Post: #551

When you see the "DNC Leak thread" gets bumped up the page just right (after several weeks of inactivity)

(09-14-2016 07:44 AM)Dr. Howard Wrote:  ^ Can someone clarify. Are these recent names/ambassadors DNC donors or fundraisers? It looks to me like the names are not donors, but people who have collected donations on behalf of the DNC and whatever these other acronyms are.

Fundraisers being awarded sweet ass ambassador positions makes more sense than donors. The first guy for example, if you had 3.5 million sitting around in cash, would wouldn't be interested in being an ambassador.

You're right, and patronage appointments for fundraisers is a bit less ethically-icky.

However, this still plays into Trump's frame from early in the campaign - nobodies without proper experience being put in ambassador roles. Caroline Kennedy in Japan when she can't negotiate her way out of a wet paper bag, etc. And you can still stick a pay-for-play moniker on it anyways, even if people accept it (like I do in a way) as part of a corrupt political process.

Any way we can use this to put egg on the right people's faces, man I hope this is a big part of the news cycle for the near future.

Post: #552

No mention of this new leak whatsoever in the Washington Post this morning. I haven't checked the NYTimes or LA Times, but it wouldn't surprise me if they didn't mention it yet either. They know about it, but they probably won't say anything unless it starts trending on social media and the alternative press.

Post: #553

I looked on Google news, and didn't find the leak mentioned on their main page, but when I searched for it specifically on the news page, there are a few stories. They still downplay it.

Post: #554

This is the type of scum we're dealing with in the Hillary network.




Huma makes light of the aftermath of Benghazi and just chalks it up as business as usual.

This casual disregard for life has been noted several times with regards to Hillary as SoS but also with Bill and his shitty attitude towards Somalia (Blackhawk down) as well as all the stuff that went down with Rwanda.

They clearly do not give a fuck as long as it benefits them in some way or they can get out of a mess they created.

edit: I just wanted to note that Huma has been a close confidante of Hillary for a long ass time (15+ years?) and was pretty much brought up by her as a personal handmaiden of sorts. Huma also has loyalities to various muslim orgs tied to terrorism, Saudis, and has a very sketchy past associated with Weiner too. What kind of leader cultivates someone like this as their protege?

Post: #555

(09-14-2016 08:52 AM)RoastBeefCurtains4Me Wrote:  I looked on Google news, and didn't find the leak mentioned on their main page, but when I searched for it specifically on the news page, there are a few stories. They still downplay it.

They aren't just downplaying it i've seen a few mainstream media outlets only quote a few narrow Colin Powell quote where he calls Trump a national disgrace. That's the only piece from the leak they are running with. They aren't mentioning the other numerous emails which makes the Queen look like the dumpster garbage she is.

Post: #556

(09-14-2016 08:33 AM)C-Note Wrote:  No mention of this new leak whatsoever in the Washington Post this morning. I haven't checked the NYTimes or LA Times, but it wouldn't surprise me if they didn't mention it yet either. They know about it, but they probably won't say anything unless it starts trending on social media and the alternative press.

It needs more time. Any decent journalist will make sure they do their homework first and I'm sure some are looking at the different angles of attack. The NYTimes for example will probably take something out of the leaks and tie it to something completely unrelated to Hillary or Obama perhaps. Maybe even settle an old score against one of those donors. Also the dump is full of stuff like credit card numbers, etc. Some of these newspaper people refuse to touch stuff like that, but some do not care.

In the leaks there was evidence of illegal activity between the DNC and a PAC from 2009. That might invoke an SEC violation investigation, but it will take time for all the bits and pieces to come together on that.

Also the media received email leaks (possibly from Colin Powell himself) that we do not have access too. Newspaper people love having exclusive shit that only they have. They will always run those stories first. It's all old news to us, but still juicy such as Hillary allegedly saying that she hates that man (Obama) for beating her in 2008. Then some boneheaded Russian hackers tried to throw medical records of our Olympic athletes out on the internet and epic failed.

