Actually, what they are presenting has all the signs of a False Flag operation.

Since Sanders has very little chance of winning the nomination anymore, they have shifted from secretly supporting him to trying to stir up as much bad blood as possible between his supporters and the Clinton campaign. Clinton would have absolutely no reason to pull the things they're accusing her of since she's winning anyway. What do they think she would gain by shutting down a few Bernie Facebook groups at this point in the race?

HRC supporters may also end up voting for Bernie.

I cant see any areas where that would be a negative outcome for them and can see some big areas where it would mean much better outcomes for them.

I mean hundreds of thousands of dollars better!

There are 5 primary races today...3 of which (Delaware, Maryland, and Pennsylvania) have been only loosely-polled (They've been long assumed to be solidly in the Clinton basket) and a 4th (Connecticut) in which changes in the circumstances on the ground over the past week may or may not have had a sea-change effect. (Our widely-disliked Democratic governor reaffirmed his endorsement of Clinton one day before releasing the pink-slips of some 15,000 state employees to be laid-off so he can avoid further raising taxes on wealthy residents and businesses. Part of this involved necessarily reneging on union contracts. To say this has harmed opinions of Clinton would be accurate (guilt by association; we heard it in in-person interviews on the news from polling places around the state)...but has it hurt her votes? )

If Sanders were to decisively win 3 or 4 of them, it probably reverses the "It's pretty much over" narrative from last week following NY and keeps the race more-open going all the way to "Super June" 7th.

So, I'm not accusing the Clinton camp of anything...this seems more like the juvenile efforts of non-affiliated partisans (This seems less like something adults would do and more like "H4X0|~ 9i9th-graders 4 Clinton" or "random Facebook assholes for Clinton.&quot ...but they would potentially benefit from this action.

SBS (Senator Bernie Sanders), or something else, other than BS?

I didn't particularly like the "BHO" for Obama because it seemed like it was used to be racist about his middle name, but calling him BO wasn't exactly kind either, so I dealt.

Just to be nice?

BSers... Better?

its a commonly used abbreviation for the British Queen.

I used to have a tendency to use Brit expressions a lot when it seems appropriate. Its fading away now but I still find myself doing it on occasion.

... my suggestion for anyone in 2008 defending the fact "to call a spade a spade" as an idiom had a far longer history than European enslavement of Africans was to use, instead:

"Call a spade a bloody shovel"....

But I suppose some of our bigger cannabis enthusiasts up here think of Butane Hash Oil.

I may be a Hillary supporter, but I have been hopeful for civility, and the best way to make it happen is lead by example.

I agree BSer is wrong, too, just still feeling like showing a bit more respect. And Wiki doesn't even have his middle name showing right now thwt I can find....

Oh well.

Presidents in that fashion, or at least the ones we like.

BS, I agree, is deliberate, but there's a lot of low level neener neener bullshit- from both sides. I support your call for civility and echo it.

I generally refer to Hillary Clinton as "Hillary Clinton" or "HRC" or "Secretary Clinton" or maybe "Hillary" for short. I don't think I've resorted to name-calling at her in that fashion.

We usually say "Hillary and Bernie", and there might just not have been enough room in the title.

But some peoples' track record speaks for itself.

Who are those people, and why do they hate the Clintons with the heat of a thousand suns?

.... that immediately blaming this on actual Hillary supporters (or, as many articles and posts have, David Brock, Correct The Record, and Hillary herself) is perhaps premature.

Here's the statement from the group naming who they think actually was the one to start this appalling event.

http://www.bros4hillary.com/statement-from-b4h-leadership/

News at 7:00!

Which is true.

It should be relatively easy for Facebook to track who did what, and when. It certainly seems they anything goes, and now that that trigger has been pulled there's no telling how this cyber warfare plays out.

K and R