DNC was correct in their response, Sanders drops lawsuit.

[NCTraveler]

Audit confirms four individual accounts within the Sanders campaign accessed information on the Clinton campaign only. The Sanders campaign performed twenty five searches, targeting eleven states, and downloaded data; all directed at the Clinton campaign.

Clinton and O'Malley cleared as expected.

Sanders suit had no merit and had to be withdrawn.

[Lucinda]

1. KNR. I'm shocked, I tell ya!!!

[Hortensis]

51. Wish the continued lying through their teeth

was a shock. What? Bernie STEAL and LIE, FILE FAKE LAWSUITS? No way!!!

Profoundly dishonorable from beginning to end. Bernie earns a point for for consistency, which I'll apply to his bill.

[greiner3]

83. You're just nasty

[Hortensis]

92. And Sanders is run-of-the-mill honest/dishonest for

a politician. It's not really Sanders I mind, although this facet is hardly one of his admirable traits.

it's his zealous followers pretending he operates on an elevated plane while they constantly trash his more-honest opponent for dishonesty. It never occurs to them that perhaps they don't just live in glass houses but are themselves glass figurines. Figuratively speaking, of course.

[Number23]

84. How about these howling morons screaming that the investigation somehow VINDICATED Sanders??

What in the sweet, deep fried crispy hell are these fucking people smoking???!

[Lucinda]

86. I don't know...but it definitely seems to knock reality out cold!

[puffy socks]

88. Why drop the $75k lawsuit if they won?

Did this somehow undo the damage they said was done to his campaign?

[Number23]

93. That's exactly right. If they'd been "exonerated" then the lawsuit would have continued on

If you've been proven "right" that you were the victim of the horrible DLC, then why drop the lawsuit you had against them and their horribleness??

[JSup]

2. The integrity...

...wafting off of his campaign smells pretty ripe; someone should probably embalm or refrigerate it or something.

[Hoyt]

3. Yet, Sanders' campaign has spun the report to say they did no wrong and

And it was Clinton and DNC's fault.

[NurseJackie]

4. Clearly, they're LYING to cover their ass and ...

... do some damage control. Which itself causes even more self inflicted damage.

They just can't catch a break, can they?

[Hoyt]

76. It's really funny. Last night there were number of threads where they claimed report exonerated

Sanders' staff from any wrongdoing. That was obviously wrong.

I think they took the Sanders' press release -- which lied, saying the investigation exonerated them -- and didn't read any further. His supporters just took what the campaign said, without looking deeper. Of course, that is what his supporters have done on everything -- single payer, school debt, etc.

[NurseJackie]

77. They're like: "Except for the data we stole, NO DATA WAS STOLEN!" And ...

They're also like: "Not including the people who had access, NOBODY HAD ACCESS!"

[Number23]

85. It was nothing short of astonishing. The report says clearly that the campaign engaged in wrong doin

And that NO other campaign did.

But somehow, his fevered fans somehow see that as vindication and that he'd been exonerated. Apparently math isn't the only thing alot of these people have problems with.

[Hoyt]

87. Exactly.

[NCTraveler]

5. They timed their withdrawal for a Friday evening news dump...

And have one of the most unethical players involved spinning it. Nothing Weaver says should be taken as truth.

[Arkansas Granny]

6. OK, I'm not making any accusations, just asking a question.

Could this be the reason I have received emails from Bernie's campaign even though I have never given my name or address at his website or signed up for his newsletters? Or does the DNC provide Democratic candidates with list of likely voters?

Just curious.

[Renew Deal]

10. Probably not

Were you ever signed up with DFA or Move On? I've received Sanders junk a few times from both.

[moriah]

13. It's possible, but unlikely. I got signed up for numerous mailing lists almost at the same time.

I suspect that I signed some petition which led to my information being found and used by anyone searching for Democrats to email.

[yardwork]

16. Just being on the voting rolls gets you on all kinds of mailing lists.

I get emails every day from Bernie, Hillary, and lots of other politicians - including people out of state. I've never contributed to most of them.

