Glad that Donna Brazile is out....

[Rustic]

Never liked Brazile very much and probably a pretty dumb choice in having her as a Clinton spokesperson.

Nonetheless, Brazile telling Hillary Clinton that during the town hall in Flint, Michigan that someone was going to ask Clinton about the lead poisoning, should NOT be of any surprise to anyone that such a question would be asked...Why the hell would the town hall be in Flint otherwise BUT for the chance to address the issue of lead poisoning?

She has lead poisoning... of the brain

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Never liked Brazile very much and probably a pretty dumb choice in having her as a Clinton spokesperson.

Nonetheless, Brazile telling Hillary Clinton that during the town hall in Flint, Michigan that someone was going to ask Clinton about the lead poisoning, should NOT be of any surprise to anyone that such a question would be asked...Why the hell would the town hall be in Flint otherwise BUT for the chance to address the issue of lead poisoning?

It's amusing that the last DNC chairperson got canned when it was proven she slanted the primary process for the bulldyke, and now the next DNC Chair gets fired from her "other job" for feeding the bulldyke debate questions. And yet the democrats scream about protecting the integrity of the process. Are there any democrats scratching their heads and wondering how they got to this point?

At least when the Republicans (I am an unaffiliated voter btw) see the shit their insiders are pulling they say fuck you, we will take the orange clown.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Never liked Brazile very much and probably a pretty dumb choice in having her as a Clinton spokesperson.

Nonetheless, Brazile telling Hillary Clinton that during the town hall in Flint, Michigan that someone was going to ask Clinton about the lead poisoning, should NOT be of any surprise to anyone that such a question would be asked...Why the hell would the town hall be in Flint otherwise BUT for the chance to address the issue of lead poisoning?

So why didn't she forward the same information to Bernie? You libtardos are always eating your own. So corrupt nothing happens with out a "all the money is in". Think it's fair to Bernie?

I agree, I remember that blank look on Bernies face when that question came up. Total surprise. If only he could have prepared for a question about lead poisoning in the Flint town hall. Those damn cheatin Clintons!

So Bernie being an idiot excuses the bulldyke and Brazile? Brilliant. I should have expected that from you.

 

[Billy000]

Never liked Brazile very much and probably a pretty dumb choice in having her as a Clinton spokesperson.

Nonetheless, Brazile telling Hillary Clinton that during the town hall in Flint, Michigan that someone was going to ask Clinton about the lead poisoning, should NOT be of any surprise to anyone that such a question would be asked...Why the hell would the town hall be in Flint otherwise BUT for the chance to address the issue of lead poisoning?

Is there an exact quote on record of what this email said? I would be very curious to know.

 

[Mac1958]

Bravo, Jack Shafer, whoever you are: CNN Dumped Donna Brazile. It Should Keep Going.

Her deceit reveals an ugly aspect of news talk that will probably go unremedied as Brazile is tarred and feathered by the ethics cops: That is, the whole show-business concept that places paid partisan yakkers on television is corrupt and venal and deserves burial in a shallow grave. The yakkers populate the news shows not because they add much in the way of substance to our political knowledge, but because they’re a cheap form of on-air talent for television’s 24/7 programming needs, and television has been over-relying on them for a long time. A partial list of notable politicians or political operators who’ve worked their way into TV includes Tim Russert, Bill Bradley, George Stephanopoulos, Joe Scarborough, Van Jones, William Safire, James Carville, Jeffrey Lord, Kayleigh McEnany, Pat Buchanan, Rick Santorum, Paul Begala, David Gergen, Chris Matthews, Peggy Noonan, Sarah Palin, Jennifer Granholm, David Axelrod, Tony Blankley, Mary Matalin, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Mike Huckabee, John Bolton, Newt Gingrich, Eliot Spitzer and Corey Lewandowski.

TV hires these people and their ilk not for their spellbinding political insights but because they’re known quantities who will provide safe and predictable idle talk. By dividing their partisan contributors between Republicans and Democrats, TV creates the illusion of impartiality and inclusion. The contributors take the job because it’s easy—anybody can fill the air with platitudes and generalization, and all that face-time makes them more marketable on the lecture circuit. Working as a paid pundit is such a good deal, the contributors tend to conform to the expectations of the producers putting on the show. They hit their marks, fill the dead spaces with palaver, keep the commercials from bumping into one another, and sit at attention until called on—or interrupt should the show stall.