Anyway, if they refuse to run stories it's okay. Trust me, it's fine. Wanna know why? Once Julian and Wikileaks get off their asses and release this (100K email dump allegedly) we have this to cross reference against it to trace the money for the Clinton Foundation or even Obama himself.

This dump was VERY useful. In alot of ways it is a huge coffin, we just need some nails to be delivered.

Post: #557

It's only been ~24 hours since it first dropped & it did come in unexpectedly from left field.

Even if the media down play it, it's all over the internet & big names like Cernovich & Scott Adams will add to the coverage.

Post: #558

(09-14-2016 09:12 AM)El Chinito loco Wrote:  

(09-14-2016 08:52 AM)RoastBeefCurtains4Me Wrote:  I looked on Google news, and didn't find the leak mentioned on their main page, but when I searched for it specifically on the news page, there are a few stories. They still downplay it.

They aren't just downplaying it i've seen a few mainstream media outlets only quote a few narrow Colin Powell quote where he calls Trump a national disgrace. That's the only piece from the leak they are running with. They aren't mentioning the other numerous emails which makes the Queen look like the dumpster garbage she is.

The MSM is like trying to build a house with a very stubborn relative. You want to finish the slab and foundation, but he insists on working on the framing on the sides.

It is what it is.

Post: #559

Pay to Play

Post: #560

Colin is a funny guy!

Post: #561

Guys- please stop looking at the Leaks. "The Brown Cow" Donna Brazile has spit out her cud and has said that you will get a virus! Nothing to see here anyways, just STOP LOOKING.

Quote:Interim DNC Chair Warns Not to Look at New Hack — Could Have Malware!

Interim Democratic National Committee Chair Donna Brazile warned against perusing the documents released in the latest DNC hack, alleging that they could have viruses which damage your computer.

Brazile urged caution for anyone attempting to download the documents, "given the potential malware risks." At the same time, she said the hack was carried out by the Russians, particularly the infamous hacker Guccifer 2.0, the same hacker who released DNC documents right before the Democratic National Convention in July, leading to the resignation of Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

The DNC is the victim of a crime — an illegal cyberattack by Russian state-sponsored agents who seek to harm the Democratic Party and progressive groups in an effort to influence the presidential election," Brazile declared in a statement Tuesday. "We have been anticipating that an additional batch of documents stolen by Russian agents would be released."

https://pjmedia.com/trending/2016/09/14/...e-malware/

Post: #562

Like some of us said, give it some time.... (I recommend looking at it from the original link, because there are lots of pictures)

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-09-13...donor-list

Quote:This Is How Much It 'Costs' To Get An Ambassadorship: Guccifer 2.0 Leaks DNC 'Pay-To-Play' Donor List

Tyler Durden's picture
by Tyler Durden
Sep 14, 2016 6:35 AM
5.3K
SHARES
After addressing a cybersecuirty conference in London, notorious hacker 'Guccifer' shared over 500Mb of documents detailing 100,000 DNC donors contact info and donations. A large number of the largest donors received senior diplomatic or political positions following thge donations, ranging from UK Ambassador to Assistant Attorney General. The DNC released a statement pre-emptively claiming that this was the work of Russia (and reigniting Trump's links to Putin).

Probably just coincidence...



Source: Magafeed.com

The dcoments contained detailed lists of 100,000 alledged donors, addresses, and phone numbers, and well as amounts donated...