[NurseJackie]

22. Voter rolls are public information, if I recall correctly ...

... and the candidates (local party orgs) can have access to those names and addresses along with information about whether or not they're active voters who reliably turn out for every election. The reliable and consistent voters are the ones whose names rise to the top of the list and who are selected to receive campaign literature, postcards and mailers.

I rarely provide my full given-name or maiden name for anything unless absolutely necessary... even when donating to candidates, parties or charities.

But my full given-name, maiden name, and married last name is how it's listed on my voter registration, and that's exactly how my name appears on the flyers and postcards I receive. My best guess is that the stuff you received was obtained legitimately through your local board of elections.

[Loudestlib]

7. .

"An independent investigation of the firewall failures in the DNC’s shared voter file database has definitively confirmed that the original claims by the DNC and the Clinton campaign were wholly inaccurate," the campaign said in a statement.

"The Sanders campaign never 'stole' any voter file data; the Sanders campaign never 'exported' any unauthorized voter file data; and the Sanders campaign certainly never had access to the Clinton campaign’s 'strategic road map.'

[NCTraveler]

9. Weaver is one of the most unethical players this campaign season.

Not one word of my op is incorrect.

[Loudestlib]

12. Describing an article he wrote for The American Spectator, a conservative magazine, in 1992,

which became the basis for his book on Ms. Hill, he said he did everything he could to ''ruin Hill's credibility,'' using ''virtually every derogatory and often contradictory allegation I had collected on Hill into the vituperative mix.''

''I demonized Democratic senators, their staffs, and Hill's feminist supporters without ever interviewing any of them,'' he continued.

[seabeyond]

20. Really? Wow. That alone should be a huge black eye on Sanders. I do not know who this man is

or the book you reference, but what a fucker.

[tonedevil]

46. The man...

bywho said those things isn't Jeff Weaver it's David Brock and the book is talking about him defaming Anita Hill when she was testifying at the confirmation of Justice Thomas. David Brock runs the PAC that is claiming to have worked the rules so it is OK for them to coordinate with Secretary Clinton's campaign. You have quite correctly identified him as a fucker. I have had a hard time understanding why Secretary Clinton would work with the man who said Anita Hill was a little bit nutty and a little bit slutty.

[merrily]

49. Jury voted to leave.

On Sat Apr 30, 2016, 10:40 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

The man...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1869938

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

This poster should be Tos'ed. Who is he to call a woman a "little bit slutty". Shame on him.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sat Apr 30, 2016, 10:44 AM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Ummm, it was David Brock who said Anita Hill was "a little bit nutty and a little bit slutty". Educate yourself before punching the Alert button
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Shame on you alerter. Brock said that, not the poster. That is very clear from reply 46.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Nothing wrong here.

[tonedevil]

52. Thanks...

I am having a hard time understanding how my comment could be read that way. Apparently 6 people on the jury couldn't see it either.

[merrily]

57. The alerter MAY have understood it was Brock's comment, but took a shot at fooling a jury anyway.

Or not.

Hard to tell these days.

[Renew Deal]

11. That's from Weaver. It is not the official finding.

Sanders camp is lying again.

[yardwork]

14. This was the turning point for me. I lost a lot of respect for Sanders and he never got it back.

I think that when we look back at election 2016, analysts will note that the Sanders' campaign was greatly hurt by poor campaign leadership. In addition to breaking laws and flailing around blaming everybody else, Sanders' campaign leadership created the negative tone of his campaign, which is reflected in the poor behavior of some Sanders supporters and campaign surrogates.

[Betty Karlson]

15. DNC massively overreacted, confirms independent investigation:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511868381

[sufrommich]

17. That sugar coated explanation is a press release

from the Sanders campaign.

[NCTraveler]

19. That is a campaign release.

Sanders suit had no merit.

[rhett o rick]

26. The DNC froze the Sanders access to their own data. The lawsuit was to get access

unfrozen. The investigation proved that the DNC overreacted when they froze access.

