Australian Labor Party Attempted Illegal Sabotage for Sanders Using Tax Dollars?

[Cow Poke]

That his older brother? he looks younger than Bernie.

He really does - I'm wondering if it's a really old picture.

ETA: Appears to be a fairly recent photo.

brothers.jpg
Bernie Sanders's brother to fight David Cameron's seat for Green party
Larry Sanders, a former Green councillor, will attempt to overturn a 22,700 Tory majority in Witney, Oxfordshire

[Raphael]

He really does - I'm wondering if it's a really old picture.

ETA: Appears to be a fairly recent photo.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]20165[/ATTACH]
Bernie Sanders's brother to fight David Cameron's seat for Green party
Larry Sanders, a former Green councillor, will attempt to overturn a 22,700 Tory majority in Witney, Oxfordshire

Sheesh, Bernie must have been doing some hard living compared to his brother.

[Mountain Man]

Reuters: FBI backs CIA assessment on Russian motives in U.S. hacking: official

More unnamed sources? What a surprise.

Here's the money quote: "The FBI had no immediate comment."

In other words, no official confirmation.

[One Bad Pig]

It's literally the same source Sparko used.

Yes. And? There's still nothing concrete. "Senior officials" is so vague it could be refering to SES working at the Dept. of Education.

[Jaecp]

Yes. And? There's still nothing concrete. "Senior officials" is so vague it could be refering to SES working at the Dept. of Education.

His own source contradicts his claim. That matters. Nevermind that his source also agrees with the actual claim I made in that post.

[Tassman]

Maybe he's angling for a shot at being Obama's golf buddy

[Mountain Man]

Yes. And? There's still nothing concrete. "Senior officials" is so vague it could be refering to SES working at the Dept. of Education.

Isn't it funny how this is supposedly a major security breech, yet not a single government official is willing to go on record to confirm it?

[Sparko]

Reuters: FBI backs CIA assessment on Russian motives in U.S. hacking: official

You work at a law firm. Let some of that rigor rub off on you.

sure thing.

More of the same. Anonymous "officials" and no comment from official sources. Wanna try again?

two senior government officials told Reuters on Friday.

blah blah blah...

The FBI had no immediate comment.

[Sparko]

It's literally the same source Sparko used.

wow, you really don't know what Reuters is do you? It is a newswire service. It collects news from various sources and sells the stories to smaller news organizations who can't afford to do their own reporting. Like your local newspaper. The stories came from two completely different sources. Just gathered by Reuters. Just like AP news. In fact Reuters and the Associated Press are two of the largest newswire agencies. Someone who deals with politics for a living should know this.

[Cow Poke]

Isn't it funny how this is supposedly a major security breech, yet not a single government official is willing to go on record to confirm it?

And no liberal can point to an official statement, or identify an individual who outright declared it. Hillary started the "17 intelligence agencies on all the same page", thing, but there's precious little meat in whatever it was about which they were "on the same page".

[Mountain Man]

wow, you really don't know what Reuters is do you? It is a newswire service. It collects news from various sources and sells the stories to smaller news organizations who can't afford to do their own reporting. Like your local newspaper. The stories came from two completely different sources. Just gathered by Reuters. Just like AP news. In fact Reuters and the Associated Press are two of the largest newswire agencies. Someone who deals with politics for a living should know this.

And like the AP, Reuters has a decidedly liberal slant.

[One Bad Pig]

His own source contradicts his claim. That matters. Nevermind that his source also agrees with the actual claim I made in that post.

They're different articles, Jaecp. Yours references officials speaking on Friday. Sparko's references officials speaking on Monday, contradicting the earlier article. That matters. The later article disagrees with the actual claim you made in that post. That matters, too.

[Jaecp]

wow, you really don't know what Reuters is do you? It is a newswire service. It collects news from various sources and sells the stories to smaller news organizations who can't afford to do their own reporting. Like your local newspaper. The stories came from two completely different sources. Just gathered by Reuters. Just like AP news. In fact Reuters and the Associated Press are two of the largest newswire agencies. Someone who deals with politics for a living should know this.

Sparko, dude, sometimes it feels like you're getting this wrong on purpose.

Reuters does in fact collect news from various sources, 2500 of them in fact. They're called journalists and they're employed by the company. Oh, and 600 photojournalists, too. And does it matter that two different people's reporting is responsible for these articles? Reuters has editorial standards, you can read all about them here.

Hmm, you know what? You don't actually have to worry about a second reporter contradicting the first because Mark Hosennball is on both bylines

Oh, and FYI, I have zero interaction with the press through my political jobs. Well, outside of getting this cute photojournalists number/facebook last month after I ran into her at a coffeeshop after she covered an event my organization threw. It was kinda of serendipitous since we both go to the same place :)

The title I generally have is Field Director. I run the ground operations of the campaign. Were I working in coms and you weren't hilarious wrong about nearly everything you wrote I'd have a ton of egg on my face!

They're different articles, Jaecp. Yours references officials speaking on Friday. Sparko's references officials speaking on Monday, contradicting the earlier article. That matters. The later article disagrees with the actual claim you made in that post. That matters, too.

Sparko's article was published on December 13th. Mine, written by the same guy, was published on the 16th. That Monday is referring to the 12th and the Friday refers to the 16th. Am I correct in supposing that you thought the Friday in my article referrer to the 9th for some reason?

[Cow Poke]

The title I generally have is Field Director. I run the ground operations of the campaign.

Maybe you're part of the reason Hillary lost!

(yeah, I know, you're probably in the 'Hillary or nobody' region of the country)

[One Bad Pig]

Sparko's article was published on December 13th. Mine, written by the same guy, was published on the 16th. That Monday is referring to the 12th and the Friday refers to the 16th. Am I correct in supposing that you thought the Friday in my article referrer to the 9th for some reason?

No, I thought Sparko's article was from the 19th; I didn't think the assessment had been around that long, since it only really started being discussed here on Friday-ish.

I was obviously wrong in that assumption.