Use specific hits to muddy the waters around ethics, transparency, and campaign finance attacks on HRC

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Re: Guccifer 2.0 hacker attack on DNC servers

A document titled “2016 GOP presidential candidates” from May 2015 – about a month after Hillary Clinton announced her candidacy – shows the DNC’s strategy to use the mainstream media to stress Clinton’s positives, while feeding reporters information and questions about Republican opponents to paint them in a negative light.

“Reporter Outreach: Working through the DNC and others, we should use background briefings, prep with reporters for interviews with GOP candidates, off-the-record conversations and oppo pitches to help pitch stories with no fingerprints and utilize reporters to drive a message,” the document says.

Instead of laying out strategies to help any given Democratic candidate that might win the nomination, document makes reference to Hillary Clinton in the document as “HRC,” giving credence to speculation that the DNC has been biased towards Clinton throughout the primary.

The same document calls for using targeted attacks on Republican candidates for the expressed purpose of taking the focus off of major questions that surround Hillary Clinton.

“Use specific hits to muddy the waters around ethics, transparency, and campaign finance attacks on HRC,” the document reads.

...

Guccifer 2.0 said that he sent the bulk of the documents he obtained to WikiLeaks, whose founder Julian Assange said that the organization had received enough information about Clinton to indict her.

“We’ve accumulated a lot of material about Hillary Clinton,” Assange said. “We could proceed to an indictment.”

...

In response to his work being attributed to a sophisticated government agency, Guccifer 2.0 wrote: “I’m very pleased the company appreciated my skills so highly))) But in fact, it was easy, very easy.”

The hacker’s moniker is a reference to the original Guccifer, a Romanian national named Marcel Lahel who hacked top US government officials and claims to have accessed Hillary Clinton’s private email server. Lahel was extradited to the United States earlier this year and is currently awaiting prosecution for his cyber-intrusions.

“Guccifer may have been the first one who penetrated Hillary Clinton’s and other Democrats’ mail servers,” Guccifer 2.0 wrote. “But he certainly wasn’t the last. No wonder any other hacker could easily get access to the DNC’s servers.”

https://www.rt.com/usa/347005-dnc-hack-donors-collusion/

Internal memos, dated May 2015—long before the first state voted in the Democratic primary—referred to Hillary Clinton as though she was already the Democratic presidential nominee. The documents leaked by Guccifer 2.0 not only illuminate the DNC’s efforts to ensure Clinton’s coronation, but also reveal the strategies used to shield her from criticism on ethics, transparency and campaign finance reform—all vulnerabilities for the corrupt Establishment darling.

...

In another internal memo released by the hacker, the DNC feeds reporters stories to perpetuate specific agendas—presumably including the baseless Bernie-Bro attacks manufactured to discredit Bernie Sanders. The DNC’s narratives were not only misleading but also cited false information to corroborate their arguments.

...

For Sanders supporters, the leaked documents affirm the bias and favoritism exercised by the Democratic National Committee, chaired by Clinton’s 2008 campaign co-chair, Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

http://observer.com/2016/06/guccifer-2-0-leak-reveals-how-dnc-rigged-primaries-for-clinton/

I noticed these links on Google news today but I wonder how reliable the information is.

Also, whether DNC protected Hillary or not, maybe they also provided protection for other Democratic candidates?

Does anyone have access to primary documentation so we could check out these allegations for ourselves objectively?

ETA: Snopes entry:
http://www.snopes.com/2016/06/17/guccifer-2-0-claims-responsibility-for-dnc-hack/

 

[Ford]

the DNC’s strategy to use the mainstream media to stress Clinton’s positives, while feeding reporters information and questions about Republican opponents to paint them in a negative light.

Wikileaks has stumbled upon Politics 101. Yes, you try to stress your candidate's positives while painting your opponent(s) in a negative light. Not exactly a revelation here.

document makes reference to Hillary Clinton in the document as “HRC,” giving credence to speculation that the DNC has been biased towards Clinton throughout the primary.

Again, Politics 101. Think of the Democratic Party as a football team. They're headed for the Superbowl. The DNC is the coaching staff. They have a choice...send in the seasoned quarterback who has a consistent track record with the team, or send in the second string wild card who has never played in a big game.

The same document calls for using targeted attacks on Republican candidates for the expressed purpose of taking the focus off of major questions that surround Hillary Clinton.

Yep. Downplay any weakness your candidate has while targeting the weakness of the other party's candidates. Textbook politics. The RNC does it, the DNC does it, and if you were in charge of the campaign apparatus for a major party you'd do all of this stuff too, because you're trying to win quite possibly the most important election in the world.


This is not news, and at the risk of seeming as if I'm defending "HRC," a considerable amount of the public perception of her as untrustworthy comes from the fact that the GOP has been using these same tactics against her for years. Well...decades, actually. And they've gone beyond "muddying the waters," if you'll recall. From the veiled accusation that she murdered Vince Foster through the accusation that she deliberately undermined the defense of Benghazi, they've been on a campaign to bring her down since the day she first walked into the White House at Bill's side.

 

[Colonel Sanders]

Right. This is business as usual and not secret in politics.

Bernie was a lifelong independent while Hillary had served as a Democrat for decades. Who the fuck does anyone think the party is going to support? And what would it say about them if they didn't?

This is like someone complaining that a boxer trained really hard before a big fight. The only response to that would be, "Derp. No shit?"

 

[Rhea]

Re: Guccifer 2.0 hacker attack on DNC servers

“We’ve accumulated a lot of material about Hillary Clinton,” Assange said. “We could proceed to an indictment.”]

What's this "we" shit? Assange has become a DA this week?

And yeah, big revelation. Party reminds team to speak to own strengths. Party talks mostly about the candidate with the highest poll numbers at the time.

Non story

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Party talks mostly about the candidate with the highest poll numbers at the time.

Not "party," but former campaign manager of candidate sends memo mentioning strategy to ONLY protect her candidate but not others. Fairness would be to protect ALL candidates or none, not focus on Hillary.

 

[bilby]

Right. This is business as usual and not secret in politics.

Bernie was a lifelong independent while Hillary had served as a Democrat for decades. Who the fuck does anyone think the party is going to support? And what would it say about them if they didn't?

This is like someone complaining that a boxer trained really hard before a big fight. The only response to that would be, "Derp. No shit?"

And all the world over each nation's the same,
They've simply no notion of playing the game,
They argue with umpires,
They cheer when they've won,
And they practice beforehand, which spoils all the fun.

- Flanders and Swan