Carolyn Curiel was just here with a group of Purdue students that visited the debate site. She and I exchanged raves about the two of you. Also with the group was Richard Norton Smith.
Carolyn Curiel, a former ambassador to Belize and cousin to Gonzalo, said she's meeting with him this week. She's now executive director of the Purdue Institute for Civic Communication in West Lafayette.
Judge's wife knows Podesta. Podesta head of Hillary campaign. Obvious bias. Trump right.
First, I'm confused. Is Carolyn his wife or cousin?
Second. So, Trump was right that Curiel's Mexican heritage made him biased because Curiel's wife/cousin? met with Podesta?
No wonder you love this stuff, carte blanche to just make connections and conclusions whether they make sense or not!
A TOP AIDE calculatingly inserted a passage critical of the financial industry into one of Hillary Clinton’s many highly-paid speeches to big banks, “precisely for the purpose of having something we could show people if ever asked what she was saying behind closed doors for two years to all those fat cats,” he wrote in an email posted by Wikileaks.
In late November 2015, campaign speechwriter Dan Schwerin wrote an email to other top aides floating the idea of leaking that passage, which had come in a speech Clinton gave to Deutsche Bank in October 2014 in return for $260,000.
“I wrote her a long riff about economic fairness and how the financial industry has lost its way,” for that purpose, Schwerin wrote. “Perhaps at some point there will be value in sharing this with a reporter and getting a story written. Upside would be that when people say she’s too close to Wall Street and has taken too much money from bankers, we can point to evidence that she wasn’t afraid to speak truth to power.”
A newly leaked email shows that the Hillary Clinton campaign proposed “selectively providing” the press with Clinton’s paid speeches to Wall Street and manipulating the media coverage to make her look less supportive of Wall Street than she actually is.
In response to the Bernie Sanders campaign and left-wing critics, Clinton pledged in the February presidential debate to “look into” releasing the transcripts of her paid speeches to Wall Street, which she had given at private events that were closed to the press.
After more than 250 days, Clinton still has not fulfilled her promise — but WikiLeaks released excerpts of her paid speeches this week that show Clinton saying she “represented” and “had great relations” with Wall Street.
But in terms of wanting a way to break in - couldn't we tell tech off the record that she had in mind the malware/key strokes idea (insert malware into a device that you know is a target, to capture keystrokes before they are encrypted). Or that she had in mind really super code breaking by the NSA. But not the backdoor per se?
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/3189 The Algeria donation came soon after the Jan. 12, 2010, earthquake in Haiti, the Clinton Foundation said The foundation acknowledged it did not alert the State Department about the gift for vetting, which was required under a memorandum of understanding between the Obama administration and the Clintons in an effort to prevent foreign governments from trying to curry favor with Hillary Clinton’s State Department by donating to Bill Clinton’s philanthropy.
From Podesta to Cheryl Mills (Hillary aid at state dept):
Think we should hold emails to and from potus? That's the heart of his exec privilege. We could get them to ask for that. They may not care, but I seems like they will. THIS WAS DATED ONLY A FEW HOURS AFTER BEING SERVED SUBPOENA. HER PEOPLE (MILLS AND PODESTA) ARE DISCUSSING WHICH EMAILS TO DELETE!
*Speculation* President Obama (i.e. "potus") never publicly asserted executive privilege up to this point. Choosing to delete these emails without executive privilege yet to have been asserted is intentionally undermining the congressional subpoena. Not only that, but it seems like Cheryl Mills is suggesting that they ask the White House to assert executive privilege, rather than it being an organic originating from the White House itself. Are they asking the WH to help cover Hillary's tracks? "We could get them to ask for that. They may not care..." Paul Combetta (Platte River IT guy) secretly askingp about stripping/replacing an "extremely VIP" email out from an email database. Obama extremely VIP? If this was communication worthy of "executive privilege", then why is being communicated through Hillary's private server, instead of using secure communications?
In Nixon vs. USA decision by Supreme Court: Executive privilege is not valid, if the prosecutor yields a "sufficient showing" that the communication is "essential to the justice of the case".