[NCTraveler]

28. It did just the opposite.

Sanders dropped his suit as it had no merit.

Four individual accounts, twenty-five searches, eleven states, info downloaded.

All directed at the Clinton campaign.

Clinton and O'Malley cleared.

[rhett o rick]

30. The lawsuit was to get access to their own data and they got that so they dropped

the lawsuit. The other data you are giving is from the DNC/Clinton campaign.

[seabeyond]

31. They got it a couple days later. Dropped the law suit 4 or more months later. Your theory fails.

[bettyellen]

81. bullshit- they got access ages ago. try another theory!

[merrily]

50. LINK? If the lawsuit was to get access and he got access, saying the lawsuit had no merit is wrong.

[seabeyond]

60. If the law suit was about access, then he would have dropped it the next day, not over 4 months.

[merrily]

62. Sorry, you are mistaken (Imagine that!). The investigation Sanders requested just wrapped up.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1280188442

If you or the other poster were correct, you would be able to link to something showing the suit was dismissed for the reason you claim. You can't, but that didn't stop you from doubling down, now, did it?

[seabeyond]

65. Sanders people stole, then sued and now spins.

[merrily]

70. No stealing, no spin AT ALL from me! The post to which I linked you contains links to

two news sources that support what the post says,and what Sanders said. You, however, have posted nothing but unsupported smears.

[seabeyond]

72. Stealin'

[merrily]

74. Nope. The DNC investigation found otherwise.

I know how much that must upset those whose very existence seems to depend on mudslinging lies and half truths at Sanders, but I can't help it.

[seabeyond]

75. He stole. We knew it then with a pathetic law suit, we know it now. Cheated.

[puffy socks]

91. Not true.

The DNC had already given Sanders access and he sued anyway.

from think progress:
"Eventually, the DNC suspended Sanders’ access to the voter file. One day later, the DNC and Sanders came to a deal, and Sanders’ access to the voter file was restored.

Still, the Sanders’ campaign sued, arguing that the DNC overreacted by suspending their access, and had harmed their ability to campaign on an equal playing field with Clinton. Moreover, Sanders’ attorneys argued that the DNC broke its contract with the campaign, which stated that the DNC must give notice before suspending access to information. The campaign is seeking $75,000 in damages.

“The DNC, in an inappropriate overreaction, has denied us access to our own data,” Sanders campaign Weaver said at the time. “In other words, the leadership of the Democratic National Committee is actively trying to undermine our campaign.”



Why would the Sanders campaign now drop the suit if they were "proven" to be correct?

[seabeyond]

21. I think DNC and Clinton especially behaved the very opposite of what you described. Clinton

pretty much treated Sanders with kid gloves thru out that whole thing. Not only did Sanders people steal, but then Sanders threw his tantrums.

[Betty Karlson]

23. Sanders made one big mistake: saying "the American people are sick and tired of hearing

about Clinton's e-mails".

He should have let her dig her own grave on television - that way the impending GE disaaster could have been averted.

We are not sick and tired of some e-mails, but we are sick and tired of a corrupt establishment's secret deals. Some of which were in those e-mails.

[seabeyond]

24. So, deflect his theft with rw smear? No surprise you feel that. The funny though? Sanders was trying

snark, and Clinton took it a different direction. That one was a classic.

[Betty Karlson]

36. So Sanders gracious and gentlemanly behaviour now counts as "snark"?

I see projection is still reaching new levels in Hill-bully-land.

[seabeyond]

39. His people admit he was trying to throw a jab and was really bothered that Clinton twisted

it as she did.

Take it to mean whatever way you choose to interpret.

[Betty Karlson]

94. Which of his people claimed that? All the media agreed he threw her a bone!

More lies and more spin - it's all we get from the Clinton camp these days.

[JTFrog]

34. For fuck's sake.

His one big mistake was using the party for media and money and then trying to steal from them on top of it. I can't imagine that endeared him to the party leadership or the supers that he keeps complaining about. Just saying...

