Patterico's Pontifications

10/31/2016

Wikileaks: Donna Brazile Blatantly Leaking More Debate Questions

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 12:32 pm

Rigged.

Expect a resignation later today, I would guess. (On second thought, they may delay it until after the election as a ploy to try to deny oxygen to the story.)

Presumably even our biased and incompetent news media will manage to ask Hillary whether she received this question. She will lie, of course — and the lie will easily be seen by virtually all onlookers for what it is.

73 Responses to “Wikileaks: Donna Brazile Blatantly Leaking More Debate Questions”

  1. Even if the likes of CNN are disturbed by the revelations, it will have to be seen to be believed.

    Colonel Haiku (8583e2)

  2. So this was the gift to Brazile, wonder what’s in store for Kaine?

    Colonel Haiku (8583e2)

  3. She has resigned.

    Patricia (5fc097)

  4. Wow!

    Colonel Haiku (8583e2)

  5. These illary supporters will do anything to get her elected.
    How sad.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  6. CNN has jettisoned her from the payroll.

    What took so long.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  7. Teh Race Card Effect…

    Colonel Haiku (8583e2)

  8. So she resigned from CNN…

    Colonel Haiku (8583e2)

  9. Heard Weiner hid his cache in a “life insurance” file… if that’s true, that is highlarious.

    Colonel Haiku (8583e2)

  10. These are like ginormous, prehistoric chickens coming home to roost.

    Colonel Haiku (8583e2)

  11. but she still keeps her dnc sinecure, fancy that,

    narciso (d1f714)

  12. she’s always seemed less terrible than some of the others

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  13. well compared to yeargh mcawful, and co, yes, but that’s the difference between chickenpox and smallpox,

    narciso (d1f714)

  14. i just wanted to hug her for what she said about katrina

    but i never did

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  15. I’m eagerly waiting the Wikileaks drop that reveals Joe Biden’s favorite movie is Amazon Women from Mars.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  16. there are some verminous froads out there,

    http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/10/white-left-issued-first-fatwa/

    narciso (d1f714)

  17. I mean as interim DNC Chair. She resigned from CNN October 14.

    She is still the interim chair, right?

    Patterico (c27351)

  18. http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-media/2016/10/cnn-severs-ties-with-donna-brazile-230534

    Dated Oct. 31st…

    But the story says Brazile resigned from CNN on Oct 14th.

    Why wasn’t it a story on Oct 15th?

    papertiger (c8116c)

  19. Neither CNN nor the DNC cares that she did this; they’re just pissed that she was so sloppy as to leave a paper trail. Pick up the damn phone, Donna!

    JVW (6e49ce)

  20. who the heck knows at this point, they might hand it to not so earnest, they are so shorthanded,

    narciso (d1f714)

  21. “CNN indicated that those worries led Brazile to offer her resignation, which CNN accepted [on10/14]. However, CNN didn’t make that decision known until Monday, more than two weeks later.”

    Colonel Haiku (8583e2)

  22. “You are watching CNN.”

    No, never watch it, just snicker at it.

    Colonel Haiku (8583e2)

  23. @23 ‘snickerrrrr’….

    Thanks for the prompt… raiding the candy basket now.

    BTW, Happy Halloween to all.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  24. Out: “The Woman in Red”

    In: Teh Woman With a Rash

    Colonel Haiku (8583e2)

  25. She is still the interim chair, right?

    So far…

    “Day ain’t over yet.” – Curly Washburn [Jack Palance] ‘City Slickers’ – 1991

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  26. Duplicity on display.

    She quietly resigned from CNN on Oct. 16, 3 days after she was outed by Wikileaks and then “persecuted” by Megyn Kelly on Fox.

    Only CNN chose to never announce her resignation.

    So when today’s revelations come to light, and there are suddenly calls for her resignation, the let it out “Oh yeah, we ended that relationship 2 weeks ago.”

    shipwreckedcrew (8aced3)

  27. Oct 14 I guess. Should have double checked. Read it earlier today.

    shipwreckedcrew (8aced3)

  28. Colonel Haiku

    If Weiner does get a sweet immunity deal it won’t be long until he’s back to his old tricks like Sammy the Bull.

    As Vince Gill put it-he always wants one more last chance.

    Pinandpuller (ae0749)

  29. You would expect that there are non-disclosure terms in all of CNN’s contracts, and that this must violate them. Why are they not suing?

