As far as I know, the emails have not been disputed. They aren't doctored and are what actually was sent. This is factual information that does make the DNC look bad, because frankly, it was really bad.
"Dismiss evidence that makes Trump look bad out of hand"
What evidence? This is what I'm talking about. There are claims that it's the Russian government with no actual facts besides a trail that ends at a sordid VPN service.
There are plenty of other things that Trump says to make him look bad, I don't need even more evidence based on hearsay and opinion.
If we let things like this go on, a Sanders candidate will never have a future. If someone is bad, let the facts speak for themselves.
> This is factual information that does make the DNC look bad, because frankly, it was really bad.
Yes, a lot of people have been very insistent that a lot of things in those emails make the DNC look really really bad. I've even seen them referred to as treasonous.
Strangely, not a lot of people actually bother to mention specifics about what, in those emails, we're supposed to be outraged over, only that we're supposed to be outraged.
Don't get me wrong, I'm no Hillary fan by any means, but the obvious attempt at propaganda is obvious, when every attempt to discuss the possible Russian connection to the DNC hacks, and Trump's links to Putin and Russia (whatever the smoke to fire ratio might be, there) is met with immediate attempts to change the subject to Clinton and the DNC emails.
"Dismiss evidence that makes Trump look bad out of hand"
What evidence? This is what I'm talking about. There are claims that it's the Russian government with no actual facts besides a trail that ends at a sordid VPN service.
There are plenty of other things that Trump says to make him look bad, I don't need even more evidence based on hearsay and opinion.
If we let things like this go on, a Sanders candidate will never have a future. If someone is bad, let the facts speak for themselves.