Not every TV contributor moment is a complete botch. Most of these people, with the exception of Lewandowski, know something about politics. Much more than you do. Much, much more than I do. But it’s not in, say, David Axelrod’s interests to share a damaging insight about Barack Obama, the horse he rode to prominence on. Almost to a one, the contributors pull punches and dilute the political conversation to the weakest of teas so the people in the bar and riding the elliptical trainers at the gym don’t have to strain to follow the Punch and Judy of it all.

What transpires during the paid contributor segments isn’t journalism. It isn’t politics. And it’s rarely even entertaining. I’d call it the worst sort of tasteless soy filler, only that would be an insult to soy, which is nutritious. There’s no reason outside of pragmatism that justifies their continued employment on the news shows.

Instead of deploying political hacks, the news shows would be smarter to hire journalists whose job it would be to extract meaningful information from the political hacks. Under my scheme, the Braziles and Carvilles and Palins could still be interviewed on TV, but they couldn’t draw pay—and they’d have to have something worthy to say or accept having the camera cut away from them.

.

 

[Kondor3]

Wwwhhhhhaaaatttttt ????? !!!!!!

Liberals rigged a primary debate on behalf of their Anointed Sovereign?

Color me surprised.

Not.

Democrats are the scum of the earth when it comes to fair elections.

Or putting a Black face on a major cable news set, to cynically sucker-in Black voters.

Then, of course, they disappear for another four years, until they need the Inner City Democratic Plantation Black Vote again.

Say what you will about the Establishment Democrat little wankers... they DO sucker-in Blacks (and Hispanics) far better than their competition.

It's funny - and sad - to see them being played this way.

 

[owebo]

Never liked Brazile very much and probably a pretty dumb choice in having her as a Clinton spokesperson.

Nonetheless, Brazile telling Hillary Clinton that during the town hall in Flint, Michigan that someone was going to ask Clinton about the lead poisoning, should NOT be of any surprise to anyone that such a question would be asked...Why the hell would the town hall be in Flint otherwise BUT for the chance to address the issue of lead poisoning?

Hitlery is that much of a moron, she really needed that help.

 

[nat4900]

So why didn't she forward the same information to Bernie? You libtardos are always eating your own. So corrupt nothing happens with out a "all the money is in". Think it's fair to Bernie?

Again...If you're going to Flint, MI.....what do you think the MAIN topic of questioning will be about???

Second, I;m NOT defending Brazile, but she has been with the Clintons for decades and Sanders (MY CANDIDATE, btw)......was not a democrat until he joined the race.

Yes, Brazile is biased....and rather stupid.

 

[eflatminor]

Can you imagine the shit storm that would ensue if Fox News had leaked questions to a Republican candidate?

When the corrupt MSM and Dems do exactly that...twice...all we hear is "Well, the questions should have been obvious anyway"

Hypocrisy, thy name is Democrat, though I think the more accurate description is Statist. Same thing really.

 

[nat4900]

When the corrupt MSM and Dems do exactly that...twice...all we hear is "Well, the questions should have been obvious anyway"

If a question about lead poisoning in the water would have been a surprise to any candidate , then that candidate would be rightfully labeled an idiot.

Harp on criticizing Brazile all you want....but its a waste of time.

 

[Slade3200]

Never liked Brazile very much and probably a pretty dumb choice in having her as a Clinton spokesperson.

Nonetheless, Brazile telling Hillary Clinton that during the town hall in Flint, Michigan that someone was going to ask Clinton about the lead poisoning, should NOT be of any surprise to anyone that such a question would be asked...Why the hell would the town hall be in Flint otherwise BUT for the chance to address the issue of lead poisoning?

So why didn't she forward the same information to Bernie? You libtardos are always eating your own. So corrupt nothing happens with out a "all the money is in". Think it's fair to Bernie?

I agree, I remember that blank look on Bernies face when that question came up. Total surprise. If only he could have prepared for a question about lead poisoning in the Flint town hall. Those damn cheatin Clintons!

So Bernie being an idiot excuses the bulldyke and Brazile? Brilliant. I should have expected that from you.

Bernie definitely got the shaft from the DNC and has a gripe. At the end of the day there is an election going on and he is behind Clinton. Perhaps after the election he will make some noise about the way the campaign was executed. I'm all for campaign reform, it's a dirty system going on from both major parties and needs a reboot

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Never liked Brazile very much and probably a pretty dumb choice in having her as a Clinton spokesperson.