Carolyn Curiel was just here with a group of Purdue students that visited the debate site. She and I exchanged raves about the two of you. Also with the group was Richard Norton Smith.
Carolyn Curiel, a former ambassador to Belize and cousin to Gonzalo, said she's meeting with him this week. She's now executive director of the Purdue Institute for Civic Communication in West Lafayette.
Judge's wife knows Podesta. Podesta head of Hillary campaign. Obvious bias. Trump right.
First, I'm confused. Is Carolyn his wife or cousin?
Second. So, Trump was right that Curiel's Mexican heritage made him biased because Curiel's wife/cousin? met with Podesta?
No wonder you love this stuff, carte blanche to just make connections and conclusions whether they make sense or not!
I agree. Lets see how Hilliary answered 25 questions from judicial watch while under oath....
Not your cup of Tea? I find it thrilling. There are threads in AET that might be exciting for you. Perhaps what are you drinking right now? or What are you eating right now? or everyones favourite ask each other Yes or no do you like chips? for the millionth time
Incorrect assumption...
You find these leaks thrilling? 99% of these "leaks" I'm reading through are garbage... you guys see this as some kind of smoking gun? Most of this comes across as typical political due diligence...
The reason the media isn't covering this stuff is because there really isn't much here... I'm no Clinton shill, believe me, but I just call it how I see it
This is all very far from thrilling... a bad episode of Ancient Aliens is more intriguing in my opinion lol
Carolyn Curiel was just here with a group of Purdue students that visited the debate site. She and I exchanged raves about the two of you. Also with the group was Richard Norton Smith.
Carolyn Curiel, a former ambassador to Belize and cousin to Gonzalo, said she's meeting with him this week. She's now executive director of the Purdue Institute for Civic Communication in West Lafayette.
Judge's wife knows Podesta. Podesta head of Hillary campaign. Obvious bias. Trump right.
First, I'm confused. Is Carolyn his wife or cousin?
Second. So, Trump was right that Curiel's Mexican heritage made him biased because Curiel's wife/cousin? met with Podesta?
No wonder you love this stuff, carte blanche to just make connections and conclusions whether they make sense or not!
I agree. Lets see how Hilliary answered 25 questions from judicial watch while under oath....
These leaks threaten our national security especially the specific leaks that threatened our national security. The Russians are interfering with our elections by hacking emails that prove we interfered with our elections, specifically the democratic primaries.
...and for anyone not familiar with the leaks the emails are just campaign minutia, the real issue is Donald super Hitler Trump.
We have begun to use "hack" and "leak" interchangeably and we shouldn't. They are not synonymous terms. I'm guilty of it myself. These emails aren't leaks. Podesta didn't leak his email. Podesta was hacked and his emails were stolen. Two different things. We should keep that in mind.
We have begun to use "hack" and "leak" interchangeably and we shouldn't. They are not synonymous terms. I'm guilty of it myself. These emails aren't leaks. Podesta didn't leak his email. Podesta was hacked and his emails were stolen. Two different things. We should keep that in mind.
Good point, your distinction opens up an entire philosophical discussion about the publics right to know and the government's responsibility to it's citizens.
My question is does it matter how a wife (us citizens) learned about her lying cheating husband (us government) either by his secretary telling her or by wife hacking husbands phone? Does the method by which the wife learned of the lying cheating diminish the lying and cheating? Should the wife not concern herself with husband lying and cheating because husbands lie and cheat?
These leaks threaten our national security especially the specific leaks that threatened our national security. The Russians are interfering with our elections by hacking emails that prove we interfered with our elections, specifically the democratic primaries.
...and for anyone not familiar with the leaks the emails are just campaign minutia, the real issue is Donald super Hitler Trump.
Of course. When you can't look at yourself and your errors, you have to point the finger at Russia and Trump and anyone else worthy of guilt.