    (To ask the question is to answer it)

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  30. Heard Weiner hid his cache in a “life insurance” file… if that’s true, that is highlarious.

    Well, the cache is cashed now. Expect ALL the mopery and dopery charges to be filed.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  31. When do we find out that she leaked questions from the October 9th debate and that is what got her fired?

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  32. No immunity for Weiner. He’s not needed for anything.

    shipwreckedcrew (8aced3)

  33. Well come on, they couldn’t do a quick took nor a lawsuit for nondisclosure- Brazil’s is the embodiment of the prototypical CNN viewer – black, older, southern. That’s also a big chunk of Lou Dobbs fandom as well.

    urbanleftbehind (064706)

  34. By the way, this election seems like WikiLeaks Christmas. First the FBI staffers leaking stuff, now CNN people undermining the suits. Where are the IRS folks in all this? Surely they have something to add.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  35. Great point raised by Trump today — someone in his camp is thinking this through.

    Brazile only one half of the “leak” exchange — the question ends up with Clinton prior to the debate.

    Clinton could have disclosed prior to the debate that a debate question had made it to her camp during her debate prep, identified the nature of the question, and ask that it not be used by the moderators.

    Nooooooooo … can’t let an opportunity pass no matter how unethical the opportunity might be.

    shipwreckedcrew (8aced3)

  36. Kevin #35 – you should not be surprised the IRS was not invited to the investigation of the Clinton Foundation by the FBI. I don’t think I need to elaborate if you’ve been following the news.

    shipwreckedcrew (8aced3)

  37. Apologies to Johnny Rivers:

    There’s a man who leads the life of Danger;
    To everyone he tweets, he gets stranger;
    With every pix he takes; the Feds investigate;
    Odds are he won’t tweet again tomorrow.

    Carlos Danger Man!
    Carlos Danger Man!

    They’ve given you a warrant;
    And taken ‘way your fame.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  38. I remember when she was previously questioned about it, she said “I am a Christian woman and you are persecuting me” or something to that effect. No, Donna, you are not now, nor have you ever been a Christian. Absolutely zero of your articulated values comports with Christianity and a great many of them stand foursquare against Christianity. And asking you if you did what you did but denied doing is not persecution.

    John Hitchcock (6ca243)

  39. Destroying someone’s business because they will not participate in an abomination and fake marriage due to their Christian faith, now that’s persecution. What you suffered was confrontation for your unrepentant sin.

    John Hitchcock (6ca243)

  40. Donna Brazile is there for the black vote, and because she’s a good DNC house servant who knows how to fix up a mint julep just right on a hot day.

    Can I say that?

    nk (dbc370)

  41. Patterico.com has fans across the Atlantic (link in original):

    Sources close to the 17-year-old at the time told Fox News that the girl and Weiner had direct-messaged each other on Twitter.

    Back in April 2011, the then-teenager openly expressed her love for Weiner, who followed her on Twitter.

    In her feed, she expressed her love of married men, according to Patterico.com.

    At one point she said: ‘HE IS MINE ALL MINE HE LOVES ME AND NO ONE ELSE ILY ILY ILY!!!’ and added ‘@RepWeiner I’m in love with you’ two days later.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  42. Donna has her own agenda

    happyfeet (418260)

  43. @42, I never doubted that. Given my hyper sophisticated sources.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  44. Naturally, Slate (no, not gonna link to them) has a piece up arguing that this should spur all of the networks to get rid of their “political hacks” who masquerade as “analysts.” Nice try, Slate, but we know that would only the leave the allegedly non-biased reporters, and conservative perspectives would never see the light of day.

    Does CNN have an ombudsman? Here are what I think would be relevant questions:
    – Did Donna Brazile participate in vetting the questions that were to be asked?
    – If so, is this standard operating procedure for a party debate, that a party operative help pick the questions?
    – How many of the questions did she know in advance?
    – If Ms. Brazile was not part of vetting the questions, is CNN in the least bit interested in finding out who at the network shared them with her and for what purpose?

    JVW (6e49ce)

  45. It was called the Clinton News Network for good reason back when Bill was in office getting serviced for the country.

    John Hitchcock (6ca243)

  46. now how does it feel?
    you lyin’ Donna Brazile
    to be on yer own

    Colonel Haiku (8583e2)

  47. This day in history.

    German submarine U-552 attacked Allied convoy HX-156 725 miles west of Iceland at 0834 hours, sinking American destroyer USS Reuben James (115 killed, 45 survived); USS Reuben James was the first American warship lost in the Atlantic Ocean in WW2.