Source: imgur

Here is the first cut of the alleged major donors on the leaked documents and the positions they received (via Magafeed.com)

#1 Matthew Berzun … Ambassador to UK
#2 Julius Genachowski … Former chairman to FCC
#3 Frank Sanchez…. Under secretary of commerce
#8 Kirk Wagner… Ambassador to Singapore
#9 Alan Solomont … Ambassador to Spain
#11 John Roos… Ambassador to Japan
#12 Nicole Avant… Ambassador to Bahamas
#13 Eileen Chamberlain Donahoe … Ambassador to the UN
#16 Steve Westly – CFO of California
#17 Don Beyer – Ambassador to Switzerland
#21 Don Gips – Ambassador to South Africa
#22 Howard Gutman – Ambassador to Belgium
#24 Cynthia Stroum – Ambassador to Luxembourg
#27 Mark Gilbert – Ambassador to New Zealand
#31 Norm Eisen – Ambassador to Czech Republic
#37 Bruce Oreck – Ambassador to Finland
#43 Tony West – deputy Attorney General
#45 Bill Kennard – Ambassador to EU


The DNC responded to the latest hack claim Tuesday through its Interim Chair Donna Brazile, who stated that the “DNC is the victim of a crime,” which she blamed on “Russian state-sponsored agents,” while also cautioning that the hacked documents were still being authenticated by the DNC legal team, as “it is common for Russian hackers to forge documents.” DNC pre-emptively published a statement in an attempt to change the narrative...

View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter
Follow
WikiLeaks ✔ @wikileaks
The DNC is bracing itself for the release of more documents
4:22 PM - 13 Sep 2016
4,486 4,486 Retweets 5,188 5,188 likes
Once again blaming Russia (and Trump)... As RT reports, it's not the first time that the name of Vladimir Putin has been brought up in the US presidential campaign, but this time the US president used this “argument” while openly campaigning for Clinton against Trump. The situation has become “really ludicrous and it borders on the ridiculous,” believes Gregory R. Copley, editor of Defense & Foreign Affairs.

“In my 50 odd years covering the US government, I have never seen this level of partisanship within the administration where a sitting president actually regards the opposition party as the enemy of the state,” Copley told RT.

The analyst said that the democrats are “blaming the messenger to revert the attention from the message.”

“The message which Donald Trump delivered on RT was unambiguous in his campaign. Just like the fact that WikiLeaks revelation of the hacked emails was very explicit in showing up what the Democratic party itself was doing,” Copley added.

The US establishment is “sacrificing key bilateral relationships in order to win [a] domestic election,” believes Copley. He added that neither Obama nor Clinton are interested in unifying the country, but they are rather “interested in winning and engaging in what modern democracy seems to have become – the tyranny of the marginal majority over the marginal minority.”

“When you think about the number of times that the Clinton campaign has brought up President Putin and the alleged Russian hacking of Hillary Clinton’s service, it makes you wonder just how desperate they are,” Copley noted. “President Obama has lost literally all prestige in an international community…with the loss of prestige he has become desperate.”
Some of the alleged major donors (via Magafeed.com)

Richard M. Lobo
obamarichard

It appears Richard M. Lobo’s wife, Caren Lobo, donated $716,000 to DNC. Obama then nominated Richard Lobo for Director of the International Broadcasting Bureau.

From BBG.gov:

Richard Lobo was nominated by President Obama to be Director of the International Broadcasting Bureau in February, 2010, and was confirmed to the post by the Senate in September of that year.
You can find Caren Lobo’s donation in this photo.





Pamela Hamamoto
Pamela Hamamoto

Pamela Hamamoto paid DNC $605,000 then became the Permanent Representative of the United States of America to the United Nations and Other International Organizations in Geneva.

More on Pamela Hamamoto

Jane Hartley
Jane Hartley

Jane Hartley paid DNC $605,000 and then was nominated by Obama to serve concurrently as the U.S. Ambassador to the French Republic and the Principality of Monaco.

More on Jane Hartley

Crystal Nix-Hines
Crystal Nix-Hines

Crystal Nix-Hines paid DNC $600,000 and then was nominated by President Obama to the position of United States Permanent Representative to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization with the rank of Ambassador.

More on Crystal Nix-Hines

Bruce J. Oreck
Bruce J. Oreck

Bruce J. Oreck donated $1,136,613 to the DNC and served as US ambassador to Finland 2009 to 2015.

