Matt Taibbi on How DNC Leak Shows Mechanics of a Slanted Campaign
Documents released by Wikileaks detail how the DNC worked with the Clinton camp to downplay a key story about questionable fundraising.
Not that it changes anything now (or even 1 day ago when this was released and I missed it, or very likely even when the wiki dump happened which was clearly too little too late; unless you buy the whole Russia is doing this to get Trump in power thing)….
I'd been watching a lot of this closely… and as stated in this article "…this Politico story were barely mentioned in the wake of the DNC leak, except by right-wing media…" – most of which are hacks or opportunists. At the very least they were anti-Sanders and anti-Clinton (and frighteningly pro-Trump).
Matt Taibbi is not a hack. Don't be dissuaded from reading this article just because it's Rolling Stone magazine. He's got chops. His stuff on the the financial shenanigans that nearly led us (along with the rest of the world) into a 2nd Great Depression is top notch. But here you have it: HRC got to use the DNC "structure as adjunct staff", including (or so it seems; I've yet to see a direct pointA to pointB on this) financially.
Does this fundamentally change anything I've stated? Nope. Not one fucking bit. If you thought politics was fair or honest please go back to the playground. Should it be? Yes. Ideally, that answer should always be a resounding yes. Has money and power ever been that way? no… of course not. Don't be naive. As even this article points out… Trump is scary as fuck. I voted Sanders… so I too get to be pissed if the guy I voted for was hampered by the DNC. It doesn't change the situation we're in though.
"The immediate question going forward for the party is whether the two camps can put aside their differences in time to defeat the more-than-a-little-scary Donald Trump."
"Bernie Sanders didn't win the nomination, but he won the argument, shaping key Clinton policies and the future of the party."