We have begun to use "hack" and "leak" interchangeably and we shouldn't. They are not synonymous terms. I'm guilty of it myself. These emails aren't leaks. Podesta didn't leak his email. Podesta was hacked and his emails were stolen. Two different things. We should keep that in mind.
Good point, your distinction opens up an entire philosophical discussion about the publics right to know and the government's responsibility to it's citizens.
My question is does it matter how a wife (us citizens) learned about her lying cheating husband (us government) either by his secretary telling her or by wife hacking husbands phone? Does the method by which the wife learned of the lying cheating diminish the lying and cheating? Should the wife not concern herself with husband lying and cheating because husbands lie and cheat?
I don't think it necessarily does. If there are things we should know in these emails I'm glad we now know them.
At the same time, we should remember that Podesta is a bit of a victim here. Cyber crime is still a crime. He now has had his emails opened up to the world, against his will.
The information we learn is valuable, but the method by which it was acquired is ethically questionable.
We have begun to use "hack" and "leak" interchangeably and we shouldn't. They are not synonymous terms. I'm guilty of it myself. These emails aren't leaks. Podesta didn't leak his email. Podesta was hacked and his emails were stolen. Two different things. We should keep that in mind.
Good point, your distinction opens up an entire philosophical discussion about the publics right to know and the government's responsibility to it's citizens.
My question is does it matter how a wife (us citizens) learned about her lying cheating husband (us government) either by his secretary telling her or by wife hacking husbands phone? Does the method by which the wife learned of the lying cheating diminish the lying and cheating? Should the wife not concern herself with husband lying and cheating because husbands lie and cheat?
I don't think it necessarily does. If there are things we should know in these emails I'm glad we now know them.
At the same time, we should remember that Podesta is a bit of a victim here. Cyber crime is still a crime. He now has had his emails opened up to the world, against his will.
The information we learn is valuable, but the method by which it was acquired is ethically questionable.
Understandable but we have to balance that against the US citizens being victims of lying cheating and corrupt government.
We have begun to use "hack" and "leak" interchangeably and we shouldn't. They are not synonymous terms. I'm guilty of it myself. These emails aren't leaks. Podesta didn't leak his email. Podesta was hacked and his emails were stolen. Two different things. We should keep that in mind.
Good point, your distinction opens up an entire philosophical discussion about the publics right to know and the government's responsibility to it's citizens.
My question is does it matter how a wife (us citizens) learned about her lying cheating husband (us government) either by his secretary telling her or by wife hacking husbands phone? Does the method by which the wife learned of the lying cheating diminish the lying and cheating? Should the wife not concern herself with husband lying and cheating because husbands lie and cheat?
I don't think it necessarily does. If there are things we should know in these emails I'm glad we now know them.
At the same time, we should remember that Podesta is a bit of a victim here. Cyber crime is still a crime. He now has had his emails opened up to the world, against his will.
The information we learn is valuable, but the method by which it was acquired is ethically questionable.
Understandable but we have to balance that against the US citizens being victims of lying cheating and corrupt government.
If all of Hilliary speeches are as damning as the 3 released today, she should have released them long ago and end the controversy. I just woke up with 10fidy spilled in my lap and on my phone...last thing I remember was reading speech #2.
From:mharris@hillaryclinton.com To: john.podesta@gmail.com Date: 2016-01-05 17:00 Subject: Re: Twitterstorm Tuesday - January 5
> wrote: > > FYI > > Sent from Donna's I Pad. Follow me on twitter @donnabrazile > > > Begin forwarded message: > > *From:* Sarah Ford <<b>sarahford@berniesanders.com> > *Date:* January 4, 2016 at 10:26:47 PM EST > *To:* undisclosed-recipients:; > *Subject:* *Twitterstorm Tuesday - January 5*
Deputy National Press Secretary Sarah Ford (Nov. 2015) National press secretary for Draft Biden 2016 to Nov. 2015. B.A. in public relations and political science from DePaul University, 2015.