More on Bruce Oreck

Robert A. Mandell
Screen Shot 2016-09-14 at 1.15.05 AM

Robert A. Mandell donated $1,121,250 to the DNC then President Obama named Mandell the Ambassador to Luxembourg in June 2011.

More on Robert Mandell

You can find Robert Mandell’s donation in this photo (as Bob Mandell).

Julius Genachowski
Julius_Genachowski

Julius Genachowski donated $3,494,919 toDNC and served as Chairman of the FCC from 2009 to 2013.

More on Julius Genachowski

You can find Robert Mandell’s donation in this photo.

K3LRK4



Karol Mason
07b8e3977b1053f50b859b7a10f0f43de8945967

Karol Mason donated $856,000 to the DNC and Obama appoints her as Assistant Attorney General, Office of Justice Programs.

Post: #563

I just saw a link on Yahoo!'s front page to a story on the leak from the New York Observer, which is Trump's son-in-law's newspaper. However, since Yahoo!'s news feed is tailored to it's individual viewers, I don't know how many others are seeing it.

Post: #564

Do we know how much an ambassador makes?

I'm wondering if these people break even on their appointments.

Is it just the status they want or what?

That really would be a sweet gig.

Post: #565

As Ambassador, they can negotiate trade deals which favor certain companies over others. It's cronyism. The money they pay to get the Ambassador position will be made back 10-fold from the bribes they collect from corporations who will use the ambassadors to get the trade deals they want.

Post: #566

(09-14-2016 01:13 PM)Samseau Wrote:  As Ambassador, they can negotiate trade deals which favor certain companies over others. It's cronyism. The money they pay to get the Ambassador position will be made back 10-fold from the bribes they collect from corporations who will use the ambassadors to get the trade deals they want.

Yeah but to Luxembourg?

Seriously though, that doesn't seem like THAT much money to make 10x roi

For sure all of us would factor in the hotness of women and probably forego more money to be in places like Ukraine haha

Post: #567

(09-14-2016 01:18 PM)Fisto Wrote:  

(09-14-2016 01:13 PM)Samseau Wrote:  As Ambassador, they can negotiate trade deals which favor certain companies over others. It's cronyism. The money they pay to get the Ambassador position will be made back 10-fold from the bribes they collect from corporations who will use the ambassadors to get the trade deals they want.

Yeah but to Luxembourg?

Seriously though, that doesn't seem like THAT much money to make 10x roi

For sure all of us would factor in the hotness of women and probably forego more money to be in places like Ukraine haha

Some are just super wealthy with nothing better to do. Nothing wrong with that in a sense, but they should be interviewing for these jobs instead of donating to parties to get them. You cannot be getting your best and brightest representing the country's interests abroad when you pick this way.

Now dudes are digging into the stock stuff inside the leaks. Let me see if I can find that interesting stuff from the Japanese Ambassador last night and post it here.

Post: #568

If I were to think of it in the sense of finance and markets, companies could make many millions from insider knowledge of deals. It is simply like throwing a fight.

If certain corporations paid the ambassador to make sure certain laws/deals/events went a certain way, having that knowledge beforehand would be vital in financial deals. You could ensure that certain restrictions were relaxed. You could then bet on stock and bond prices swinging a certain way, and those small percentages add up big time over multi million or even billion dollar deals. The ambassador would be sure to be promised a share of the windfall.


With regards to Luxembourg, it is a big Switzerland like tax haven, as well as the per capita richest country in the EU, so I am sure that it is advantageous to hold sway there.

Post: #569

The Guccifers have done what Nixon couldn't do - get all the dirt on the Democrats.

And maybe it's all the Russians, but honestly it feels more like we now live in a world of not just citizen journalism, but citizen espionage and (hopefully) citizen law enforcement.

