4 ms·

What was the public interest in his lobster recipe? Or creating a paranoid frenzy that got shots fired at a Pizza place? Randomly dumping personal emails isn't

by firasd 10y ago

What was the public interest in his lobster recipe? Or creating a paranoid frenzy that got shots fired at a Pizza place? Randomly dumping personal emails isn't the same as Ellsberg and Snowden working with reporters to blow the whistle on specific transgressions in war and mass surveillance. Interesting article exploring this issue of exercising discretion and developing new ethics in the age of leaks: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/05/opinion/what-were-missing-while-we-obsess-over-john-podestas-email.html http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/05/opinion/what-were-missing-...

yarou 10y ago
Obviously the pizzagate stuff is stupid and unfounded. It does a great disservice to people that were victims of real sexual abuse. But can't you see the vast amount of corruption? The DNC rigged the primary for one candidate. We need to hold our political parties accountable for their actions.
- mullingitover 10y ago
  They preferred a candidate, but 'rigging' implies fraudulently manipulating the votes, which didn't happen. I'd like to see the RNC's emails now. What kind of dirt do the republicans have? Is it not being released because it's being used to blackmail them?
  - Natsu 10y ago
    Despite some unsubstantiated rumors, there is no proof they were ever hacked.
  - wavefunction 10y ago
    Rigging doesn't specifically mean manipulating votes. It means taking what is presumably an open and fair contest and taking some actions to ensure it isn't. The big things that came out of the leaks for me is the explicit and cosy relationship with specific members of the media who were instructed to produce and disseminate certain messaging against Bernie Sanders. They also asked those "media resources" to prop up Trump, Cruz and Carson because they naively believed that Trump would be a push-over, for example.
- KVFinn 10y ago
  >The DNC rigged the primary for one candidate. Clearly there were people within the DNC who preferred clinton, but in what sense did they rig the vote? See: http://electionado.com/canvas/1478880826459 http://electionado.com/canvas/1478880826459
  - equalunique 10y ago
    There was a conflict of interest between the top election official for Brooklyn and a "Clinton Super-delegate" http://reverbpress.com/politics/battlegrounds/ny-poll-worker-who-dropped-thousands-from-voter-list-paid-6-6-million/ http://reverbpress.com/politics/battlegrounds/ny-poll-worker... Whatever the case was, 126K Brooklyn-based democrats were unable to cast votes in the primary http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/officials-investigating-why-126000-voters-were-purged-from-ny-rolls/ http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/officials-investigating-... Brooklyn is one of the parts of the NYC area that have ultra liberal demographics, so one could draw the conclusion that Brooklyn's voting power would have tipped the NY primary towards Sanders.
- travmatt 10y ago
  >But can't you see the vast amount of corruption? Every time I see someone write something like this my knee jerk reaction is to either assume they're lying or they are clueless. Can you point to the vast amount of corruption you claim is self evident?
  - virtuabhi 10y ago
    1) Selling ambassdor positions to the donors (check the xlsx file which has higher paying donors getting 'better' countries) 2) Co-ordinating with Super PAC https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/807308520546848769 https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/807308520546848769
    - neuronexmachina 10y ago
      1) This doesn't make it right, but it's a common practice for a President to give a percentage of ambassadorships (typically 30%-40%) to donors and friends. Obama, Clinton, and both Bush's all engaged in this practice. It's unusual though to extend this practice to the Cabinet, as Trump has done.
      - travmatt 10y ago
        I could even name some Reagan donors turned unqualified ambassadors. I can't tell if people hawking such ridiculous ideas are truly naive or are just following a motivated reasoning to reach some post-hoc justification of their dislike.
Natsu 10y ago
There's a long list of stuff here: http://www.mostdamagingwikileaks.com/ http://www.mostdamagingwikileaks.com/ The press never covered most of it because a lot of the leaks are things that make them look bad. For example, Glenn Thrush: https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/12681 https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/12681 > No worries > Because I have become a hack I will send u the whole section that pertains > to u > Please don't share or tell anyone I did this > Tell me if I fucked up anything He tried to get out of this by saying he was just fact-checking. But that normally doesn't require a request for secrecy and one would just send specific items they wanted fact checked, not a prerelease copy of the article.
- specialist 10y ago
  Upvote for link. I had ignored the wikileaks stuff, like I ignored most of the election cycle, because I ignore most current events. But it was time to take a peek to see what everyone got excited about. I just randomly picked links and citations. Sorry, but I didn't find any there there. (I skipped the secret email server, mostly because I don't care.) Just one example, in #6 its clear from context that Bill Ivey's use of "we" refers to society as a whole. Further, he's venting about the decline of civic engagement, an opinion shared by many (such as myself). My primary reaction is "Hate the game, not the players." Politics sucks. All of it. But why is any one surprised by the corruption? This is the system we designed, or at least accepted. If we hate it so much, they we should support publicly financed campaigns, restoring the fairness doctrine, shortening the political cycle, etc, etc. But we don't. Because Freedom Markets™ booyah! My secondary reaction is "Wow, this InfoWars stuff makes my head hurt." I can never tell if cherry picking quotes out of context and making wild inferences is intentional obfuscation or just how some people process the world. Any way, thanks for the link. PS- The spirit worshipping stuff is hysterical.
  - Natsu 10y ago
    The secret email server is actually more interesting than you think. They found hundreds of emails containing classified info (including TS info, like a picture of NK that one of the media guys talks about in the dump). We also have an email between Hillary & Colin Powell discussing how to subvert the Presidential Records Act. Read the PDF on here for more: https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/30324 https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/30324 This is part of what Colin Powell said that I think it especially illustrative of how big of a security risk people like this are when put in power: Now, the real issue had to do with PDAs, as we called them a few years ago before BlackBerry became a noun. And the issue was DS would not allow them into the secure spaces, especially up your way. When I asked why not they gave me all kinds of nonsense about how they gave out signals that could be read by spies, etc. Same reason they tried to keep mobile phones out of the suite. I had numerous meetings with them. We even opened one up for them to try to explain to me why it was more dangerous than say, a remote control for one of the many tvs in the suite. Or something embedded in my shoe heel. They never satisfied me and NSA/CIA wouldn't back off. So, we just went about our business and stopped asking. I had an ancient version of a PDA and used it. In general, the suite was so sealed that it is hard to get signals in or out wirelessly.

