Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Are there really some folks out there who believe that what was revealed through Wikileaks is okay? Specifically this particular chain of events:
1) DNC colluding to push Hillary over Bernie - DWS fired for her corruption.
2) Hillary hiring DWS after she was fired for her corruption.
3) Brazille giving questions to Hillary before the debate.
4) The DNC coincidentally hiring Brazille to replace DWS.
Who here is okay with all of this, and will openly admit it?
Are there really some folks out there who believe that what was revealed through Wikileaks is okay? Specifically this particular chain of events:
1) DNC colluding to push Hillary over Bernie - DWS fired for her corruption.
2) Hillary hiring DWS after she was fired for her corruption.
3) Brazille giving questions to Hillary before the debate.
4) The DNC coincidentally hiring Brazille to replace DWS.
Who here is okay with all of this, and will openly admit it?
Anyone?
When you put it that way, no. It's not okay.
When you put it as it actually happened, it's more of a "yes and no" sort of situation to me.
I'm not surprised that the DNC wasn't fond of Bernie. He was suing them up until about April and he's not a Democrat, let's be serious here. I like him and all, but he's not a Democrat.
I think Hillary made a bad choice hiring DWS after she was let go.
Giving questions to someone before a debate is not a good idea unless all candidates are given the questions and that's all I'm going to say about that.
I'm not sure I'd read anything into the DNC hiring Brazille. Likely is not related to anything unscrupulous.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
When you put it as it actually happened, it's more of a "yes and no" sort of situation to me.
I'm not surprised that the DNC wasn't fond of Bernie. He was suing them up until about April and he's not a Democrat, let's be serious here. I like him and all, but he's not a Democrat.
I think Hillary made a bad choice hiring DWS after she was let go.
Giving questions to someone before a debate is not a good idea unless all candidates are given the questions and that's all I'm going to say about that.
I'm not sure I'd read anything into the DNC hiring Brazille. Likely is not related to anything unscrupulous.
I've heard of rose colored glasses but wow. I never heard of that color that you appear to be wearing.
1) If the DNC wasn't fond of Bernie they could have said NO, you may not run as a DEM. They didn't.
THAT would have been the time to express that they weren't fond of Bernie and that he's not a democrat.
Once they allow him to run as a DEM, then they have an OBLIGATION to play fair and not show partiality don't they?
2) You think hiring DWS was a bad choice huh?
You think perhaps, it was taking care of one of the people who had been rigging the primary in your favor?
3) So you pretty much have at least admitted that this was 100% unethical. I can certainly commend you for not trying to twist THAT into something less egregious.
4) You aren't sure that you would read much into the hiring of Brazille? Seriously?
When a very corrupt person (DWS) who was rigging the primary in favor of Hillary, was fired for her corruption, that the DNC THEN hire a person who we now know was ALSO CORRUPT and trying to help rig the election for Hillary?
Likely not related to anything unscrupulous? OMG.
Perhaps they were rewarding another co-conspirator in the "rig the election for Hillary" circle??
Are there really some folks out there who believe that what was revealed through Wikileaks is okay? Specifically this particular chain of events:
1) DNC colluding to push Hillary over Bernie - DWS fired for her corruption.
2) Hillary hiring DWS after she was fired for her corruption.
3) Brazille giving questions to Hillary before the debate.
4) The DNC coincidentally hiring Brazille to replace DWS.
Who here is okay with all of this, and will openly admit it?
Anyone?
I believe in complete transparency of our government------even if we have to cheat, steal, lie, and hit the elites/government-class over the head with baseball bats to obtain it.
I do not believe in the fallacy that the so-called elites are smarter or more enlightened - only that they are much shrweder than the everyday American.
The only way to combat their level of shrewdness is to take it up a notch and become equally as shrewd.
Regardless of how the truth was uncovered . . . The truth is still the truth.
Years ago, we forced Nixon to resign because people under his direction broke into the dem hq and stole information regarding elections etc. He was ready to be impeached by his own party. Few came to his defense and there was universal agreement that what he did was wrong. Today, we have sunk so low morally and nuanced our values so completely that people like you say things like that. There still is a right and a wrong. The end does not justify the means. Cheating is wrong. Lying is wrong. Stealing is wrong. Breaking our laws and violating our sovereign space is wrong. There is no excuse, no moral "but" to it. Teach your children well.
Regardless of how the truth was uncovered . . . The truth is still the truth.
I feel the same.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