Nonetheless, Brazile telling Hillary Clinton that during the town hall in Flint, Michigan that someone was going to ask Clinton about the lead poisoning, should NOT be of any surprise to anyone that such a question would be asked...Why the hell would the town hall be in Flint otherwise BUT for the chance to address the issue of lead poisoning?

So why didn't she forward the same information to Bernie? You libtardos are always eating your own. So corrupt nothing happens with out a "all the money is in". Think it's fair to Bernie?

I agree, I remember that blank look on Bernies face when that question came up. Total surprise. If only he could have prepared for a question about lead poisoning in the Flint town hall. Those damn cheatin Clintons!

So Bernie being an idiot excuses the bulldyke and Brazile? Brilliant. I should have expected that from you.

Bernie definitely got the shaft from the DNC and has a gripe. At the end of the day there is an election going on and he is behind Clinton. Perhaps after the election he will make some noise about the way the campaign was executed. I'm all for campaign reform, it's a dirty system going on from both major parties and needs a reboot

Bernie won't say a word. He was paid off. Remember his new vacation home?

 

[Slade3200]

Never liked Brazile very much and probably a pretty dumb choice in having her as a Clinton spokesperson.

Nonetheless, Brazile telling Hillary Clinton that during the town hall in Flint, Michigan that someone was going to ask Clinton about the lead poisoning, should NOT be of any surprise to anyone that such a question would be asked...Why the hell would the town hall be in Flint otherwise BUT for the chance to address the issue of lead poisoning?

So why didn't she forward the same information to Bernie? You libtardos are always eating your own. So corrupt nothing happens with out a "all the money is in". Think it's fair to Bernie?

I agree, I remember that blank look on Bernies face when that question came up. Total surprise. If only he could have prepared for a question about lead poisoning in the Flint town hall. Those damn cheatin Clintons!

So Bernie being an idiot excuses the bulldyke and Brazile? Brilliant. I should have expected that from you.

Bernie definitely got the shaft from the DNC and has a gripe. At the end of the day there is an election going on and he is behind Clinton. Perhaps after the election he will make some noise about the way the campaign was executed. I'm all for campaign reform, it's a dirty system going on from both major parties and needs a reboot

Bernie won't say a word. He was paid off. Remember his new vacation home?

If Hillary wins he will likely have a strong voice in government so in that case he will probably be tempered. If Trump wins I expect a lot of noise, only question, will anybody be listening?

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

So why didn't she forward the same information to Bernie? You libtardos are always eating your own. So corrupt nothing happens with out a "all the money is in". Think it's fair to Bernie?

Again...If you're going to Flint, MI.....what do you think the MAIN topic of questioning will be about???

Second, I;m NOT defending Brazile, but she has been with the Clintons for decades and Sanders (MY CANDIDATE, btw)......was not a democrat until he joined the race.

Yes, Brazile is biased....and rather stupid.

Stupid?

No.

CNN got caught and they need Brazile to be their scapegoat!

I am not excusing Brazile but I am not foolish to buy the story CNN is selling either...

 

[nat4900]

Stupid?

No.

CNN got caught and they need Brazile to be their scapegoat!

I am not excusing Brazile but I am not foolish to buy the story CNN is selling either...

I think that Brazile has been gone from CNN's payroll as of last July after DWS' demise.

 

[Scorpion]

Per CNN and the New York Times:

“We are completely uncomfortable with what we have learned about her interactions with the Clinton campaign while she was a CNN contributor,” Lauren Pratapas, a network spokeswoman, said in a statement.

“CNN never gave Brazile access to any questions, prep material, attendee list, background information or meetings in advance of a town hall or debate,” Ms. Pratapas wrote.​

It's strange that the CNN spokeswoman made both those statements. One or the other statement having been issued...okay...but both? Excuse me?

• How the hell can Mrs. Brazile have obtained the question if the second statement is true?
• Just how uncomfortable can CNN's management be if the second statement is not true for they'd have somehow had to have allowed her to obtain the question?

