Guccifer 2.0 just drops new hacked DNC documents

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: ColaTesla

That link doesn't go to anything that says that. Try again.

pay to play

Does anyone know where I can see an easy to install version of the new emails? The download, as I said previously, does NOT work for me. Even with the encryption key.

Is there an html version? Please?

This is very frustrating and hard to understand. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't there two different types of files that were released - one was a spreadsheet with donor info (I don't give a hoot about that) and the other were new emails?

I just want to see those emails. Please, can anyone help me with this?

I don't dare try to download anything again from that site as I had issues with my computer afterwords and it nearly crashed.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

It seems we have a bonafide political operative in our midst's.

I can only assume that you mean me since I'm not the only alt-right low-information useful idiot ignorantly blathering out of an inexcusable ignorance and lack of comprehension?

I'll make you a deal. I will happily to share my identity with a 3rd party who can verify that I am not a political operative if you'll do the same. Then when your pathetic baseless insinuations are proven wholly and irrefutably incorrect, you publicly apologize and close your account.

You want to accuse people of being shills because they aren't half-wits in the most pathetically passive-aggressive manner possible?

Put up or shut up.

a reply to: ColaTesla

Yeah it says "pay to play letters" and the subject is what? "SEC letters and donations"

That's not even new. That was from a previous release (Google is your friend). That one came out in the first batch. What do you think "pay to play letters" is a reference to?

It actually refers to recordkeeping compliance under the SEC's "Pay to Play Rule" See here.

a reply to: theantediluvian

Not to butt in on something not really my business. But um, how does proving you're a real human being prove one is not a shill?

I was not under the impression shills were AI, or some kind of non human hominid, or some kind of well trained ravens pecking at a keyboard, or literal trolls with green warty skin using a laptop under a bridge between billy goat steaks.

originally posted by: theantediluvian
The evidence? From Twitter source:

Show of hands — anyone know what this is? It's obviously a spread sheet but what is the data, where does it come from, when was it compiled and what does it mean? Anyone?

The dates don't match up for early voting for any 2008 election in North Carolina preciesly. All of their GEs were in November. Early voting by mail in NC doesn't start until September. Seems like it's the results of early vote counting from a particular NC district. It's also worth noting that the Republican vote count is significantly higher.

How is this proof of "a plot" to "force" an Obama victory in 2008 again?

I'd never expect 'regular joe that happens to be well informed about national politics and such' to be able to take 'one look' at some seriously arcane spreadsheet data and not only know what it all means but also be able to articulate the entire historical context while 'debunking' it.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

I point how how ridiculously ignorant posters are being in their haste to have something to talk about and because there's no refutation to be made, you call me a shill?

Whose really butthurt here?

When you were lecturing about groupthink and cult behaviors, did you talk about defense mechanisms? It's pretty obvious that somebody's ego can't handle the sting of objective reality and it ain't me.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Oh and to be completely fair to the other party, but I've always found people posting that quite ironic.

I mean anyone who feels the need to post that, should probably be filling out one of their own.

a reply to: theantediluvian

Me? During the Bush years I fought tooth & nail against the GOP / Neocons alongside the democrats EVERYDAY for years on end, just like what you've been seeing me do lately against the DNC etc. In 2008 I was all in for Ron Paul (who the GOP preferred to see Obama takeover rather than give Ron a fair shake). After what they did to him I was out. Done with the Left/Right. Couldn't even bear to do it again in '12, never even opened a video or clicked on a news story. This election I blew the whole thing off again until... I had never even heard of an "SJW" until June of this year. Once I got up to speed I then realized what was really going on in all of the riots etc at Trump rallies (that MSM coverage had left me clueless all spring when I did start scanning headlines everyday in particular because of the whole rioting stuff). It still wasn't until about July I hadn't spoken to Trump/Hillary/he election/ etc. Because I hadn't kept up on it I had to get caught up for a while, so I only observed as an OUTSIDER (story of my life). The first Trump speech I even watched was his nomination acceptance speech of the GOP convention! By the time I was ready to take a position realized that the Left has been gearing the nation towards a bigot driven totalitarian nightmare. And that's why I got sucked into all fof this (where where it not for SJW etc poised to DESTROY our nation I still wouldn't have had enough motivation to really make the election worth my time in running a soap box.

a reply to: dianajune

Check you PMs.

