Will Hillary disavow this super sleazy email from her Super PAC?

[Bonobo]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-jeremy-corbyn_55f73339e4b00e2cd5e79e11?utm_hp_ref=politics

The email, sent to a Huffington Post reporter in response to an article about Corbyn and Sanders without any agreement that it would be off the record, was meant to flag Corbyn's "most extreme comments." Among those was the suggestion that the assassination of Osama bin Laden was "a tragedy," since there was no attempt to arrest the former al Qaeda leader and put him on trial. The email also cites Corbyn's comment that he'd invite his "friends" from Hezbollah to come to the U.K. to discuss peace in the Middle East and an editorial in which he said that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's "attempt to encircle Russia is one of the big threats of our time."

The email uses those comments to pivot to "similarities" between Corbyn and Sanders, who have engaged in a mild cross-Atlantic love-fest of late, given that they are both insurgent populists challenging their political parties' establishments. Corbyn has said he is following Sanders' campaign "with great interest," and Sanders said he was "delighted" that the Labour Party elected Corbyn as its leader.

The "similarities" between the two, according to the email, include Sanders' introduction of legislation to terminate the United States' nuclear weapons program, comments that NATO's expansion into former Soviet states is dangerous because it could provoke Russia, opposition to more U.S. funds for NATO, and saying he "was concerned" that proposed new NATO members had shipped arms to Iran and North Korea.

The more serious stretch comes as the email highlights how Sanders helped negotiate a program with Venezuela's national oil company in 2006 that provided discounted heating oil assistance to low-income Vermonters. The senator said it was "not a partisan issue," in the state, which was the sixth to make the deal. His support for the program was apparently enough to merit a mention, since Corbyn has written that the late Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez's "electoral democratic credentials are beyond reproach."

[virtualobserver]

1. they coordinate with her campaign- this is on her

[66 dmhlt]

25. Cite most definitely needed for your claim!

Spare me any pointless blathering and bashing - just provide a legitimate citation supporting your claim - otherwise I call BS!

[TM99]

31. OK. How about a few as this discussion

began last May.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/05/12/how-a-super-pac-plans-to-coordinate-directly-with-hillary-clintons-campaign/

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-05-13/is-new-hillary-clinton-super-pac-pushing-legal-boundaries-

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hillary-clinton-plans-to-coordinate-directly-with-super-pac/

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/may/20/pro-clinton-super-pac-hit-fec-complaint/?page=all

http://www.ibtimes.com/election-2016-hillary-clinton-aligned-super-pac-touts-her-campaign-finance-reform-2087582

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/09/15/1421400/-It-begins-Hillary-Clinton-smears-Bernie-Sanders-over-Single-Payer

So drop your insults and arrogance. Read up on the topic to see that the only ones promoting bullshit are Clinton supporters.

[passiveporcupine]

70. Thanks for the links

This is the key link, as it discloses who the superpac was that started this smear campaign against Bernie, and it is the smear he is reporting about in e-mails. I got my e-mail this morning. There is no way in hell Hillary does not know this is being done. She has played dirty in the past with Obama, and she's getting scared now, so the white gloves come off.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/09/15/1421400/-It-begins-Hillary-Clinton-smears-Bernie-Sanders-over-Single-Payer

[peacebird]

35. Here you go

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/hillary-clinton-gets-another-super-pac

Super PACs are typically prohibited by law from coordinating with candidates, but Correct the Record will not be a typical super PAC. The group will not run ads, but instead does all of its work online, which it says will allow it to coordinate with the Clinton campaign.

The so-called “Internet exemption” was not intended to be used this way (it was created before the existence of super PACs), the Washington Post notes, but experts say Correct the Record is unlikely to face reprisal.

[leftynyc]

26. It's illegal to coordinate with her

So you're accusing her of more than this.

[JustAnotherGen]

28. +1

[virtualobserver]

32. a loophole

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/hillary-clinton-gets-another-super-pac

Super PACs are typically prohibited by law from coordinating with candidates, but Correct the Record will not be a typical super PAC. The group will not run ads, but instead does all of its work online, which it says will allow it to coordinate with the Clinton campaign.