Another bothersome thing is that CNN, like other cable news networks, perhaps ABC, CBS, and NBC too (I don't watch them), CNN pays "plugged-in" individuals to appear as editorialists in discussions about news events, or more accurately, the most salaciously sensational snippets of news stories. Those editorial discussions seem to comprise more of the programs' content than does actual reporting of news, that is, the "who, what, when, where, how and factual background/contextual information" pertaining to events, and that preponderance of commentary over objective and unselective presentation of events makes most cable news useful only as background noise worth having on only because they report information somewhat rapidly when new snippets come available. All the same, paying insiders to sit as commentators seems tantamount to the National Enquirer paying "whomever" for a so-called news (gossip) story, and, frankly, much of the commentary strikes as little but gossip. (To CNN's credit, the news they do actually report does strike me as being accurately reported, and that's doubly so for the printed web-news version of CNN. I don't have a problem with CNN in that regard.)

Moreover, that cable news organizations do spend so much of their on-air time with commentators yammering on and on is a big reason for why I make a point of watching PBS Newshour everyday; they routinely spend 5-15 minutes fully covering a story, but they cover fewer stories per episode and there's not much editorial content in the show. I don't really care what anyone thinks about the news until I have collected a pretty full set of facts about the events themselves and formed an opinion of my own. At that point, it's mildly entertaining to watch the pundits to see whether any of them concur with me, but even so, I don't care what they think or whose position they represent.


Getting back to the matter of Mrs. Brazile, she too, per the New York Times, made some question-raising remarks:

• From time to time I get the questions in advance.
  
• CNN “never, never” shared advance questions with her ahead of debates or town hall-style events.

Her two remarks above, combined with those of the CNN spokeswoman leaves unanswered this question: Who the hell gave her the question?

• Did Mrs. Brazile get it from the town hall audience member who submitted it? If that's so, there'd have been no way for her or the audience member to know whether the question would be asked.
• Did Mrs. Brazile get it from someone at CNN? That seems the only "normal" way for her to know the question would likely be asked during the town hall debate.
• Does the DNC have their own hackers? Or maybe a 3rd party hacker gave her the question? Both those possibilities are pretty unapt, but it's not impossible.

Obviously, I don't know the answer any more than does anyone other than Mrs. Brazile and her source.


To close, I want to point out an issue I have with so many speakers on matters political, and that is that they all are "loosey goosey" with their claims and presentation of information. With regard to Mrs. Brazile's sharing a debate question with others, Donald Trump said, "Speaking of draining the swamp, Donna Brazile did it again,” WikiLeaks today, she gave the questions to a debate to Hillary Clinton." Now here's the thing: she didn't give the question to Hillary Clinton. She gave it to John Podesta and Jennifer Palmieri, both of whom work on the Clinton campaign. IIRC, at the time Trump learned of Mrs. Brazile's having shared debate info, the info she'd shared consisted of one question, not more than one.

Is it plausible that either of those individuals shared the info with Mrs. Clinton? Of course it is; it's even probable. That's not the point I'm making. The point I'm making is one I made above: people playing the game at this level need to be factually accurate and precise if they expect to be believed. It's not as though Trump could not have said, "...She gave a debate question to John Podesta, Mrs. Clinton's campaign manager."? That would have been no less damning/damaging for Mrs. Clinton, the DNC, Mrs. Brazile, and Mr. Podesta, and it'd have been 100% true, and Lord knows Trump could stand to boost his quantity of truthful statements.

If Donna Braziles cord has been cut, what of this Roland Martin person?
Billy Bush got whacked by NBC for his 'participation' in an uncouth conversation .
Is Roland still around? Anyone??

 

[Fueri]

When the corrupt MSM and Dems do exactly that...twice...all we hear is "Well, the questions should have been obvious anyway"

If a question about lead poisoning in the water would have been a surprise to any candidate , then that candidate would be rightfully labeled an idiot.

Harp on criticizing Brazile all you want....but its a waste of time.

The subject matter of the question she stole is utterly irrelevant.

 

[LaDexter]

CNN has been giving the debate questions to the Democrats since Dukakis. They are a Democratic Activist group on TV disguised as a "news network.:

 

[Unkotare]

Per CNN and the New York Times:

“We are completely uncomfortable with what we have learned about her interactions with the Clinton campaign while she was a CNN contributor,” Lauren Pratapas, a network spokeswoman, said in a statement.

“CNN never gave Brazile access to any questions, prep material, attendee list, background information or meetings in advance of a town hall or debate,” Ms. Pratapas wrote.​

It's strange that the CNN spokeswoman made both those statements. One or the other statement having been issued...okay...but both? Excuse me?

