A couple juicy emails from today

[plaster]

And webtv.net is down. And if you do wayback machine, not authorized. Seems legit though...

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/1181

From:[email protected]
To: [email protected]
Date: 2015-05-19 19:38
Subject: Margaret, per our conversation

Margaret, far be it from me what the public editor of the NY Times should focus on, but:

Per our recent conversation and my recent column about "Clinton Cash Con" and the appropriate role of the NY Times, take another look at the Sid Blumenthal story in the Tuesday paper. I make no defense for Blumenthal. But that story involved New York Times doing stenography for the House Benghazi committee, sans legitimate reporting, replete with an email obviously leaked (without disclosure from the Times) by one of the most partisan committees in my memory.

Should the NY Times reporters be stenographers for a partisan committee, taking dictation and writing stories? And if the committee unethically leaks an email shouldn't the NY Times give some general indication of the partisan nature of the source? And shouldn't the NYT reporters do some legitimate reporting rather than repeating from partisan committee handouts?

As we discussed, I respect you and what you are trying to do. And I do not envy your position. We live in an age when political reporting is not what it used to be, and sadly, when political reporting in the New York Times is not what it used to be. The NYT should not be not having exclusive arrangements with Peter Schweizer or writing stenography-handout stories from a partisan committee. In sorrow rather than anger, Margaret, I find it sad this happens because the NYT should be different and better.

Your foreign correspondents are. Your political reporting is not.

Too bad.

Best, Brent
Sent from my iPad

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/7432

From:[email protected]
To: [email protected]
Date: 2016-01-01 20:01
Subject: Re: New Clinton emails

Sid is lost in his own web of conspiracies. I pay zero attention to what he says.

On Friday, January 1, 2016, Brent Budowsky <[email protected]> wrote:

> John, assume I wrote a thousand words about this. It is disquieting that > when HRC was secretary of state she spent a good time of time doing gossip > emails with Sid Blumenthal about various matters, the ubiquitous Lanny > Davis shilling for himself in pathetic ways, and Neera Tanden gossiping > about what Soros thinks of Obama. At least Tanden I regard as a serious > person. Sid and Lanny I do not by standards of a secretary of state or > potential president. >

> I was not in touch with you at the time of the healthcare debate, but what > Sid suggests does not strike me as your style. I was in very regular and > close touch with Daschle at the time, and he would never have said to the > press what Sid suggests, and since I am in the press I know those were not > his views. I guarantee that based on direct personal knowledge of Tom's > views and actions at the time. Blumenthal did not have the slightest idea > of what he was talking about in his girlie gossip with the secretary of > state about this. Why she places such great stock over so much time in > these exchanges with Blumenthal is mystifying to me---and frankly > troublesome. >

> This whole subject, to use vernacular, gives me the creeps. Secretaries > of state, presidential candidates and presidents should not be spending > their time on this kind of minor league stuff. >

> Sent from my iPad

[JSWENSON]

Donald Trump is melting down as we speak and this dude is digging up emails.

So is he really fucking stupid and serious about all this or really fucking stupid and going through all this effort to troll?

The world may never know.

[plaster]

Originally Posted by JSWENSON

Donald Trump is melting down as we speak and this dude is digging up emails.

So is he really fucking stupid and serious about all this or really fucking stupid and going through all this effort to troll?

The world may never know.

Skip along son and save yo quarters...

It's world fucking news dipshit.

[beerptrol]

More circle jerk material for you and your fellow Trump supporters

[Relic]

Plaster,

White House Watch - Rasmussen Reportsâ„¢

Trump with 43% support among Likely U.S. Voters to Clinton’s 41%.

Trump 2020.

[Coup]

"HOW DARE YOU WRITE DAMAGING FACTS ABOUT OUR QUEEN!"

--Shillary's coven of fuckboi spindoctor's

[Relic]

[JSWENSON]

Originally Posted by Relic

Plaster,

White House Watch - Rasmussen Reports?



