>They were passing debate questions to their favorite candidate Sort of. Rather, Donna Brazile, a high-ranking Democrat at the time, was also working as a CNN

>They were passing debate questions to their favorite candidate Sort of. Rather, Donna Brazile, a high-ranking Democrat at the time, was also working as a CNN analyst. She got access to general debate topics and sent them to Clinton's camp. CNN fired her almost immediately upon learning this, and said: >"CNN never gave Brazile access to any questions, prep material, attendee list, background information or meetings in advance of a town hall or debate." [0] Brazile doubled down, criticized CNN, and said her only regret was getting caught. [0] >“My conscience — as an activist, a strategist — is very clear [...] if I had to do it all over again, I would know a hell of a lot more about cybersecurity.” CNN is not at fault here. Brazile violated her contract and general ethical standards to support her party. I'm no fan of CNN, but they did not leak questions intentionally. Sure, CNN could be lying and Brazile could be agreeing to take the fall. But considering they both shittalked each other in the media after she was fired, and CNN's immediate condemnation of her and her actions, then that's a pretty hefty conspiracy theory claim. To me, this just seems like the Democratic leadership wasn't afraid to play a little dirty - all of their own doing. >claiming reading leaked document is only legal for the media Who did this? Every major media source, including the left-leaning ones, openly discussed and sometimes provided links to the Wikileaks archives. [0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/11/07/donna-brazile-is-totally-not-sorry-for-leaking-cnn-debate-questions-to-hillary-clinton/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/11/07/do...