The so-called “Internet exemption” was not intended to be used this way (it was created before the existence of super PACs), the Washington Post notes, but experts say Correct the Record is unlikely to face reprisal.

[azurnoir]

33. Thank you

[reformist2]

87. Lovely. Fortunately, the internet is a wide open democracy. Live by the internet attack campaign...

[portlander23]

36. We already know Mrs. Clinton is directly coordinating with Super Pacs

We already know Mrs. Clinton is directly coordinating with Super Pacs:

How a super PAC plans to coordinate directly with Hillary Clinton’s campaign

Any attack on Mr. Sanders by a Super PAC or a surrogate is a direct attack. Mrs. Clinton is correct to be afraid of Mr. Sander's candidacy.

[morningfog]

48. We know its illegal, but Hillary claims it isn't.

It's an offensive loophole that will be closed once challenged. It will be found illegal and she is doing it.

[HooptieWagon]

52. They claim to have a loophole.

Since the PAC isn't running ads in media, but instead online, they can coordinate smear attacks directly with the campaign. Hillary has signed off on this, unless you are suggesting she's not in charge of her own campaign.

[MADem]

51. You are going to have to prove that violation of federal election law. Cite, please? nt

[virtualobserver]

57. “Internet exemption”

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/hillary-clinton-gets-another-super-pac

Super PACs are typically prohibited by law from coordinating with candidates, but Correct the Record will not be a typical super PAC. The group will not run ads, but instead does all of its work online, which it says will allow it to coordinate with the Clinton campaign.

The so-called “Internet exemption” was not intended to be used this way (it was created before the existence of super PACs), the Washington Post notes, but experts say Correct the Record is unlikely to face reprisal.

[MADem]

59. OK--so no law violation, then (notwithstanding the odd MSNBC parsing, there).

One has to wonder if the FEC will ever fold the internet into their "regulations."

I think they'll soon realize that that's an impossible task. The minute they try to crack down on internet activity, these efforts will move offshore and become untouchable.

[bobbobbins01]

68. There was never that claim.

You just made it up. The claim was that this is on her, and that claim stands.

[MADem]

69. Indeed? There was most certainly that suggestion!

I rather doubt it's 'on her,' either.

That's as silly as blaming Bernie Sanders for some of the things that are written here at DU by his 'supporters'--which is something I'd never do.

I'll go to the source, not the 'supporters' of the source.

[bobbobbins01]

79. No, that was not even a suggestion

And going from claim to suggestion shows your eroding position. And of course it is on her, she coordinates with that PAC, so it is nothing like a Bernie supporter saying something...not even in the slightest.

[MADem]

81. Because you've declared it so, then?

smh!

Forgive me if I give your pronouncements the authority I feel they deserve!

[bobbobbins01]

82. I declared nothing.

You made the declaration. I just pointed out that you declared that someone claimed it was illegal when no one said any such thing. Then you said it was "suggested." And now I don't know what you're trying to pull, but I assume you're just out of ideas now and are lashing out. May I "suggest" you stop before someone needs to throw you a shovel.

[MADem]

83. It would seem that you're the one doing the "lashing" there, not me! nt

[bobbobbins01]

94. Nope. Pointing out facts isn't lashing.

But you and facts had a falling out a long time ago, so I think I'm done with this conversation.

[MADem]

95. I think you're looking in the mirror when you express that opinion, actually. nt

[arcane1]

2. Will she even be asked about it?

[Bonobo]

4. I doubt it. But I tell you what...

East coasters have been getting brutalized by the Winters and the cost of oil.

With Obama's disgusting cuts to the LIHEAP program, it has been the Venezualan oil that has saved us from dying and losing our homes.

This could lose the NE entirely for her where Bernie is already a serious challenge.

[Betty Karlson]

13. She may well lose New York over this.

Losing homestates: isn't that supposed to be avoided?