Trump 2020.

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/...id=rrpromo#now

9% to win and dropping.

[Relic]

[bronco67]

Originally Posted by Relic

Plaster,

White House Watch - Rasmussen Reports?



Trump 2020.

Rasmussen will report that Trump won the election, after he loses in a landslide. That's just to give you a general idea of the slant of that organization.

You realize that almost every poll has Clinton beating Trump by big margins? Cherry picking one partisan polling firm means jack shit.

[Relic]

Originally Posted by bronco67

Rasmussen will report that Trump won the election, after he wins in a landslide.

I hope you will bremain with us, after Trump's landslide victory

[plaster]

I would like to summarize what I think those emails are suggesting:

1) Brent from webtv.net (which is inaccessible online by any means currently) works for the Clintons. He's a reporter for whoever and writes articles to praise the clintons. I'm no journalistic expert but I think that's a conflict of interest.
2) Brent sends panic email to John Podesta in that he highights:
- Soros hates Obama and the rumor is floating.
- Secretary of state, Presidents and Presidential Candidates should not be talking so much with a low life like Sid Blumenthal.

Who's Sid?? Welp, he's the guy that Hillary paid to give them intel in Libya. However, this is not standard protocol. The reason for this first hand intel is to gain access to foreign business deals to line the Clinton Foundation pockets. It is also suggested that Hillary's lack of following government procedures is a direct result of the tragedy in Benghazi.

Better read this article to highlight it better:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/19/us...ness.html?_r=0

That is the article that Brent was referring to when scolding the NYT's reporter in the first email. A section of that article for NYT is as follows:

The emails suggest that Mr. Blumenthal?s direct line to Mrs. Clinton circumvented the elaborate procedures established by the federal government to ensure that high-level officials are provided with vetted assessments of available intelligence.

Former intelligence officials said it was not uncommon for top officials, including secretaries of state, to look outside the intelligence bureaucracy for information and advice. But Paul R. Pillar, a former C.I.A. official who is now a researcher at the Center for Security Studies at Georgetown University, said Mr. Blumenthal?s dispatches went beyond that sort of informal channel, aping the style of official government intelligence reports but without assessments of the motives of sources.

?The sourcing is pretty sloppy,? Mr. Pillar added, ?in a way that would never pass muster if it were the work of a reports officer at a U.S. intelligence agency.?

.... and 4 people dead. Oh wait... it's not Hillary's fault, nevermind.

[JSWENSON]

Donald Trump -

Poor people's idea of a rich man.

Uneducated people's idea of a smart man.

Insecure people's idea of a strong man.

[kane]

Originally Posted by Relic

While that is cool looking, clearly Trump and his crew are the Horde!

#Orclivesmatter

[plaster]

Originally Posted by JSWENSON

Donald Trump -

Poor people's idea of a rich man.

Uneducated people's idea of a smart man.

Insecure people's idea of a strong man.

I guess trump is the strongest, smartest and richest man in the world to you then...

Save yo quarters because that hundo you are coughing up is going to set you back a few months.

[bronco67]

Originally Posted by plaster

And webtv.net is down. And if you do wayback machine, not authorized. Seems legit though...

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/1181

From:[email protected]
To: [email protected]
Date: 2015-05-19 19:38
Subject: Margaret, per our conversation

Margaret, far be it from me what the public editor of the NY Times should focus on, but:

Per our recent conversation and my recent column about "Clinton Cash Con" and the appropriate role of the NY Times, take another look at the Sid Blumenthal story in the Tuesday paper. I make no defense for Blumenthal. But that story involved New York Times doing stenography for the House Benghazi committee, sans legitimate reporting, replete with an email obviously leaked (without disclosure from the Times) by one of the most partisan committees in my memory.

Should the NY Times reporters be stenographers for a partisan committee, taking dictation and writing stories? And if the committee unethically leaks an email shouldn't the NY Times give some general indication of the partisan nature of the source? And shouldn't the NYT reporters do some legitimate reporting rather than repeating from partisan committee handouts?

