746
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml 54 points 2 years ago

An email recently released by the whistleblowing organization WikiLeaks shows how the Clinton campaign and Democratic Party bear direct responsibility for propelling the bigoted billionaire to the White House.

In its self-described “pied piper” strategy, the Clinton campaign proposed intentionally cultivating extreme right-wing presidential candidates, hoping to turn them into the new “mainstream of the Republican Party” in order to try to increase Clinton’s chances of winning.

Ah, the real reason people hate WikiLeaks. It exposed the truth, but rather than focus on the truth people focused on the messenger.

[-] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 28 points 2 years ago

My brother in OSRS, they had emails from the Republican Party as well, but didn't release them because they said there was nothing interesting in them. I don't disagree at all that Clinton's strategy was inappropriate, but there's plenty of legitimate reasons to dislike WikiLeaks. Ironically, there's a lack of transparency on them. They should've released the GOP emails.

WikiLeaks has a problem when we need a WikiLeaks for WikiLeaks.

[-] OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml 17 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

My brother in Middle Earth, the hate started long before WikiLeaks allegedly had any Republican emails, and even searching for the subject now I can't find anything that says WikiLeaks had them.

Edit: I found a source, reading it again pretty much tells the whole story (it wasn't emails but "information on the Trump campaign"): https://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/293453-assange-wikileaks-trump-info-no-worse-than-him/

[-] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world -3 points 2 years ago

Oh of course some people said that. Doesn't mean they're right though. And even so, they should've released that information on the trump campaign

What information could they possibly have that is worse than what we already know about Trump? He could eat babies on stage and 30% of people would still vote for him.

[-] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Something like the Trump campaign bribing the RNC early on. You could have the exact same things going on that the DNC did.

I don't think that would change anything. He's done far worse than that, and quite brazenly.

[-] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

I think it might've in 2016, but who knows.

[-] letsgocrazy@lemm.ee 22 points 2 years ago

Sadly the republicans had zero say in their slide to right wing extremism and could do nothing about it. It's not like their flirtation with the Tea Party movement meant anything.

[-] Asafum@feddit.nl 8 points 2 years ago

Yup, poor poor Republicans... They don't actually agree with all the things they say on Facebook or memes they share, or political violence they wish for or enact. Poor Republicans, it was all the evil Democrats that made Republicans be who they are. It's really a shame that they have absolutely no brain of their own that they just go with whatever the Democrats make them do. We should be lead by that party though, because they're "free thinkers"

....wait

[-] banneryear1868@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago

It's not just Trump either they've used the strategy for many insane Republican primary candidates.

[-] Agent641@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago

Repiblicans are maniacs and Democrats are retarded. Story as old as time.

[-] Smeagol666@lemm.ee 10 points 2 years ago

Republicans are retarded maniacs and Democrats are gaslighting hypocrites who play dumb when called out on their bullshit.

[-] spider 3 points 2 years ago

It exposed the truth, but rather than focus on the truth people focused on the messenger.

In this case, the media also focused on the messenger and gave Hillary a pass on the actual contents of those e-mails.

this post was submitted on 08 Nov 2023
746 points (90.5% liked)

politics

31035 readers
614 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS