5 ms·

Whoever released the emails did the American public a huge service. They pulled back the curtain and we got to see how the sausage is made. It doesn't matter wh

Whoever released the emails did the American public a huge service. They pulled back the curtain and we got to see how the sausage is made. It doesn't matter who they are or why they did it. The end result was important whistle blowing. We should hope that information like this is leaked out as it helps balance the power between the public and corrupt politicians/media in a way nothing else can.

simonw 10y ago
How do you feel about the fact that they appear to have hacked the RNC too but deliberately chose not to release those emails, in order to favor one candidate over the other. Still think that's a huge public service? Not to mention that the emails they kept might be used for blackmail in the future.
- williamle8300 10y ago
  Maybe because RNC emails are mundane and don't have scandalous material?
  - cariaso 10y ago
    The majority of the Podesta leaks were extremely mundane. This suggests the RNC leaks were held to a different standard.
    - mythrwy 10y ago
      The majority, yes. However some were "interesting".
    - 3131s 10y ago
      Of course the majority were mundane. The majority of Chapo Guzman's private communications would be mundane too. The contents of the DNC emails suggest nothing about the contents of the RNC emails, though I have no doubt that republicans are equally crooked.
      - chillwaves 10y ago
        And what does the one-sidedness of the attacks and releases suggest?
        3131s 10y ago
        The one-sidedness of the attacks? From whom? If you're referring to recent CIA claims that the RNC was hacked as well, then my answer is that I don't trust the CIA. It may have happened, but you have no real proof about Russian involvement at all. Unlike other posters in this thread and Clinton herself, I am not keen on starting a physical war with Russia over conjecture about a virtual attack.
- makomk 10y ago
  If I remember correctly, that was walked back to a claim that they'd hacked "RNC actors" but not the RNC themselves - and we already knew that because e-mails from Republicans were released fairly early on. This is a problem with a lot of the scary claims going around in general; they simply don't actually seem to be true.
- exstudent2 10y ago
  Yes they did 1/2 have of the work they could but I'm not complaining about getting more information. Someone else should leak the RNC. Or possibly it didn't contain as many bombshells? Either way, I'm happy to get more information than I had before.

simonw 10y ago

How do you feel about the fact that they appear to have hacked the RNC too but deliberately chose not to release those emails, in order to favor one candidate over the other. Still think that's a huge public service? Not to mention that the emails they kept might be used for blackmail in the future.

williamle8300 10y ago
Maybe because RNC emails are mundane and don't have scandalous material?
- cariaso 10y ago
  The majority of the Podesta leaks were extremely mundane. This suggests the RNC leaks were held to a different standard.
  - mythrwy 10y ago
    The majority, yes. However some were "interesting".
  - 3131s 10y ago
    Of course the majority were mundane. The majority of Chapo Guzman's private communications would be mundane too. The contents of the DNC emails suggest nothing about the contents of the RNC emails, though I have no doubt that republicans are equally crooked.
    - chillwaves 10y ago
      And what does the one-sidedness of the attacks and releases suggest?
      - 3131s 10y ago
        The one-sidedness of the attacks? From whom? If you're referring to recent CIA claims that the RNC was hacked as well, then my answer is that I don't trust the CIA. It may have happened, but you have no real proof about Russian involvement at all. Unlike other posters in this thread and Clinton herself, I am not keen on starting a physical war with Russia over conjecture about a virtual attack.
makomk 10y ago
If I remember correctly, that was walked back to a claim that they'd hacked "RNC actors" but not the RNC themselves - and we already knew that because e-mails from Republicans were released fairly early on. This is a problem with a lot of the scary claims going around in general; they simply don't actually seem to be true.
exstudent2 10y ago
Yes they did 1/2 have of the work they could but I'm not complaining about getting more information. Someone else should leak the RNC. Or possibly it didn't contain as many bombshells? Either way, I'm happy to get more information than I had before.