As we discussed, I respect you and what you are trying to do. And I do not envy your position. We live in an age when political reporting is not what it used to be, and sadly, when political reporting in the New York Times is not what it used to be. The NYT should not be not having exclusive arrangements with Peter Schweizer or writing stenography-handout stories from a partisan committee. In sorrow rather than anger, Margaret, I find it sad this happens because the NYT should be different and better.

Your foreign correspondents are. Your political reporting is not.

Too bad.

Best, Brent
Sent from my iPad

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/7432

From:[email protected]
To: [email protected]
Date: 2016-01-01 20:01
Subject: Re: New Clinton emails

Sid is lost in his own web of conspiracies. I pay zero attention to what he says.

On Friday, January 1, 2016, Brent Budowsky <[email protected]> wrote:

> John, assume I wrote a thousand words about this. It is disquieting that > when HRC was secretary of state she spent a good time of time doing gossip > emails with Sid Blumenthal about various matters, the ubiquitous Lanny > Davis shilling for himself in pathetic ways, and Neera Tanden gossiping > about what Soros thinks of Obama. At least Tanden I regard as a serious > person. Sid and Lanny I do not by standards of a secretary of state or > potential president. >

> I was not in touch with you at the time of the healthcare debate, but what > Sid suggests does not strike me as your style. I was in very regular and > close touch with Daschle at the time, and he would never have said to the > press what Sid suggests, and since I am in the press I know those were not > his views. I guarantee that based on direct personal knowledge of Tom's > views and actions at the time. Blumenthal did not have the slightest idea > of what he was talking about in his girlie gossip with the secretary of > state about this. Why she places such great stock over so much time in > these exchanges with Blumenthal is mystifying to me---and frankly > troublesome. >

> This whole subject, to use vernacular, gives me the creeps. Secretaries > of state, presidential candidates and presidents should not be spending > their time on this kind of minor league stuff. >

> Sent from my iPad

You found the smoking gun. Holy shit. Put the cuffs on her..for something I guess.

[Relic]

Originally Posted by kane

While that is cool looking, clearly Trump and his crew are the Horde!

A horde is needed to take out the entrenched cabal.

[beerptrol]

Originally Posted by kane

While that is cool looking, clearly Trump and his crew are the Horde!

#Orclivesmatter

More like brain dead zombies

[Coup]

Originally Posted by Relic

A horde is needed to take out the entrenched cabal.

[plaster]

Originally Posted by bronco67

You found the smoking gun. Holy shit. Put the cuffs on her..for something I guess.

I don't expect you to dig into the emails and find the connection. I don't expect you to read my post on what I believe it further confirms. And I don't expect you to read the NYT article.

But if you read this post, just know you have the ability to understand the argument and stance and why those emails have importance.

[bronco67]

Originally Posted by plaster

I don't expect you to dig into the emails and find the connection. I don't expect you to read my post on what I believe it further confirms. And I don't expect you to read the NYT article.

But if you read this post, just know you have the ability to understand the argument and stance and why those emails have importance.

I'll tell you what Kojak...you go down the rabbit hole and keep retrieving those puzzle pieces that will eventually form a clear picture for everyone. In the meantime, we have the other presidential candidate talking about being smart for not paying taxes for 20 years, and his modus operandi of grabbing/tongue kissing whoever he pleases whether they like it or not -- and now the victims are coming forward to substantiate the very things he described.

I don't need to examine that with a magnifying glass you fucking idiot. I only call you an idiot because you support Trump in the first place. You're just another one of those waterhead mongoloids you see in the background at his circus rallies. Plaster...is that what your brain is made of?

[plaster]

Originally Posted by bronco67

I'll tell you what Kojak...you go down the rabbit hole and keep retrieving those puzzle pieces that will eventually form a clear picture for everyone. In the meantime, we have the other presidential candidate talking about being smart for not paying taxes for 20 years, and his modus operandi of grabbing/tongue kissing whoever he pleases whether they like it or not -- and now the victims are coming forward to substantiate the very things he described.