by firasd 10y ago

yarou 10y ago

Obviously the pizzagate stuff is stupid and unfounded. It does a great disservice to people that were victims of real sexual abuse. But can't you see the vast amount of corruption? The DNC rigged the primary for one candidate. We need to hold our political parties accountable for their actions.

mullingitover 10y ago
They preferred a candidate, but 'rigging' implies fraudulently manipulating the votes, which didn't happen. I'd like to see the RNC's emails now. What kind of dirt do the republicans have? Is it not being released because it's being used to blackmail them?
- Natsu 10y ago
  Despite some unsubstantiated rumors, there is no proof they were ever hacked.
- wavefunction 10y ago
  Rigging doesn't specifically mean manipulating votes. It means taking what is presumably an open and fair contest and taking some actions to ensure it isn't. The big things that came out of the leaks for me is the explicit and cosy relationship with specific members of the media who were instructed to produce and disseminate certain messaging against Bernie Sanders. They also asked those "media resources" to prop up Trump, Cruz and Carson because they naively believed that Trump would be a push-over, for example.
KVFinn 10y ago
>The DNC rigged the primary for one candidate. Clearly there were people within the DNC who preferred clinton, but in what sense did they rig the vote? See: http://electionado.com/canvas/1478880826459 http://electionado.com/canvas/1478880826459
- equalunique 10y ago
  There was a conflict of interest between the top election official for Brooklyn and a "Clinton Super-delegate" http://reverbpress.com/politics/battlegrounds/ny-poll-worker-who-dropped-thousands-from-voter-list-paid-6-6-million/ http://reverbpress.com/politics/battlegrounds/ny-poll-worker... Whatever the case was, 126K Brooklyn-based democrats were unable to cast votes in the primary http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/officials-investigating-why-126000-voters-were-purged-from-ny-rolls/ http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/officials-investigating-... Brooklyn is one of the parts of the NYC area that have ultra liberal demographics, so one could draw the conclusion that Brooklyn's voting power would have tipped the NY primary towards Sanders.
travmatt 10y ago
>But can't you see the vast amount of corruption? Every time I see someone write something like this my knee jerk reaction is to either assume they're lying or they are clueless. Can you point to the vast amount of corruption you claim is self evident?
- virtuabhi 10y ago
  1) Selling ambassdor positions to the donors (check the xlsx file which has higher paying donors getting 'better' countries) 2) Co-ordinating with Super PAC https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/807308520546848769 https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/807308520546848769
  - neuronexmachina 10y ago
    1) This doesn't make it right, but it's a common practice for a President to give a percentage of ambassadorships (typically 30%-40%) to donors and friends. Obama, Clinton, and both Bush's all engaged in this practice. It's unusual though to extend this practice to the Cabinet, as Trump has done.
    - travmatt 10y ago
      I could even name some Reagan donors turned unqualified ambassadors. I can't tell if people hawking such ridiculous ideas are truly naive or are just following a motivated reasoning to reach some post-hoc justification of their dislike.

