CNN blasts Clinton dirty tricks during debates ~ Huffington Post

[dutch508]

uawchild (1,614 posts) http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141612913

CNN Chief Jeff Zucker Rips Donna Brazile’s ‘Disgusting’ Dealings With Clinton Campaign

Source: Huffington Post

Oh, da-yam!

Did she actually do this?!?

Were Donna Brazile’s interactions with the Clinton campaign “unethical” and “disgusting” as Jeff Zucker is claiming? He's A CNN president for god's sake!

Please tell me that Donna did not actually tip off Hillary or her people about debate questions. This just can't be true.

You are a fuquing idiot.

Foggyhill (785 posts)
1. He must be a GOP supporter to do this kind of hyperbole

NewJeffCT (42,874 posts)
2. meanwhile, they continue to employ Lewandowski?

bucolic_frolic (3,716 posts)
3. CNN ... Fair & Balanced

too

That is not any type of journalistic ethics, that is pure bias

MANative (2,628 posts)
4. In light of Corey Lewandowski's on-going employment with both Trump and CNN...I cannot bring myself to care if Brazile shared anything or not. Since this comes from hacked emails, all content is suspect, anyway.

They admit they do not care if their candidate broke the rules, the law and what ever else... just to get elected.

Star Member pnwmom (77,973 posts)
5. The ridiculous part is that even I could have told Hillary that a question about lead would be asked in Flint, Michigan.

ANYONE could have guessed this. It didn't take super secret info.

Yet- Hillary cheated. Just to win.

Blue Idaho (3,760 posts)
8. Zucker shows us who he really is.

CNN becomes Pro Trump megaphone.

Star Member George II (18,449 posts)
10. She has said that she didn't give Clinton that question, and that's what they're harping about....

....ONE question!!!

In the wikileaks stolen email, they say "Brazile appeared to send the Clinton campaign a question...."

See that - "APPEARED" and "A QUESTION". And Brazile has denied that she did it and when she saw the email she said she didn't write it.

It's been noted a number of times that many of the so-called emails that wikileaks released either were created by wikileaks or doctored by wikileaks.

This whole issue is bullshit, and CNN's president should know that and should act more responsibly.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KiIP_KDQmXs[/youtube]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6Y-ri7IWqc[/youtube]

Star Member Cha (186,620 posts)
33. I don't believe it for a second. I think zucker is a lying idiot for trump.

Poor Donna.. you know she wants to speak out about this. She gets fired for putin manufactured emails and cory stays on.

Demit (9,005 posts)
13. "Disgusting"? If he were firing a man, I just can't see him calling a man disgusting.

I had the same reaction when Comey called out HRC in that weird press conference in July. I just couldn't see the head of the FBI scolding a man in the same way.

I think there's a lot of male privilege angst coming out in this campaign.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-H9BOIYhgc[/youtube]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dY77j6uBHI[/youtube]

Star Member Hekate (38,792 posts)
18. Listen to me, people: Anyone in the media who accepts Wikileaks "info" at face value...

...is not doing their job. At this point, it means all of them. They are damned fools. Don't let them get you.

Wikileaks traffics in stolen property. Wikileaks is not journalism. Wikileaks took this load from Russia. Russia trolls us -- even our message boards, and you know it. Putin has an interest in creating chaos and distrust.

WHY on God's green earth would anyone take this latest load of crap from Wikileaks at face value? I am not saying that none of it is true; what I am saying is that it is very conceivable that it has been selectively tampered with in order to (see above) sow chaos and distrust.

At this point, I trust NOTHING coming from Wikileaks, and in my opinion, neither should anyone else. The media handling of this "source" continues to amaze and disgust me.

Star Member JI7 (57,192 posts)
25. CNN is the shittiest "news" network there is. thst suck more than fox

warrprayer (4,624 posts)
36. I believe Brazile.

And I believe Putin is giving wikileaks plenty of "help", which would include expert and likely undetectable tampering of messages.

Donna Brazile out at CNN after WikiLeaks reveals she leaked more debate questions to Clinton
~NY Times

Its not one question. Its more than one question. They don't even know hopw many at this point.

Hillary cheated, plain and simple. The DOJ DNC and WH all worked together with teh MSM to brush off Bernie and get Hillary nominated...

and now it's all falling apart...

[USA4ME]

Hekate

18. Listen to me, people: Anyone in the media who accepts Wikileaks "info" at face value is not doing their job. At this point, it means all of them. They are damned fools. Don't let them get you.