[Barky Bark]

88. She has already lost it

She doesn't know it yet.

[Betty Karlson]

103. Is there a poll I'm not aware of?

What reason do you have to know Mrs. Clinton will lose New York?

[Unknown Beatle]

19. Obama has been a great disappointment as president.

He cut LIHEAP by 20% when he should have increased it by 40% instead.

He sure did talk the talk, and people believed that he would keep his word, but unfortunately, he didn't walk the walk.

Obama is a true wordsmith if ever there was one. Eloquent speaker but short on promises. *Sigh*

[bunnies]

55. You said it Bonobo.

This bullshit infuriates me. As someone whos spent a New England winter with no fucking heat, I take this personally. They would rather I freeze? Fuck them.

[underthematrix]

3. Okay I wouldn't call it sleazy but I would call it a poorly

constructed hit piece. Most Americans would have difficulty figuring what it is they're supposed to be outraged about. The best hit pieces are a very short sentence. This must be some sort of trial balloon that needs lots of work.

Right now. It's garbage.

[Bonobo]

5. Nah, it's sleazy. nt

[underthematrix]

8. well we have different definitions of sleazy

THere's no sex, no perversion and trust me it's not sexy. It definitely fails the sleaze test.

[progree]

10. Sleazy, adjective...

1. (of a person or situation) sordid, corrupt, or immoral.
synonyms: corrupt, immoral, unsavory, disreputable; informalshady, sleazoid
"sleazy arms dealers"

2. dated
(of textiles and clothing) flimsy.
synonyms: revealing, skimpy; informalslutty, whorish
"a sleazy outfit"

[underthematrix]

12. Okay. So what you're saying is that the HRC campaign is sleazy for trying

to suggest something nefarious in his relationship with foreign leaders. Bernie folks need to develop some chill because this is nothing. It's gonna get a lot worse.

[salib]

18. Of course Sanders supporters will take this in stride

Part of that will be to demand an apology from Clinton.

[AgingAmerican]

40. She attacks from the right at great peril to herself

She has decided to go negative again this year.

[frylock]

84. Wrong answer..

try again.

[underthematrix]

92. This is an opinion forum filled with lots of opinions including yours.

Welcome to the REAL world!

[frylock]

93. And your opinion is seriously misguided..

I find people that constantly need to reference their knowledge of the Real World no fuckall about it.

[underthematrix]

97. uh huh

[frylock]

98. yuh huh

[padfun]

20. You consider sex sleazy?

Or sexy? We definitely have different definitions of sleazy.

[underthematrix]

46. Not the sex but the context of the sex.

[murielm99]

15. Even if they fix it,

it will still be garbage.

[beam me up scottie]

17. Thank you for saying that.

This kind of dirty politics turns off honest voters who care about issues.

[99Forever]

22. Dirty campaigns gotta campaign dirty.

They can't seem to help themselves.

[beam me up scottie]

23. And they're only going to get dirtier.

[HooptieWagon]

54. Yep. Into the gutter if need be.

She thinks she's entitled to the nomination, and there's no depth too low she won't go to defend her sense of entitlement. It's gonna get ugly...I think we've known that....I'm sure Sanders does. But I hope he continues to take the high road, that will only further shine the spotlight on their differences.

[Armstead]

41. Ineffective sleaze is still sleaze

[LondonReign2]

42. Agreed, this is par for course as far as the competency the Clinton campaign has shown

I mean really, Sanders = Chavez/Corbyn???

99.98% of Americans have no idea who Corbyn even is, and I think the Chavez-as-boogeyman played out long ago. The only people this is going to dissuade from voting for Sanders are Freepers; if that is how Hillary wants to spend her money I don't think we have to worry about the gap in the size of the candidates' war chests.

[jfern]

6. Of course not

She brought in Carville so that she can run a gutter campaign.

[underthematrix]

7. Oh Lord Carville is back.

[Bonobo]

24. Was there supposed to be a comma after "Lord"? nt

[passiveporcupine]

72. or before?