I don't need to examine that with a magnifying glass you fucking idiot. I only call you an idiot because you support Trump in the first place. You're just another one of those waterhead mongoloids you see in the background at his circus rallies. Plaster...is that what your brain is made of?

Do you even know what happened in Benghazi dipshit? I mean besides 4 Americans died and conservatives blame Hillary... do you have any idea at all??

Too fucking funny about those girls all coming out on Tuesday, 4 days after leaked video. You know another thing cuck?? NBC who had the tape sat on it for months. You wanna know something else cuck... NY Times had those women lined up for months. It was collusion to release totally absurd accusations, all at the same time, in an effort to allow Hillary Rotten Crotch to win the election.

It 'aint gonna happen though. And during your early night November 8th butt fuck party with all the other cucks, a big pile of shit is going to come screaming out of all your asses when Trump takes state, after state.

That's right. Don't ever use your brain now and certainly don't try to figure out why your almighty cunt candidate lost

Heads up... because she's the top of the lying, greedy, corrupt, self serving machine and enough of America knows it and will show in the polling results on November 8th (the day of your dick party that turns into a shit fest).

[trevesty]

Originally Posted by JSWENSON

Donald Trump -

Poor people's idea of a rich man.

Uneducated people's idea of a smart man.

Insecure people's idea of a strong man.

[Coup]

Originally Posted by bronco67

I don't need to examine that with a magnifying glass you fucking idiot. I only call you an idiot because you support Trump in the first place. You're just another one of those waterhead mongoloids you see in the background at his circus rallies. Plaster...is that what your brain is made of?

And there it is. The exact reason the working class fucking despises liberalism. Fucks like you have nothing but nothing but hatred for working class people. Keep up the great work you classist piece of shit. It's the whole reason why even a shithead like Hillary Clinton isn't carrying +90% of the vote against a candidate as supposedly as terrible as Donald Trump.

Waterheaded mongloids:

[kane]

Originally Posted by plaster

Do you even know what happened in Benghazi dipshit? I mean besides 4 Americans died and conservatives blame Hillary... do you have any idea at all??

Too fucking funny about those girls all coming out on Tuesday, 4 days after leaked video. You know another thing cuck?? NBC who had the tape sat on it for months. You wanna know something else cuck... NY Times had those women lined up for months. It was collusion to release totally absurd accusations, all at the same time, in an effort to allow Hillary Rotten Crotch to win the election.

It 'aint gonna happen though. And during your early night November 8th butt fuck party with all the other cucks, a big pile of shit is going to come screaming out of all your asses when Trump takes state, after state.

That's right. Don't ever use your brain now and certainly don't try to figure out why your almighty cunt candidate lost

Heads up... because she's the top of the lying, greedy, corrupt, self serving machine and enough of America knows it and will show in the polling results on November 8th (the day of your dick party that turns into a shit fest).

It's fine to hate Hillary, hell there is plenty there to hate. And it's fine to throat Trump's cock if you want. To each their own. But you have to admit, if Trump wins this election it is going to be a very close, very tightly contested affair not a state by state landslide.

[2MuchMark]

Originally Posted by Relic

Trump supporter porn.

[onwebcam]

Originally Posted by JSWENSON

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/...id=rrpromo#now

9% to win and dropping.

If Trump provides another great performance at the next debate it's all over. Clinton is resting rather than campaigning. wikileaks is providing daily blows and it's getting juicier and juicier daily. I'm sure they are saving the best for last... There's rumor of a WJC rape video. And now even rasmussen's post debate polls are showing Trump pulling ahead despite mainstream media claims he lost the debate

Most of the liberal pollster have admitted to oversampling dems and inde's in their polling so if correctly factoring in oversampling the race is much tighter than they would like to portray. That coupled with 538's own fudging obviously he's on Obama's first spaceship to Mars with his projections.