[seabeyond]

40. Way back in New Hampshire a Democratic official, super delegate threw out there, Sanders might stop

insulting them if he really was looking for their vote. He didn't listen, of course.

[Betty Karlson]

95. Criticing and insulkting are two different things.

If the superdelegate was so thin0skinned that he didn't want to be criticised at all, I'm not surprised Sanders ignored him. That super sounds almost as delusional as Clinton's self-image.

[bigtree]

18. so Sanders' is the ONLY campaign found to be cheating in this primary

...I want details on who did what, and who knew what when.

[rhett o rick]

25. Your information is from what the DNC is saying about the investigation. They have not

released the investigation. The DNC is heavily biased for the Clinton campaign.

"An independent investigation of the firewall failures in the DNC’s shared voter file database has definitively confirmed that the original claims by the DNC and the Clinton campaign were wholly inaccurate,"

The reason for the firewall failing has not been determined.

[NCTraveler]

27. You believe this to be inaccurate information?

Sanders dropped his suit. Had no merit. Four individual accounts were involved in the breach, twenty-five individual searches, eleven states, Sanders fired people, and you are calling conspiracy.

I don't envy the position you feel you have to argue here. Sanders and Weaver have put you in a tough spot with their campaigns highly unethical behavior.

[rhett o rick]

29. The suit was to regain access to their own data which the DNC has now allowed so the

suit was dropped. The data you are quoting is from the DNC which is corrupted by Big Money. I believe that the Big Money behind the Clinton campaign will do anything to keep a progressive out of the WH. If the Sanders campaign is guilty of anything it's not anticipating how low the Billionaires will stoop to win.

I remember when all Democrats were against the influence of Big Money like Goldman-Sachs and the Koch Bros. but now some are embracing it. Selling out the Party to the Wealthy. When they are done we will be just like Haiti.

[seabeyond]

32. And Sanders will do anything to get the WH, like steal?

[NCTraveler]

33. I understand why you fell you have to do this.

[rhett o rick]

42. I will continue to fight the control of our government by the billionaires and Wall Street that

you guys are so proud to side with. I bet you will rationalize future increases in jobless, homeless and poverty rates as not your fault but the fault of the bad Republicons. You side with those that are raiding our jobs, taking away our homes, send our families off to die for profits and yet you gloat. Well gloat as you will, but the People's movement will continue in spite of the pressure from the Rich and Powerful.

We are fighting to end poverty, what are you fighting for? Bigger Goldman-Sachs profits. rhetorical question.

[NCTraveler]

54. You are promoting known campaign theft.

You are promoting campaign corruption.

O'Malley and Clinton have taken the high road.

Sanders campaign. Four individual user accounts, twenty-five searches, eleven states, information exported. All directed at the Clinton campaign.

[rhett o rick]

56. What's sad is that you have sided with the Rich And Powerful and disparage

those that are fighting for the 99%. We are fighting an honest campaign and America knows it. Most Americans recognize that the Powers That Be / Clinton campaign can't be trusted.

[NCTraveler]

59. Twenty-five searches, four users, eleven states.

Weaver then sends out an extremely deceptive press release in a Friday evening news dump. He has no ethics. They dropped the suit as it has no merit. Most of us were well aware of that months ago.

Clinton and O'Malley cleared.

[seabeyond]

61. No ethics. No integrity. Nt

[NCTraveler]

63. +1

Weaver is trying to make a name for himself.

[rhett o rick]

64. That's what most Americans feel about Clinton. She did betray her party and

country when she chose to back the Republcons in the Iraq War.

[seabeyond]

66. Sanders backed it also in all ways but one vote.

[rhett o rick]

67. The suit was dropped when the DNC unfroze the Sanders campaign access to their own data.

That was the purpose of the suit and they succeeded. The DNC is an arm of the Clinton campaign and is using it's influence to buy super-delegate support. No integrity. But your Rich and Power friends will literally do anything to keep a progressive out of the WH. How can you say you support the 2.5 million homeless children when you back Goldman-Sachs and the Koch Bros. Authoritarian Adulation, I guess.