Wikileaks traffics in stolen property. Wikileaks is not journalism. Wikileaks took this load from Russia. Russia trolls us -- even our message boards, and you know it. Putin has an interest in creating chaos and distrust.

WHY on God's green earth would anyone take this latest load of crap from Wikileaks at face value? I am not saying that none of it is true; what I am saying is that it is very conceivable that it has been selectively tampered with in order to (see above) sow chaos and distrust.

At this point, I trust NOTHING coming from Wikileaks, and in my opinion, neither should anyone else. The media handling of this "source" continues to amaze and disgust me.

Now THAT is some heavy-duty delusional conspiracy theory non-sense. With Dear Leader in control during all of this, I feel compelled to ask the primitives regarding the Russians and the Wikileaks thingy: MIHOP or LIHOP?

.

[Boudicca]

If it quacks like a duck, more than likely it's a Hillary enabling turd.
It's truly incomprehensible how ****ing stupid MSM viewers have become that they can't taste the shit sandwich being crammed down their throats. 

[98ZJUSMC]

Blue Idaho (3,760 posts)
8. Zucker shows us who he really is.

Oh, good gawd..............

You would be hard pressed to find a bigger (D)Marxist shill, you infants.

 

Hekate

18. Listen to me, people: Anyone in the media who accepts Wikileaks "info" at face value is not doing their job. At this point, it means all of them. They are damned fools. Don't let them get you.

Unless the target is a non-(D)Marxist.   

Now THAT is some heavy-duty delusional conspiracy theory non-sense. With Dear Leader in control during all of this, I feel compelled to ask the primitives regarding the Russians and the Wikileaks thingy: MIHOP or LIHOP?

.

It is..... it is. 
 


The power of fReEsHiT!!!!!eLebinty

[Carl]

Meanwhile in the real world the beasts collapse continues.

[Gina]

Star Member Hekate (38,792 posts)
18. Listen to me, people: Anyone in the media who accepts Wikileaks "info" at face value...

...is not doing their job. At this point, it means all of them. They are damned fools. Don't let them get you.

Wikileaks traffics in stolen property. Wikileaks is not journalism. Wikileaks took this load from Russia. Russia trolls us -- even our message boards, and you know it. Putin has an interest in creating chaos and distrust.

WHY on God's green earth would anyone take this latest load of crap from Wikileaks at face value? I am not saying that none of it is true; what I am saying is that it is very conceivable that it has been selectively tampered with in order to (see above) sow chaos and distrust.

At this point, I trust NOTHING coming from Wikileaks, and in my opinion, neither should anyone else. The media handling of this "source" continues to amaze and disgust me.

Um I haven't heard anyone from those actual emails stating they might be doctored, have y'all? 

[SVPete]

Um I haven't heard anyone from those actual emails stating they might be doctored, have y'all?

Or, zeroing in a bit, released the "real" emails.

Did she actually do this?!?

Were Donna Brazile’s interactions with the Clinton campaign “unethical” and “disgusting” as Jeff Zucker is claiming? He's A CNN president for god's sake!

Please tell me that Donna did not actually tip off Hillary or her people about debate questions. This just can't be true.

The horror you fear is real! The Clinton News Network just avowed the credibility of Wikileaks. The question that interests me - whose answer we'll probably never know - is whether the Clinton News Network fact-checked these specific leaks, or whether the Clinton News Network has known all along that Wikileaks' releases are, en bloc, genuine (and fact-checking these specific leaks would almost certainly find evidence that many other leaks are genuine, so my question is more a distinction than a difference).

[docstew]

Um I haven't heard anyone from those actual emails stating they might be doctored, have y'all?

NONE of the principals have stated that the emails were doctored, nor denied ANY of the content. Also, WikiLeaks has a stellar record of publishing the truth. If they doctored emails to defame people, they would have been sued into non-existence years ago. And weren't they the Left's darling a few years ago when they went after Bush?

[98ZJUSMC]

Um I haven't heard anyone from those actual emails stating they might be doctored, have y'all?

Nope.  Just (D)Ummies doing what they always do.

Blame something else.

[SVPete]

Um I haven't heard anyone from those actual emails stating they might be doctored, have y'all?

Given that Wikileaks has released 10s of thousands of emails, the very scale of "doctoring" that many emails demonstrates the absurdity of the claim.