>
The reaction of the HRC camp would strongly indicate the content is authentic.
>
>Also, 3 sources now state that they can positively validate WikiLeaks claims. Now, security and these type of aspects of I.T. are not my strong suit. But right now there's a far more compelling case that the WikiLeaks dumps are authenticate.
>
>As for your question - clearly the HRC camp thought there was evidence. Now, whether or not their claim is true, I have no idea. My point is that those who smear the right for their concerns on voter fraud need to also remember that the HRC campaign raised the accusation against Obama.
>
>And by the way, I myself don't fear individual cases of voter fraud as much as I fear political parties engaging in ballot fraud. A few democrats got prison sentences for their part in election fraud during the 2008 Indiana Democratic primary.>
>Kevin - what you say makes sense but you are beating your head against the proverbial brick wall if you expect Victor to listen to anything you have to say, whether or not you can back it up. Victor keeps on drinking the same old kool aid....
Well, this next one goes a bit further. For those who rejected Project Veritas - there is now an admission that the "Donald Duck operation" might have come directly from the HRC campaign and possibly even HRC herself.
This doesn't mean I know with 100% certainty that HRC was behind it. But I no longer believe the claim that her campaign had no prior knowledge of this.
http://legalinsurrection.com/2016/10/video-democrat-operatives-admit-hillary-ordered-donald-duck-campaign/#more-188903http://projectveritasaction.com/video/rigging-election-video-iii-creamer-confirms-hillary-clinton-involvement