Trump with 43% support among Likely U.S. Voters to Clinton’s 41%
White House Watch - Rasmussen Reportsâ„¢

[kane]

Originally Posted by onwebcam

If Trump provides another great performance at the next debate it's all over. Clinton is resting rather than campaigning. wikileaks is providing daily blows. And now even rasmussen's post debate polls are showing Trump pulling ahead despite mainstream media claims he lost the debate


Trump with 43% support among Likely U.S. Voters to Clinton’s 41%
White House Watch - Rasmussen Reportsâ„¢

Rassmussen is known to slant right. So much so that RealClearPolitics.com doesn't even use them in their RCP average.

Everyone else has Clinton ahead by 5-10 points. Even the LA Times, which just a week ago had Trump at +6 and has been leaning Trump for a long time now, has it even.

But, it doesn't really matter. What matters is the battleground states. It doesn't matter how big a margin Trump wins Oklahoma by, it matters if he wins Pennsylvania and Florida.

[onwebcam]

Originally Posted by kane

Rassmussen is known to slant right. So much so that RealClearPolitics.com doesn't even use them in their RCP average.

Everyone else has Clinton ahead by 5-10 points. Even the LA Times, which just a week ago had Trump at +6 and has been leaning Trump for a long time now, has it even.

But, it doesn't really matter. What matters is the battleground states. It doesn't matter how big a margin Trump wins Oklahoma by, it matters if he wins Pennsylvania and Florida.

Most everyone else that you mention have been doing heavy oversampling. Sampling should reflect percentages of registered voters which is roughly 26% Republicans 29% Democrats 42% Independents



Just a couple of examples

PID: Dem (no lean) 747
37
%
PID: Ind (no lean) 664
33
%
PID: Rep (no lean) 590
30
%

http://www.politico.com/f/?id=000001...f-f76fbaf20002

ABC news oversampling

Partisan
divisions
are
36
-
24
-
33
percent
, Democrats
-
Republicans
-
independents
, in the full sample, 37
-
27
-
30
among registered voters
.

http://www.langerresearch.com/wp-con...16Election.pdf



WAPO

34% of the respondents identifying as Democrats, 24% identifying as Republican, 33% as Independent, 5% as other, and 3% declining to say.


If you look at the 23rd page WAPO/ABC has been oversampling all along

Washington Post-ABC News national poll Sept. 5-8, 2016 - The Washington Post

[plaster]

Originally Posted by kane

Rassmussen is known to slant right. So much so that RealClearPolitics.com doesn't even use them in their RCP average.

Everyone else has Clinton ahead by 5-10 points. Even the LA Times, which just a week ago had Trump at +6 and has been leaning Trump for a long time now, has it even.

But, it doesn't really matter. What matters is the battleground states. It doesn't matter how big a margin Trump wins Oklahoma by, it matters if he wins Pennsylvania and Florida.

I live in pa. I've seen maybe 2 hillary signs and hundreds of trump signs. The media keeps saying pa suburbs and women trump is big time deficit. I don't buy it. We will see.

I just watched an ABC night line clip on trump. Literally just ended 2 minutes ago. There is no escaping the media bias against him. It's like crazy eddy from the 80's... it's fucking crazy. And just like eddy was a convicted fraud, so is the media, without the conviction... yet

[Coup]

99% Hillary wins michigan: http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/...an-democratic/

Whoops my bad you guys: Bernie Sanders wins Michigan in stunning upset - POLITICO

538 lol

[onwebcam]

Originally Posted by kane

Rassmussen is known to slant right. So much so that RealClearPolitics.com doesn't even use them in their RCP average.

Everyone else has Clinton ahead by 5-10 points. Even the LA Times, which just a week ago had Trump at +6 and has been leaning Trump for a long time now, has it even.

But, it doesn't really matter. What matters is the battleground states. It doesn't matter how big a margin Trump wins Oklahoma by, it matters if he wins Pennsylvania and Florida.