While people have long looked the other way for selling ambassadorships, selling the Chairmanship of the FCC cannot be viewed as anything but corruption. Giving away one of the most powerful positions for the regulation and enforcement of the 1st Amendment directly impacts the Republic.

Post: #570

Found this:

Quote:John Roos Anonymous IDa+5CPvd Tue 13 Sep 2016 23:12:58 No.88769880 ViewReport
John Roos is a donor to the Clinton Foundation that donated $2,030,150 on Aug 20, 2009. He was sworn in as United States Ambassador to Japan on August 16, 2009. The end date in the leak matches his resignation date from the position.

His big thing was something called the tomodachi initiative which does "educational and cultural exchanges as well as leadership programs". Wikipedia also states that 450 persons have been given the opportunity to move from Japan to US. No mention of any other actions.

Hes on board with Sony and Mitsubishi.

He has been given rewards for his work.

Thoughts?

Quote:Anonymous ID:1hN5FQFN Tue 13 Sep 2016 18:47:20 No.88741951 ViewReport
Now lets take a look at John Roos, ambassador to Japan. Donated over $2,030,150

Then inn May 2009 Obama named Roos to replace the departing Tom Schieffer as United States Ambassador to Japan.

>John Roos term as ambassador to Japan concluded in August 2013

>In April of 2014 John Roos forms The Roos Group LLC

http://archive.is/GiMJk

According to Kikipedia

>The Roos Group is focused on strengthening ties between Silicon Valley and Japan in areas that include cross-border investment, venture capital, corporate growth, and the promotion of innovation and entrepreneurship

Is this maybe why people pay to be ambassadors? So they can make connections with people and form business ties with for later?

John Roos donated 2 million, and he's now running a company that sounds like its making a lot more then 2 million with what its doing.

What reason does a guy like John Roos have being the ambassador to Japan for the United States, when all he is a venture capitalist? If I could give Obama 2 million dollars and become the ambassador for China, is it ok for me to set up all my business contacts in 1 or 2 years, quit, then start a new firm for more business in China? Even if it was technically legal in a way, it's very unethical.

What work did he ever do on our behalf in regards to Japan other than set himself up to start another LLC?

He also donated to the Clinton Campaign.

The plot thickens....


Also Twitter chatter on the leaks is at some 370,000 tweets or more. The MSM cannot hide this forever.

Post: #571

Post: #572

Now Hannity is running that list. InfoWars and Breitbart will probably be next up.

http://www.hannity.com/articles/election...-15106726/

Post: #573

(09-14-2016 01:18 PM)Fisto Wrote:  

(09-14-2016 01:13 PM)Samseau Wrote:  As Ambassador, they can negotiate trade deals which favor certain companies over others. It's cronyism. The money they pay to get the Ambassador position will be made back 10-fold from the bribes they collect from corporations who will use the ambassadors to get the trade deals they want.

Yeah but to Luxembourg?

One of the richest per capita GDP "countries" in the world. A massive international tax haven.

Post: #574

Interesting. Wasn't this a conflict of interest when US Postal Service and Department of Treasury made donations to DNC?

Post: #575

(09-14-2016 03:14 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(09-14-2016 01:18 PM)Fisto Wrote:  

(09-14-2016 01:13 PM)Samseau Wrote:  As Ambassador, they can negotiate trade deals which favor certain companies over others. It's cronyism. The money they pay to get the Ambassador position will be made back 10-fold from the bribes they collect from corporations who will use the ambassadors to get the trade deals they want.

Yeah but to Luxembourg?

One of the richest per capita GDP "countries" in the world. A massive international tax haven.

The practice of appointing campaign donors to ambassadorships has been happening for decades, it's nothing new. Look at any advocacy piece from career diplomats - they've been arguing against this practice for several administrations. Nothing new here. Most donor ambassadors go to nice countries that aren't super sensitive (Western Europe, Australia, etc). The tough places get either personal friends of the president with experience or career diplomats. It would be great if Trump got rid of this trend but I'm not holding my breath.