    And really ticking me off.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  48. There are two things that got Donna Brazile in trouble here. The first is that she broke confideneces at CNN. (She didn’t tell anybody else at CNN she was communicating with one of the candidates)

    The second is that she didn’t share the questions also with Bernie Sanders’ people.

    She doesn’t appear to have had the questions in their final form, but her information probably came from an earlier point in the process of generating them.

    Sammy Finkelman (b4888e)

  49. Kevin M (25bbee) — 10/31/2016 @ 2:37 pm

    You would expect that there are non-disclosure terms in all of CNN’s contracts, and that this must violate them. Why are they not suing?

    Because she resigned and agreed to not fight a dismissal. She agreed not to demand severance and they probbaly reached a legal agreement.

    Sammy Finkelman (b4888e)

  50. Wait a minute, this is the statement from CNN via the New York Times:

    “We are completely uncomfortable with what we have learned about her interactions with the Clinton campaign while she was a CNN contributor,” Lauren Pratapas, a network spokeswoman, said in a statement.

    CNN never gave Brazile access to any questions, prep material, attendee list, background information or meetings in advance of a town hall or debate,” Ms. Pratapas wrote.

    Oh, so Ms. Brazile just randomly guessed correctly, two separate times, as to what people would ask of the candidates? Or is she saying that a non-CNN employee somehow got hold of the questions, perhaps a mind-reader hired by nefarious parties with the intent of making Democrats look bad?

    And then, honestly, read the NYT article and just marvel at the nerve of Ms. Brazile to cast herself as a victim who has had her personal life invaded by unscrupulous parties and is suffering through the indignity of this horrible exposure. ( Puke.)

    JVW (6e49ce)

  51. Like A Rolling Stone Like A Donna Brazile

    Once upon a time you toed teh line
    Threw the press a dime in your prime, didn’t you?
    People call say ‘beware gal, she ain’t your pal’
    You thought they were all a-kiddin’ you
    You used to tell some lies
    Wearin’ Donna Karan in a 40 size
    Now you don’t talk so loud
    Now you don’t seem so proud
    About having to be keepin’ it so real
    How does it feel, how does it feel?
    To be without a meal
    Like a barkin’ seal, like a Donna Brazile

    Colonel Haiku (8583e2)

  52. @ Steve57: I’m about a quarter of the way through “The Fleet at Flood Tide” now, but do I recall correctly that you got an early review copy and have already read it?

    Beldar (fa637a)

  53. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAM_ship

    CAM ships were World War II-era British merchant ships used in convoys as an emergency stop-gap until sufficient escort carriers became available. CAM ship is an acronym for catapult aircraft merchant ship.[1] A CAM ship was equipped with a rocket-propelled catapult launching a single Hawker Hurricane, dubbed a “Hurricat” or “Catafighter”

    …Being large and slow, the Fw 200 became a rather vulnerable target. After the combat, the fighter pilot would bail out or ditch in the ocean near the convoy, and be picked up if all went well.[1]

    …an convoys with aircraft maintenance performed by the Royal Canadian Air Force at Dartmouth, Nova Scotia. CAM ships sailed on Gibraltar and Freetown convoys beginning in September, 1941, after an aircraft maintenance unit was established at the RAF base at North Front, Gibraltar. No CAM aircraft were provided during January and February 1942 after it proved impossible to maintain the catapult-mounted aircraft in flying order during the North Atlantic winter. CAM sailings resumed on 6 March 1942 on North Atlantic convoys and in April on the Arctic Russian convoys with a RAF aircraft maintenance unit in Archangelsk.[2]

    Figure the odds. H3ll, winter? North Atlantic or South Atlantic in June. Oh, and by the way. Whether you could ditch or bail out near the convoy? The Condor crew had something to say about that. And the convoy wasn’t going to stop and pick you up.

    Dunno. I do know this. This country is in crisis mode. And I need to look back to see how others have handled it.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  54. “LA TIMES TUESDAY: FBI Investigators had planned to conduct new email review over several weeks. It now hopes to complete ‘preliminary assessment’ in coming days, but agency officials have not decided how, or whether, they will disclose results publicly… Developing…”

    Colonel Haiku (311cb7)

  55. Yes, Beldar. It wasn’t an early review copy, but like coming to Texas I got
    there as early as I could. Hornfischer does his usual excellent job. You will
    not be disappointed. It’s different, as it doesn’t focus on the Navy so much as on the strategic bombing campaign. But the bombing campaign should not be ignored, so I don’t mind.