As far as latimes they don't ask the party affiliation question that I'm aware of so it's hard to judge them. I honestly think they are just robo calling at random. For instance their black support for Trump blip not long ago. It came and went in a matter of days. Why? Because that call list contained a lot more blacks that happened to be Trump supporters during that period. Which goes to show how easily the polls can be manipulated. Whoever provides the list provides the outcome.

[ruff]

Originally Posted by Relic

Grab her by the pussy, Donald!

[kane]

Originally Posted by onwebcam

Most everyone else that you mention have been doing heavy oversampling. Sampling should reflect percentages of registered voters which is roughly 26% Republicans 29% Democrats 42% Independents



Just a couple of examples

PID: Dem (no lean) 747
37
%
PID: Ind (no lean) 664
33
%
PID: Rep (no lean) 590
30
%

http://www.politico.com/f/?id=000001...f-f76fbaf20002

ABC news oversampling

Partisan
divisions
are
36
-
24
-
33
percent
, Democrats
-
Republicans
-
independents
, in the full sample, 37
-
27
-
30
among registered voters
.

http://www.langerresearch.com/wp-con...16Election.pdf



WAPO

34% of the respondents identifying as Democrats, 24% identifying as Republican, 33% as Independent, 5% as other, and 3% declining to say.


If you look at the 23rd page WAPO/ABC has been oversampling all along

Washington Post-ABC News national poll Sept. 5-8, 2016 - The Washington Post

So which is it? First, you post information from a poll as proof Trump is now ahead. Now you are posting proof that the polls are rigged. So are you saying all the other polls are rigged, but Rassmussen isn't?

[onwebcam]

Originally Posted by kane

So which is it? First, you post information from a poll as proof Trump is now ahead. Now you are posting proof that the polls are rigged. So are you saying all the other polls are rigged, but Rassmussen isn't?

Nope Rasmussen has their method behind a pay wall. Could be as well. If you want to pay and report back feel free.

[JSWENSON]

Originally Posted by onwebcam

Most everyone else that you mention have been doing heavy oversampling. Sampling should reflect percentages of registered voters which is roughly 26% Republicans 29% Democrats 42% Independents



Just a couple of examples

PID: Dem (no lean) 747
37
%
PID: Ind (no lean) 664
33
%
PID: Rep (no lean) 590
30
%

http://www.politico.com/f/?id=000001...f-f76fbaf20002

ABC news oversampling

Partisan
divisions
are
36
-
24
-
33
percent
, Democrats
-
Republicans
-
independents
, in the full sample, 37
-
27
-
30
among registered voters
.

http://www.langerresearch.com/wp-con...16Election.pdf



WAPO

34% of the respondents identifying as Democrats, 24% identifying as Republican, 33% as Independent, 5% as other, and 3% declining to say.


If you look at the 23rd page WAPO/ABC has been oversampling all along

Washington Post-ABC News national poll Sept. 5-8, 2016 - The Washington Post

Unskewed polls did this same shit and were laughed off the internet by liberals during the race and by everyone after the race.

[kane]

Originally Posted by onwebcam

Nope Rasmussen has their method behind a pay wall. Could be as well. If you want to pay and report back feel free.

Here is just a little food for thought when it comes to polls.

Here is Electoral-vote.com and their electoral map with polls updated daily for the states (as the polls come available). This map shows where the election was at, via polls, at this same time in 2012.

If you compare their map that is based on polls to the final outcome you will see it is pretty damn accurate. All they missed were Florida and New Hampshire, both of which the polls had Romney up by 2 points in, which is within the margin of error., and Colorado which they had tied. Obama ended up winning all three of those.

[plaster]

Maybe someone can dig up latimes poll the day before election day 2012 and post back their numbers and actual obama point victory.

Hint... it's 3.2 obama and actual was 3.8... the closest to true poll.

[Coup]

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/11011

The Shillary Clinton wall street speech transcripts can be downloaded from the attachments tab