• How the hell can Mrs. Brazile have obtained the question if the second statement is true?
• Just how uncomfortable can CNN's management be if the second statement is not true for they'd have somehow had to have allowed her to obtain the question?

Another bothersome thing is that CNN, like other cable news networks, perhaps ABC, CBS, and NBC too (I don't watch them), CNN pays "plugged-in" individuals to appear as editorialists in discussions about news events, or more accurately, the most salaciously sensational snippets of news stories. Those editorial discussions seem to comprise more of the programs' content than does actual reporting of news, that is, the "who, what, when, where, how and factual background/contextual information" pertaining to events, and that preponderance of commentary over objective and unselective presentation of events makes most cable news useful only as background noise worth having on only because they report information somewhat rapidly when new snippets come available. All the same, paying insiders to sit as commentators seems tantamount to the National Enquirer paying "whomever" for a so-called news (gossip) story, and, frankly, much of the commentary strikes as little but gossip. (To CNN's credit, the news they do actually report does strike me as being accurately reported, and that's doubly so for the printed web-news version of CNN. I don't have a problem with CNN in that regard.)

Moreover, that cable news organizations do spend so much of their on-air time with commentators yammering on and on is a big reason for why I make a point of watching PBS Newshour everyday; they routinely spend 5-15 minutes fully covering a story, but they cover fewer stories per episode and there's not much editorial content in the show. I don't really care what anyone thinks about the news until I have collected a pretty full set of facts about the events themselves and formed an opinion of my own. At that point, it's mildly entertaining to watch the pundits to see whether any of them concur with me, but even so, I don't care what they think or whose position they represent.


Getting back to the matter of Mrs. Brazile, she too, per the New York Times, made some question-raising remarks:

• From time to time I get the questions in advance.
  
• CNN “never, never” shared advance questions with her ahead of debates or town hall-style events.

Her two remarks above, combined with those of the CNN spokeswoman leaves unanswered this question: Who the hell gave her the question?

• Did Mrs. Brazile get it from the town hall audience member who submitted it? If that's so, there'd have been no way for her or the audience member to know whether the question would be asked.
• Did Mrs. Brazile get it from someone at CNN? That seems the only "normal" way for her to know the question would likely be asked during the town hall debate.
• Does the DNC have their own hackers? Or maybe a 3rd party hacker gave her the question? Both those possibilities are pretty unapt, but it's not impossible.

Obviously, I don't know the answer any more than does anyone other than Mrs. Brazile and her source.


To close, I want to point out an issue I have with so many speakers on matters political, and that is that they all are "loosey goosey" with their claims and presentation of information. With regard to Mrs. Brazile's sharing a debate question with others, Donald Trump said, "Speaking of draining the swamp, Donna Brazile did it again,” WikiLeaks today, she gave the questions to a debate to Hillary Clinton." Now here's the thing: she didn't give the question to Hillary Clinton. She gave it to John Podesta and Jennifer Palmieri, both of whom work on the Clinton campaign. IIRC, at the time Trump learned of Mrs. Brazile's having shared debate info, the info she'd shared consisted of one question, not more than one.

Is it plausible that either of those individuals shared the info with Mrs. Clinton? Of course it is; it's even probable. That's not the point I'm making. The point I'm making is one I made above: people playing the game at this level need to be factually accurate and precise if they expect to be believed. It's not as though Trump could not have said, "...She gave a debate question to John Podesta, Mrs. Clinton's campaign manager."? That would have been no less damning/damaging for Mrs. Clinton, the DNC, Mrs. Brazile, and Mr. Podesta, and it'd have been 100% true, and Lord knows Trump could stand to boost his quantity of truthful statements.

If Donna Braziles cord has been cut, what of this Roland Martin person?
Billy Bush got whacked by NBC for his 'participation' in an uncouth conversation .
Is Roland still around? Anyone??

I think he's on "Laugh-in"

 

[leftwinger]

Bernie was smart enough to not need help?

Never liked Brazile very much and probably a pretty dumb choice in having her as a Clinton spokesperson.

Nonetheless, Brazile telling Hillary Clinton that during the town hall in Flint, Michigan that someone was going to ask Clinton about the lead poisoning, should NOT be of any surprise to anyone that such a question would be asked...Why the hell would the town hall be in Flint otherwise BUT for the chance to address the issue of lead poisoning?

So why didn't she forward the same information to Bernie? You libtardos are always eating your own. So corrupt nothing happens with out a "all the money is in". Think it's fair to Bernie?