How Democrats Manipulated Nevada State Party Convention Then Blamed Sanders For Chaos
Days after a convention in which leaders incited chaos and disorder, the Nevada State Democratic Party demonized supporters of Bernie Sanders in a letter written to the Democratic National Committee.
We believe, unfortunately, that the tactics and behavior on display here in Nevada are harbingers of things to come as Democrats gather in Philadelphia in July for our National Convention, declared Bradley S. Schrager, the state partys general counsel. We write to alert you to what we perceive as the Sanders campaigns penchant for extra-parliamentary behavior indeed, actual violence in place of democratic conduct in a convention setting, and furthermore what we can only describe as their encouragement of, and complicity in, a very dangerous atmosphere that ended in chaos and physical threats to fellow Democrats.
The letter written by leadership of the Nevada State Democratic Party appears to be an attempt to control the narrative, so that citizens throughout the United States view what happened at the convention as the result of violent Sanders delegates, who had no respect for the rules, and not as the result of anti-democratic conduct by the state party.
Nevada State Democratic Party leaders claim that the Sanders campaign has a penchant for violence,' Sanders said in a statement. That is nonsense. Our campaign has held giant rallies all across this country, including in high-crime areas, and there have been zero reports of violence.
Our campaign of course believes in non-violent change and it goes without saying that I condemn any and all forms of violence, including the personal harassment of individuals. But, when we speak of violence, I should add here that months ago, during the Nevada campaign, shots were fired into my campaign office in Nevada and apartment housing complex my campaign staff lived in was broken into and ransacked.
The Nevada State Democratic Party held its caucus on February 20, and Hillary Clinton won more pledged delegates. However, Nevada has a tiered system, where there are county-level conventions prior to the state convention. Delegates must show up, and when they dont, it produces an outcome, like what happened in Clark County, which flipped from having more Clinton delegates to more Sanders delegates at the county convention. This increased interest among Sanders supporters, who saw the state convention as a final opportunity to pick up more delegates for Sanders to send to the national convention.
According to several individuals, who were present, the Nevada State Democratic Party, led by chairwoman Roberta Lange, engaged in the following during the 15-hour convention:
MUCH MORE...DETAILED REPORT at:
The Hillary contingent represents the status quo and resistance to change.
I feel sorry for them, but eventually resisting change is futile.
Hillary and her supporters need to grow up and accept that young Democrats want change. They want an end to the corruption.
Hillary is not the one to end the corruption. The Democratic Party leadership needs to understand that.
They need to accept the change that is inevitable.
There is a lot more going on here than people upset with not winning more delegates. The Democratic Party establishment, especially the party leadership at state levels, has witnessed supporters pass motions in an effort to end superdelegates, which have gone against the will of the people in multiple states where Sanders won landslide victories. They do not want Sanders delegates to organize effectively and wield the process to advance their agenda. So, leaders, who back Clinton, have decided to engage in manipulation and obstruction at conventions to diminish the influence of Sanders supporters.
On top of that, the Nevada State Democratic Party and others, who militantly guard the status quo, cry out about the threat Sanders supporters pose to the Partys national convention scheduled for July. Their false alarm is dependent on the public not knowing all the shenanigans, which the Party has engaged in to improperly limit the influence of the Sanders campaign. For example, the Party has stacked the deck against the Sanders campaign by only appointing three of the 45 people he recommended for the Democratic National Convention committees. Critically, former Representative Barney Franka Clinton surrogate, who has been vitriolic in his criticism of Sanderswill co-chair the important Rules Committee.
Finally, it cannot be argued that Sanders never would have won the state convention in Nevada, and so it does not matter what the Democratic Party did to engineer a certain outcome. Why, then, did they go to all that trouble to stifle the influence of Sanders?
The answer is because the Democratic Party is confronted with a popular uprising that is raising expectations for change and forcing them to represent people over corporate or special interests. It threatens the very mechanisms, which the party uses to entrench a status quo that helps preserve their power. They do not appreciate being challenged and have opted to respond with authoritarian maneuvers to vilify and silence millions of people they expect to fall in line and support a nominee they are still struggling to anoint as the presidential nominee.