Natsu 10y ago

There's a long list of stuff here: http://www.mostdamagingwikileaks.com/ http://www.mostdamagingwikileaks.com/ The press never covered most of it because a lot of the leaks are things that make them look bad. For example, Glenn Thrush: https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/12681 https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/12681 > No worries > Because I have become a hack I will send u the whole section that pertains > to u > Please don't share or tell anyone I did this > Tell me if I fucked up anything He tried to get out of this by saying he was just fact-checking. But that normally doesn't require a request for secrecy and one would just send specific items they wanted fact checked, not a prerelease copy of the article.

specialist 10y ago
Upvote for link. I had ignored the wikileaks stuff, like I ignored most of the election cycle, because I ignore most current events. But it was time to take a peek to see what everyone got excited about. I just randomly picked links and citations. Sorry, but I didn't find any there there. (I skipped the secret email server, mostly because I don't care.) Just one example, in #6 its clear from context that Bill Ivey's use of "we" refers to society as a whole. Further, he's venting about the decline of civic engagement, an opinion shared by many (such as myself). My primary reaction is "Hate the game, not the players." Politics sucks. All of it. But why is any one surprised by the corruption? This is the system we designed, or at least accepted. If we hate it so much, they we should support publicly financed campaigns, restoring the fairness doctrine, shortening the political cycle, etc, etc. But we don't. Because Freedom Markets™ booyah! My secondary reaction is "Wow, this InfoWars stuff makes my head hurt." I can never tell if cherry picking quotes out of context and making wild inferences is intentional obfuscation or just how some people process the world. Any way, thanks for the link. PS- The spirit worshipping stuff is hysterical.
- Natsu 10y ago
  The secret email server is actually more interesting than you think. They found hundreds of emails containing classified info (including TS info, like a picture of NK that one of the media guys talks about in the dump). We also have an email between Hillary & Colin Powell discussing how to subvert the Presidential Records Act. Read the PDF on here for more: https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/30324 https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/30324 This is part of what Colin Powell said that I think it especially illustrative of how big of a security risk people like this are when put in power: Now, the real issue had to do with PDAs, as we called them a few years ago before BlackBerry became a noun. And the issue was DS would not allow them into the secure spaces, especially up your way. When I asked why not they gave me all kinds of nonsense about how they gave out signals that could be read by spies, etc. Same reason they tried to keep mobile phones out of the suite. I had numerous meetings with them. We even opened one up for them to try to explain to me why it was more dangerous than say, a remote control for one of the many tvs in the suite. Or something embedded in my shoe heel. They never satisfied me and NSA/CIA wouldn't back off. So, we just went about our business and stopped asking. I had an ancient version of a PDA and used it. In general, the suite was so sealed that it is hard to get signals in or out wirelessly.