The Podesta Emails

tonifig8 said:

PJ_Soul said:

tonifig8 said:

dignin said:

tonifig8 said:

dignin said:

I appreciate the determination JC has going through all of this, but I have to agree with others, this seems much ado about nothing. Anyone with even a remote understanding of how politics are done can see this is all par for the course.

Maybe in the coming days there will be something more condemning and of interest. We will see.

This comment is good for the clintonites, but not the rest of us.

Hey, a guy has to make a living. You know, since I'm on the Clinton campaign payroll.

I would like to add that she has been fundraising and polling so well these days, I've gotten a raise! Hope all the rest of you got your raise as well!

What does you working for Clinton have anything to do with my comment? Clintonites are fearless and devoted sheep that will surrender for their queen. Not employes, well I guess employes are sort of the same, except they get paid.

She's spent well over 8 million and counting on social media- who knows who her staff is. I just recognize the clintonites.

I'm not a Clintonite, but still agree that the emails so far as much ado about nothing, as digin so aptly put it. I don't see why anti-Clintonites would be any more interested in the emails so far. Again as digin said, we're all on tenterhooks waiting for something interesting to come out... but so far, these emails seem more like spam in this thread, and not information that is worth page after page of posts for everyone to filter through. Just a link to all of the emails would be sufficient, no? So that we can all just go and see for ourselves? (no, I'm not telling you what to do - just offering my viewpoint).

Much to do about nothing? Are you delusional? Did you know that Dona Brazile had given the clinton camp one of the debate questions in advance? The emails are a tremendous source of information. Damaging information. And I've seen you guys attack republicans for far less damaging words. Clinton, if elected, will be impeached- zero doubt about that.
Now you guys can wait around all day for the mainstream media to report on anything relevant. All I've seen is trump trump trump trump.....

The media has done a terrible job- Shit CNN still hasn't even covered the latest Wikileaks news... give me a break.

You have your opinion and that's great. More power to you. I hope Canada doesn't end up with such a horrible crooked candidate, such as we're dealing with here in the States.
Enough said, no need for me to waste your time or for you to waste mine.

As far as Clinton herself goes, I haven't really seen anything that actually hurts Hillary yet. Now if there were an email from Clinton asking Dona Brazile to give her the questions ahead of time, then I would be scandalized. (btw, I should think that ANY candidate already has a very solid opinion about the DP and how they convey that to people. I don't think the possibility of Hillary being told about that question ahead of time had any impact whatsoever, but do agree that Brazile shouldn't have sent that email.... but these leaks aren't meant to act as evidence against Brazile, right? I think what I'm doing is simply quite objectively considering RELEVANCY TO HILLARY CLINTON when I read these emails. So far, they are all just a bunch of private emails between staffers and what not, and they are all just discussing campaign politics as usual - I don't think a single thing they said (so far) was out of the ordinary within a campaign. Plus Clinton likely had no clue most of what was being discussed was being discussed. I just don't find any of this damning against Clinton at all. Not delusional, I think just logical. But I will certainly let everyone know when I do see an email that I find scandalizing. I would think that if one existed we would have seen it by now, unless Assange is a lot more immature than I thought.... and he does seem like a douchebag at best. It's possible he's holding on to something juicy until right before the election just for shits and giggles.

JC29856 said:

It's what we all already knew.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/10/17/us-allies-are-funding-isis-and-hillary-knew-all-along/

Yes, we did already know all that. I certainly don't like how the US handles the middle east and haven't for years and years. I'm definitely concerned about where it's all going to go in the future.

PJ_Soul said:

JC29856 said:

PJ_Soul said:

JC29856 said:

We already knew this

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN12H1QA

What that doesn't seem to mention is that those emails were deemed classified retroactively anyhow. They weren't classified when they were sent. They went through them after the fact - I assume a team was assigned to read them and decide what should have been deemed classified but had been - and then assigned the label to them. Sounds to me like there is some disagreement about how the term was applied retroactively to some of the emails. Could be a case of an overeager evaluator and/or a genuine disagreement about the classifications. Perhaps this Kennedy felt that marking certain emails as classified wasn't necessarily appropriate and thought this could be clarified with a quid pro quo about the emails in question.

I don't see where it says docs were emailed then marked classified. I do see in the fbi report that says the email was marked classified and Kennedy wanted it changed. How does one retrospectively mark a sent email classified?

Seems to me that's what happened: https://www.quora.com/Why-does-it-matter-if-Clintons-emails-were-retroactively-classified-as-classified

And then the two emails that were marked classified... seems it was an honest mistake, no? http://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/07/07/ny-times-reports-marked-classified-emails-clinton-case-without-noting-classification-was-botched/211432

Yeah this dead horse has been beaten enough.