these leaks, and to prevent FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) requests.*
Paul Combetta was hired to modify the email headers that referred to a VERY VERY VIP individual, i.e.*change the name of who it was from. If you*read Stonetear/Combetta story, it's easy to see this is exactly what he was attempting. He wanted to change header information on already sent mail to show "state.gov" instead of Hillary's private email address. Multiple people informed him of the infeasibility (and illegality) of it, so somewhere in the next 6 days, it was decided that simply eradicating them was the only option left.
The FBI said they could find no intent to break the law, therefore no recommendation of prosecution. *This email proves, in plain language, that there was intention, and knowingly broke the law.
Ask yourselves: Why would they both be communicating on a secret server to each other? Why not through normal proper channels? What were they hiding? We may soon find out.
?
?
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
Yeah. So??? Did you need Podesta's emails to tell you that? There are pictures of the Clintons at Trump's wedding.
It's not hard to imagine any number of things, but imagination isn't proof of a crime. Are you really asking me to examine the imaginary evidence?
And yet, you can't put your finger on a specific incident...
This is the triumph of optics over fact.
For particular acts of corruption to fade, there would need to be at least one. You haven't pointed to any so far.
I don't think it's a fact at all. Certainly, particular member of the press have preferences, and people that they're more sympathetic to.
Except that nothing in the emails proves corruption of the press, either. At some point, you're going to have to get past hand-waving if you're going to make a serious point.
ClimateSanity
New member
This is just one of thousands. Some are illegal acts. Some are pay for promises of favors. Some are just revealing of the duplicitous nature of hillarys and Obamas and the rest of that crowd in how they deal with donors and foreign leaders and their own supports......they flat out lie to them.
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
Sure. But lets acknowledge first that you weren't being honest with me when you said that the corruption revealed in the emails was important to you. It wasn't. You couldn't name a single thing off the top of your head that mattered about them. Even three posts later, you were punting on an actual instance of corruption and talking about the general optics. So yes, let's examine the alleged corruption revealed, with the benefit of time and Google, but first I think you should level with me (and with yourself) about your real motivation.
Ok, hold up. Rather than pasting large blocks of commentary from Teh Interwebz at me, can you state simply and succinctly what you've found that you find so corrupt here? Am I supposed to be scandalized that Clinton had people going through public statements and trying to "clean them up"? I'm not going to spend the rest of my life responding to everything every anti-Clinton blogger has ever written.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
what discredited Podesta and Clinton?
was it, perhaps, their discreditable natures and actions?
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
this is what drew me into the conversation:
the "russians" apparently were out to get podesta
and hillary
which is fine with me
they can have 'em :idunno:
the "russians" apparently were out to get podesta
and hillary
which is fine with me
they can have 'em :idunno:
Whether you think what the Russians leaked discredited them is beside the point. Breaking into the computers and stealing the emails is a crime, no matter what the contents, and if Trump officials participated, as it seems may have happened, they need to be prosecuted. Committing crimes should not be part of running for office.