[underthematrix]

102. Does it matter? Lord or not Queen of mean is back

[Bonobo]

104. But commas are your friend. nt

[Bonobo]

107. Look up in the road a head! nt

[Bonobo]

111. Again, redundant.

Dismember MEANS to take apart limb by limb.

[Agschmid]

115. Handled that well...

Nicely done, sorry you had to deal with that.

[Bonobo]

108. Also, "disembowel your belly wide open" is redundant, my psychopathic friend. nt

[underthematrix]

106. Oh please. This is really not the way to fill those gaps in your

self-esteem

[Bonobo]

110. It was meant to be a light-hearted moment. Sorry you didn't feel it.

But for a man of your erudition, I am surprised at your lack of grammatical precision.

[underthematrix]

112. Actually I'm not a man. I'm a fierce awesome AA woman.

Sometimes I'm impercise. But I'm good with that too.

[Bonobo]

113. Then I guess humor is the only possible place you could improve upon! nt

[underthematrix]

114. LOL! you get the last word

[Scootaloo]

9. About as surprising as farts at a bean festival n/t

[LeftOfWest]

11. No.

n/t.

[tecelote]

14. Don't tell me Sanders is against war?

He's anti-nukes?

He puts his constituents lives above corporate profits?

Tell me it can't be so!

[merrily]

16. Huh? What's wrong with you?

As the Colbert Report proved, candidates never coordinate with their PACs.

[mhatrw]

21. Sanders is Scarily Socialist, while Clinton is Comfortably Corporate.

dirty tricks as usual

[deutsey]

29. I expect it to get even dirtier

I know Bernie is savvy and knows how the political "game" is played, but I sincerely hope he has a strategy for dealing with the tidal wave of sludge that will likely be unleashed on him.

[djean111]

27. No, her supporters will defend it to the bone, and then whine and moan about any valid criticism

of Hillary. As is usual.

Newsflash - any oil to poor people that does not turn a profit for Big American oil and its investors is unwanted by Hillary's donors and supporters. I am starting to think that anyone who votes for Hillary, and is not in the 1%, is voting against their own best interests.

[Fawke Em]

30. Can I send her an email back that explains that 15,000 new

people have joined Labour now that Corbyn is elected and she can expect the same once Sanders is elected?

No?

Well, screw her and her goons, then.

[HereSince1628]

34. No need to disavow, she was immunized in statements about how -she- and Sanders

personally don't go negative. That statement has been made repeatedly since late July when she pulled Jimmy Carville back on the job. As always in politics, what's said is often a head fake and you have to be ready for exactly the opposite, whether it comes or not.

If you take Sanders proposals as things he'd actually try to achieve, and if you are among those who have built the wealth gap and income-inequality you'd be looking to protect your interests and to take Sanders down many notches.

Sanders can't be ignored anymore. Laughing at him hasn't worked. It's time for them to actually fight him and the two fronts that have been opened up are race and conflation of myths about the red menace of Sanders' democratic socialism. Don't expect Dems to directly attack him for his faith, rather expect warning to remain in the news of how Jewishness will open him up to the R's Christian Right pressing this mercilessly and making him unelectable.

[Armstead]

61. Unfortunately, I think you're correct

[SouthernProgressive]

37. I would hope not. It would be completely ignorant for her to do so.

Then again, you know that.

[Bonobo]

38. I love playing the DU refrigerator magnet game!!! nt

[SouthernProgressive]

44. It's obvious. nt.

[morningfog]

47. Welcome back!

Maybe you'll have a little more staying power this time.

[SouthernProgressive]

49. ok. Thank you I guess.

Not sure what you are talking about but I'm sure it has something to do with the op or my reply. I mean a long-time member here wouldn't simply fling shit out that has nothing to do with anything and a blatant lie on top of it, would they?