If that doesn't work, try this http:// www . mediafire . com/download/i7qpxki68od4hih/ngp-van.zip

(remove the spaces) ATS doesn't like the source, I guess.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Well I assume you have a web browser and that you're able to access a search engine from it? What seems to be lacking here is critical thought, basic curiosity and an unwillingness to vet anything — possibly because scrutinizing the material makes it impossible to maintain the false beliefs that are triggering the rush of endorphins.

In other words I read the column headers and then I Googled the dates for early voting in North Carolina and it's not rocket science, you just need to get past the desire to delude yourself because it feels good.

a reply to: theantediluvian

You know I was actually going to chime in and state that some of the descriptions from SOME of what people were posting ('out there') seemed a bit blown out of proportion. Yet as I went on I felt the need to also state that you were doing the exact opposite blowing everything way under proportion. And then I saw you expert analysis...

Some juicy tidbits from Powell have already been discovered.

He warned Clinton not to blame him several times. He even had to resort to throwing a hissy fit at a party in the Hamptons.

Everybody in their wealthy elite circle hates Hillary.

The Clinton's hate Obama and refer to him as "that man."

They were all discussing her poor health and inability to climb stairs back in early 2015.

originally posted by: theantediluvian
Then when your pathetic baseless insinuations are proven wholly and irrefutably incorrect, you publicly apologize and close your account.

I didn't post it because of the work being done in the thread. I posted it because of this:

originally posted by: theantediluvian
Then when your pathetic baseless insinuations are proven wholly and irrefutably incorrect, you publicly apologize and close your account.

Although there kind of was cause to post it before then

a reply to: ketsuko

Let me remind you what your statement was and then you can tell me whether you think that it's honest and factually correct:

DNC admits their own policies helped create ISIS ...

There are only two sentences that could be construed (if you get really drunk, hold your breath for a few minutes and then hurry up and read it while squinting very hard) as even a tacit admission that "their own policies helped create ISIS."

"Maliki's prejudicial governing style worsened after U.S. troops left Iraq, helping quickly deteriorate the situation further."

"His successors now lead the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS)"

Every other word in that document refers to is something that happened between 2003 and 2006. Can we agree that these are the facts regarding this document? If anything, I'd say that this document is a point by point argument for emphasizing a sequence of events that disproportionately places the blame on the policies of the previous administration.

Wishful thinking doesn't change facts. Are you standing by your earlier mischaracterization?

a reply to: Deny Arrogance

THANK-YOU! That's what I was waiting to hear.. some of the news-worthy tidbits from this first batch.

I wonder why Colin Powel would advise Hillary not to blame him even before this server debacle became public?

Maybe the "having trouble climbing stairs" comment came after Hillary fell flat on her face after boarding the jet, as seen in that infamous video.

"That Man" Obama kicked Hillary's butt in 2008. If President Obama was not so dedicated to keeping a Democrat in the Whitehouse, he wouldn't campaign much at all for Hillary. It's becoming clearer why Bill Clinton looked like he wanted to hit President Obama upside the head with his golf club earlier this year.


And just to think that there are over 100,000 documents coming from Wiki-Assange between now and November 7th. Wow.

a reply to: carewemust

They were actually refering to a couple of podium steps.

I know we are not supposed to link to the leaks but this is a news story about the leak so I hope it is ok.

“On HD tv [sic] she doesn’t look good. She is working herself to death,” Powell wrote in the e-mail listing the “crummy press conference” she did at the UN, flying to San Francisco “to go to a paid gig for EBay and then went to Marc’s house to get ready for a money dinner for the Clinton Foundation.” Powell went on to write that he “ducked her” later that evening when the two were “in Marc’s second house” for fear of being seen together and triggering “another email story.” Powell closed, “She will turn 70 her first year in office.”

Leeds responds that Rhode Island Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse is a “huge Clinton supporter” and told Leeds that both he and Clinton gave “speeches at the same event a few months back and she could barely climb the podium steps.”

Read more: dailycaller.com...

originally posted by: ColaTesla
Heres a twitter live feed of the leaks, This is big, Early voter fraud, Emails discussing pay to play, Ambassadorships for cash,

An email from 2015 talking about hillary not being able to walk up stairs, Oh and a juicy conversation about how much hillary hates obama.

Embedded image of tweet pic

a reply to: burntheships

Yeah, I observed a bunch of stuff along those lines when I was in that insane twitter feed thing, shortly ago.