Bill Clinton tells the truth about their plans to frame Trump with friendly New York Times in february!! "President Clinton… Clinton, like others, thinks that… only a well-financed, concerted campaign portrayed him as dangerous and bigoted will win… President Clinton (like Mrs. Clinton and many other Dems) thinks the single greatest weapon against Trump is Trump's own instinct to make outrageous, divisive, even hateful comments that can come across as unpresidential"
EMAILID 10275 Gathering information on Juanita Broaddrick, who accused Bill Clinton of raping her. They likely want to destroy Broaddrick to neutralize her accusation, which creates the public image that Bill Clinton is a rapist. David Kendall writes : "The first is the affidavit and cover letter from her lawyer. This document makes clear that Broaddrick is indeed “Jane Doe #5” in the Paula Jones suit. I believe this has been unsealed but before we release it publicly, I’d need to check." - So this guy is gathering documents and sending them to Podesta BEFORE he checked whether it was unsealed or not. It's OK if I send it by email, I'm sure nobody will find out... https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/10275
EMAILID 10353 Reporters on the Clinton campaign bus accepted off-the-record parties at the home of John Pedesta. "Thursday night, April 9th at 7:00p.m. Dinner at the Home of John Podesta. This will be with about 20 reporters who will closely cover the campaign (aka the bus)." Were they bribing them with lavish parties for better coverage or they were simply thanking them for services already rendered? https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/10353
EMAILID 10728 Brent Budowsky triumphantly reports to John Podesta that he finished his latest article. It is titled "The Magic of Bill Clinton". Brent writes to Podesta in the subject line "Hope this helps" Podesta's response? "Yep". By the way here is an archive link to the article Budowsky wrote http://archive.is/ayD4m to "help out" the Clinton campaign. https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/10728
Comments
Second.
So, Trump was right that Curiel's Mexican heritage made him biased because Curiel's wife/cousin? met with Podesta?
No wonder you love this stuff, carte blanche to just make connections and conclusions whether they make sense or not!
A TOP AIDE calculatingly inserted a passage critical of the financial industry into one of Hillary Clinton’s many highly-paid speeches to big banks, “precisely for the purpose of having something we could show people if ever asked what she was saying behind closed doors for two years to all those fat cats,” he wrote in an email posted by Wikileaks.
In late November 2015, campaign speechwriter Dan Schwerin wrote an email to other top aides floating the idea of leaking that passage, which had come in a speech Clinton gave to Deutsche Bank in October 2014 in return for $260,000.
“I wrote her a long riff about economic fairness and how the financial industry has lost its way,” for that purpose, Schwerin wrote. “Perhaps at some point there will be value in sharing this with a reporter and getting a story written. Upside would be that when people say she’s too close to Wall Street and has taken too much money from bankers, we can point to evidence that she wasn’t afraid to speak truth to power.”
A newly leaked email shows that the Hillary Clinton campaign proposed “selectively providing” the press with Clinton’s paid speeches to Wall Street and manipulating the media coverage to make her look less supportive of Wall Street than she actually is.
In response to the Bernie Sanders campaign and left-wing critics, Clinton pledged in the February presidential debate to “look into” releasing the transcripts of her paid speeches to Wall Street, which she had given at private events that were closed to the press.
After more than 250 days, Clinton still has not fulfilled her promise — but WikiLeaks released excerpts of her paid speeches this week that show Clinton saying she “represented” and “had great relations” with Wall Street.
Isn't the discussing of hacking kind of ironic?
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/9181
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/3189 The Algeria donation came soon after the Jan. 12, 2010, earthquake in Haiti, the Clinton Foundation said The foundation acknowledged it did not alert the State Department about the gift for vetting, which was required under a memorandum of understanding between the Obama administration and the Clintons in an effort to prevent foreign governments from trying to curry favor with Hillary Clinton’s State Department by donating to Bill Clinton’s philanthropy.
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/9545
From Podesta to Cheryl Mills (Hillary aid at state dept):
Think we should hold emails to and from potus? That's the heart of his exec privilege. We could get them to ask for that. They may not care, but I seems like they will.