[morningfog]

50. You know all about the habits of long time members, lol.

[SouthernProgressive]

53. Where have I mentioned the habits of long time members?

I am realizing this place is very hostile to new members. One thing the long time members such as yourself need to be educated on is that this isn't a member only site. One does not have to be a member of this site to read it. You are clearly unaware of that aspect. Do you know I read here for almost two years before creating an account. Nope. You didn't. Didn't stop the assumptions. As a new member it does appear I am more aware of the rules and working of this site. 1) You had no clue non-members can read the forum. 2) You have no clue that you are doing what they call a thread hi-jack which is always considered to be below board. Yet my time here is your issue. lol

Please, what does any of this have to do with the op or my reply. Why hijack the op like this.

You can have the last word. While this op is rooted in political naiveté, I still have enough respect for the members here to not hi-jack their op.

[morningfog]

64. No shit anyone can read the forum, it's an open website.

I don't doubt you've been here in one form or another for two years.

There is a reason this site is hostile to new members. Trolls, sock puppets and zombies sign up and return by the dozens daily. And when a "new member" comes in lecturing long time members on their expectations, they will get push back. Your "awareness" as a new member makes me doubt this is your first account. If its too hostile for you, maybe you should dial it back.

[frylock]

85. Then again, you know that..

she's ignorant. Finished that up for you.

[restorefreedom]

39. people are not buying loads of crap this time

this is precisely The kind of dirty establishment politics that are going to put trump or Carson on the GOP side and Bernie on the Democratic side.

the sleaze fest is over.

can.t wait for the big backfire.

[frylock]

86. They didn't buy it the last time, that's why it's so laughable..

that Team Clinton thinks that it will work this time.

[Avalux]

43. Um....that email sounds like it came from the GOP.

Seriously, this is the shit they do...but it doesn't surprise me. Bernie Sanders is staying above the fray, unfortunately Hillary is so desperate she has to resort to GOP tactics.

[arcane1]

60. And resorting to them rather early in the game, too.

Bernie must be doing something right

[Avalux]

74. He's doing a lot right - and that includes not attacking his opponents. nt

[Armstead]

63. David Brock -- used to be the GOP smear machine

Now he's working for Clinton

[Avalux]

73. Thanks for that little bit of info; I'm not surprised she enlisted Brock.

If I were a Hillary supporter I'd say that she did it because she'll need to counter GOP attacks, but I don't have much interest in someone willing to stoop to their level. Not at this time in this country.

[BuelahWitch]

75. Yep, I remember his terrible hit piece on Anita Hill

How long till he calls Bernie "A little bit nutty and a little bit slutty"?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

45. No. She'll be too busy collecting money from Super Pacs and telling us about

how corrosive corporate money is in politics.

[ancianita]

56. I see you're "taking it forward" now. What the hell.

[Sunlei]

58. always amazes me, decades of emails 'released' for media/public dissection and Mrs. Clinton is

an incredibly honest & law abiding person. Online PACs have a legal loophole and it is legal to use email.

I always wonder if Senator Sanders happens to win the primary and 'they' go over his 40 years? of private communications...

will he come out as clean & honest after 'they're' done with him?

[frylock]

89. So in the meantime, you're just fine with what "we're" doing to him?

[Sunlei]

91. You mean Senator Sanders? who is the "we're" and what is the "what"?

[Armstead]

62. She's tapped into the same RIGHT WING SMEAR MACHINE she used to critcize

David Brock, the guy that used to be high up in the GOP Right Wing smear machine that went after the Clintons in the 90's. He became an expert on dirty tricks.

Then he had a change of heart, and renounced that. And became a good guy, exposing the RW lie machine.

But now, he's thrown his expertise behind Clinton's campaign. ....And it's not like he's forgotten everything he learned.

And he seems to be taking the same "end justifies the means" approach to her that he used to use for the RW.

And therefore, he's happy to smear Sanders as an Osama Loving Commie, if it'll advance the Clinton campaign.

[arcane1]

65. And now he's making Media Matters less trustworthy thanks to his actions.

Then again, it seems like MM has been mostly about Clinton anyway.

[TM99]

66. Brock is the real life

equivalent of Doug in season 3 of House of Cards.