    I hope, and I don’t think, I’ve spoiled anything for you.

    Happy Halloween.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  56. Let me correct myself. The focus is on the Navy. But you can’t discuss the Pacific war especially after Saipan and not talk about the USAAF. Hornfischer doesn’t make that mistake.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  57. I’m sure I come across like a jerk. I probably deserve to. But I’ve seen pictures of my dad when he was seventeen. And his friends. They could have been me. Some of them didn’t come back; they got blown apart.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  58. Beldar, when you get done with the “The Fleet at Flood Tide” I recommend “The Al Qaeda Reader.?”

    http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1691583.The_Al_Qaeda_Reader

    The Al Qaeda Reader: The Essential Texts of Osama Bin Laden’s Terrorist Organization

    Yes. This is what I do for fun. Don’t ask. But it’s not dated. If you want to get inside the jihadi mind, and who wouldn’t, it’s essential reading. It’s not pleasant, but it’s essential.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  59. It’s an old book.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  60. There’s no question mark.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  61. Kevin #35 – you should not be surprised the IRS was not invited to the investigation of the Clinton Foundation by the FBI. I don’t think I need to elaborate if you’ve been following the news.

    Well, I’m not surprised, but I wonder which pathology was the reason. Was it because they are all Clintonista hacks and not to be trusted? Or was it because they wanted to limit the investigation?

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  62. “I am a Christian woman and you are persecuting me” or something to that effect

    Any time a profane person draws the mantle of Jesus around themselves, you know they are guilty guilty guilty.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  63. Because she resigned and agreed to not fight a dismissal. She agreed not to demand severance and they probbaly reached a legal agreement.

    And because they wanted to keep the reasons secret. And I wonder what else happened. The CNN Clinton-Trump debate was right before this, and Trump was talking about it being rigged by the media, and here we have maybe some questions going from the CNN staff to the DNC chair. The timing smells.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  64. Yeah, no hem haw or positing excuses for her.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  65. What? Donna “Don’t let the white boys win” Christian-woman Brazille said something like that?

    I am stunned. Stunned.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  66. I especially like how they end the piece.

    The DNC did not immediately respond to request for comment.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  67. “A Retired CIA Agent Explains, For the Drunk, Brain Damaged, and Corrupt, Why Putting Classified Information on an Unsecured Server Is a Bad Idea
    —Ace

    Everyone seems to understand this with the singular exception of the Smartest Woman in the World and the Most Qualified Presidential Candidate in US History.

    I have worked in national security my entire life. Most of that has been in the intelligence community surrounded by classified information. For twenty years, I worked undercover in the Central Intelligence Agency, recruiting sources, producing intelligence and running operations. I have a pretty concrete understanding of how classified information is handled and how government communications systems work.
    Nobody uses a private email server for official business. Period. Full stop.

    The entire notion is, to borrow a phrase from a Clinton campaign official, “insane.” That anyone would presume to be allowed to do so is mind-boggling. That government officials allowed Hillary Clinton to do so is nauseating.

    Classified and unclassified information do not mix. They don’t travel in the same streams through the same pipes. They move in clearly well defined channels so that never the twain shall meet. Mixing them together is unheard of and a major criminal offense.

    If you end up with classified information in an unclassified channel, you have done something very wrong and very serious.

    Accidentally removing a single classified message from controlled spaces, without any evidence of intent or exposure to hostile forces, can get you fired and cost you your clearance. Repeated instances will land you in prison.

    Every hostile intelligence agency on the planet targets senior American officials for collection. The Secretary of State tops the list. Almost anything the Secretary of State had to say about her official duties, her schedule, her mood, her plans for the weekend, would be prized information to adversaries.

    It is very difficult, in fact, to think of much of anything that the Secretary of State could be saying in email that we would want hostile forces to know.”

    http://ace.mu.nu/archives/366611.php

    Colonel Haiku (311cb7)

  68. …It is very difficult, in fact, to think of much of anything that the Secretary of State could be saying in email that we would want hostile forces to know.

    It used to be difficult to think of situation when the Secretary of State wasn’t a hostile force.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  69. Duly noted, and thanks Steve57!

    Beldar (fa637a)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.4638 secs.