THIS WAS DATED ONLY A FEW HOURS AFTER BEING SERVED SUBPOENA. HER PEOPLE (MILLS AND PODESTA) ARE DISCUSSING WHICH EMAILS TO DELETE!
*Speculation*
President Obama (i.e. "potus") never publicly asserted executive privilege up to this point. Choosing to delete these emails without executive privilege yet to have been asserted is intentionally undermining the congressional subpoena.
Not only that, but it seems like Cheryl Mills is suggesting that they ask the White House to assert executive privilege, rather than it being an organic originating from the White House itself. Are they asking the WH to help cover Hillary's tracks?
"We could get them to ask for that. They may not care..."
Paul Combetta (Platte River IT guy) secretly askingp about stripping/replacing an "extremely VIP" email out from an email database. Obama extremely VIP? If this was communication worthy of "executive privilege", then why is being communicated through Hillary's private server, instead of using secure communications?
In Nixon vs. USA decision by Supreme Court: Executive privilege is not valid, if the prosecutor yields a "sufficient showing" that the communication is "essential to the justice of the case".
http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-releases-new-hillary-clinton-email-answers-given-oath/
Most of the questions were objected to and the rest except for a few Hilliary "did not recall".
You find these leaks thrilling? 99% of these "leaks" I'm reading through are garbage... you guys see this as some kind of smoking gun? Most of this comes across as typical political due diligence...
The reason the media isn't covering this stuff is because there really isn't much here... I'm no Clinton shill, believe me, but I just call it how I see it
This is all very far from thrilling... a bad episode of Ancient Aliens is more intriguing in my opinion lol
Brilliant!
The Dem response to the leaks.
These leaks threaten our national security especially the specific leaks that threatened our national security.
The Russians are interfering with our elections by hacking emails that prove we interfered with our elections, specifically the democratic primaries.
...and for anyone not familiar with the leaks the emails are just campaign minutia, the real issue is Donald super Hitler Trump.
As SoS she is aware of all the electronic surveillance and hacking going on out there... and knew she would be targeted...
You guys keep falling for Putins plan to distract and divide the country
"....not a single shred of proof"
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
My question is does it matter how a wife (us citizens) learned about her lying cheating husband (us government) either by his secretary telling her or by wife hacking husbands phone?
Does the method by which the wife learned of the lying cheating diminish the lying and cheating?
Should the wife not concern herself with husband lying and cheating because husbands lie and cheat?
At the same time, we should remember that Podesta is a bit of a victim here. Cyber crime is still a crime. He now has had his emails opened up to the world, against his will.
The information we learn is valuable, but the method by which it was acquired is ethically questionable.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/
Attachments
Podesta talking about having a TS clearance in a gmail account and how it could benefit Clinton Foundation.
Anyone know what the first rule of holding a TS clearance is?
Edit: Podesta is a campaigning manager. Do all CM for hopeful pres runners have TS clearance?
From:mharris@hillaryclinton.com To: john.podesta@gmail.com Date: 2016-01-05 17:00 Subject: Re: Twitterstorm Tuesday - January 5
> wrote: > > FYI > > Sent from Donna's I Pad. Follow me on twitter @donnabrazile > > > Begin forwarded message: > > *From:* Sarah Ford <<b>sarahford@berniesanders.com> > *Date:* January 4, 2016 at 10:26:47 PM EST > *To:* undisclosed-recipients:; > *Subject:* *Twitterstorm Tuesday - January 5*
Anyone know Sarah Ford? Bernie staffer mole
(Nov. 2015) National press secretary for Draft Biden 2016 to Nov. 2015. B.A. in public relations and political science from DePaul University, 2015.
https://www.linkedin.com/in/sarah-ford-5370b352
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/4664
EMAILID 10728 Brent Budowsky triumphantly reports to John Podesta that he finished his latest article. It is titled "The Magic of Bill Clinton". Brent writes to Podesta in the subject line "Hope this helps" Podesta's response? "Yep". By the way here is an archive link to the article Budowsky wrote http://archive.is/ayD4m to "help out" the Clinton campaign. https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/10728