[ibegurpard]

67. Lol yeah right

[hifiguy]

71. And now the hurricane of Rovian horseshit

is unleashed.

[HooptieWagon]

76. Disavow it? Hell, she coordinated it!

Discounted heating oil to freezing poor people cuts in to Big Oil profits....hillary supports profits above poor people.

[dorkzilla]

77. For once I’d love to see a Hillary supporter actually criticize her for this poo-flinging

But I’d also love to drop 20 pounds in 2 weeks but that aint gonna happen either.

[ancianita]

80. ...

right?

[Broward]

78. Doubtful, since she can't win on the issues. This is all she's got.

[frylock]

90. Stay classy, Team Clinton.

[TheKentuckian]

96. Sure, she even stopped supporting the Iraq war eventually not sure when though she was still down

in 2008 but as I understand it she managed to quietly as a church mouse when the barn cats are on the prowl walked it back some in a book. I say even that only because she wants to be President and she got the message that support really opens your flank in a Democratic primary and that is it because the rest of her interventionist and hawkish ways simply in no way illustrates any other lessons learned.

People also really need to stop pretending some foolish enough to still be in favor of invading Iraq in 2008 is some foreign policy genius the position is ludicrous! That pretty much puts you in the bottom 30% in the country on a combined stupid and/or evil score.
Either way you go or some of both still leads you no way, no how territory. Particularly, when you follow that up with S. American coup attempts, "we came, we saw, he died" (while laughing and cackling), and pushing to arm "moderate" murderous theocrats in the biggest powder kegs in the world. God only knows what goes on behind closed doors.

I think she was at or near the lead hawk and voices of unreason in this administration, every time word was it was her and Petraeus on one side and old Uncle Joe occupying not a dove role because no such existed but the moderate or really more restrained point of view.

Clinton is bad in other areas of course but this supposed strength is in my view perhaps were she is dangerously worst.
Sure, not John McShame coo coo for coco puffs saber rattling at fucking Spain and singing Mad Al Killemallavic Beach Boy rips but I worry she maybe, just maybe can see Dick Cheney, Condi Rice, or Donald Rumsfeld from her ideological house.

[portlander23]

99. dark money

[HereSince1628]

100. Do you remember Mission Impossible? Should any of the Correct the Record team be caught or captured

The Secretary -WILL- disavow any knowledge of your action.

The most important act of a surrogate or a co-conspirator is taking the fall?

[HooptieWagon]

101. At its formation, it was announced Correct The Record...

...would be coordinating directly with her campaign. It seems there's a loophole in the law. Anyway, it's a good thing that they've outed themselves early as a swiftboating group with direct ties to Hillary. No plausible deniability.

[HereSince1628]

116. Yes there is a "loophole" of some sort...

whether it covers paid staff is a rather gray area untested in court.

It's sometimes interesting to consider semantics because so much hangs on the meaning and connotation of words. The term "loophole" refers to an intentional opening in a wall through which weapons are fired in defense. The exception in the law, created to allow campaigns to communicate with groups of campaign volunteers via internet doesn't look like intentional or defensive.

It doesn't look intended for this use by PACs because it was written before PACS came into existence as such, and is now being exploited for an offensive gain. A rather a different jargon seems to better fit this sort of thing in the internet age... a vulnerability in the legal code, a place where a hacker, usually for some selfish purpose, perversely exploits the code that was written for other purpose.

IMO, the frequency with which H resorts to "it's legal" is a detectable signal about her character and behavioral choice. Whether some behavior is legal or not, the "it's legal" defense isn't invoked when a person is well within the bounds of the intent of the law.

In Wisconsin we have spent years dealing with leaking claims of impropriety from the John Doe investigations of Scott Walker, not so much because of use of a private server, but because the use of that private server was to coordinate at least one PAC with Walker's campaign. The special prosecutor deemed that illegal. Now team H> steps into the news arguing openly that coordination of her campaign and a PAC is ok.

That's curious and, imo, must be informative.