You go gloat and ridicule elsewhere, I am done with you. Bob-Bye

[sufrommich]

68. What? The DNC allowed them access the day after the breach.

The suit was dropped yesterday.

[seabeyond]

69. "The suit was dropped when the DNC unfroze" Not even close to truth, any truth. How do you do that?

[rhett o rick]

71. How do you rationalize siding with the Bankster wing of our party.

Here's what Michelle Alexander thinks of Clinton:

“Far from resisting the emergence of the new caste system, Clinton escalated the drug war beyond what conservatives had imagined possible a decade earlier. As the Justice Policy Institute has observed, “the Clinton Administration’s ‘tough on crime’ policies resulted in the largest increases in federal and state prison inmates of any president in American history.”99 Clinton eventually moved beyond crime and capitulated to the conservative racial agenda on welfare. This move, like his “get tough” rhetoric and policies, was part of a grand strategy articulated by the “new Democrats” to appeal to the elusive white swing voters. In so doing, Clinton—more than any other president—created the current racial undercaste. He signed the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, which “ended welfare as we know it,” replacing Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) with a block grant to states called Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF). TANF imposed a five-year lifetime limit on welfare assistance, as well as a permanent, lifetime ban on eligibility for welfare and food stamps for anyone convicted of a felony drug offense—including simple possession of marijuana.”
― Michelle Alexander, The New Jim Crow

[seabeyond]

73. Divert! Divert!!!! How do you say Sanders dropped the suit when he got access?

[NCTraveler]

78. No one is going to believe what you are selling.

Your first two sentences highlight that to even the most casual of observers.

[JTFrog]

35. Koch Bros., Karl Rove and Preibus are funding anti-Hillary propaganda and taking steps

to help Sanders.

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/republicans-offer-unsolicited-support-bernie-sanders

[rhett o rick]

38. Koch Bros have endorsed Clinton. She agrees with the Repubs on 90% of the issues.

Most Americans feel she is untrustworthy.

[seabeyond]

41. your post is 90% bullshit. I am see lots of just pulling whatever number.

[rhett o rick]

43. The Koch Bros recognize that a Clinton presidency will be a boon for the Wealth and Powerful.

Black Lives Matter see it differently.

“Here's the truth: the Clinton legacy has left our prisons bursting at the seams. Real lives have been destroyed as a result. It is an indisputable fact that millions of Black people were locked up for drug crimes and provided the bodies for the expansion of the prison industry.

The 1994 Crime Bill that she so vigorously defended not only expanded incarceration, but stripped funding for college education from prisoners. The Clinton legacy allowed for policies that prevented anyone convicted of a felony drug offense from receiving food stamps or income assistance. Clinton-led welfare reform fundamentally ripped apart the social safety net.”

“Make no mistake, Hillary Clinton's efforts to push these policies resulted in the continued destruction of Black communities and the swift growth of our mass incarceration crisis.”

A vote for Clinton is a vote for more Prisons For Profits.

[seabeyond]

45. Kock brothers cheered Sanders too. You are into playing their game?

[rhett o rick]

47. the billionaires love Clinton, the neocons love Clinton, Prisons For Profits love Clinton.

BLM not so much. Most Americans don't trust her. She did lie about the need to go to war with Iraq.

We are fighting for those struggling in the 99%, for the 50 million Americans living in poverty, for the 2.5 million children that are homeless. What are you fighting for besides larger profits for Wall Street? rhetorical

[JTFrog]

44. No they have not, but you keep telling yourself that if it helps you sleep at night. n/t

[rhett o rick]

48. "POLL: Voters don't trust Hillary Clinton"

http://www.businessinsider.com/poll-voters-dont-trust-hillary-clinton-2015-5?op=1

She stood side by side with Bush and told us Iraq had WMD. She lied when we needed her to stand up to the bastard Republicons.

[wendylaroux]

37. the dnc said? lol fuck that's good stuff. lol

[leftinportland]

53. Search results were NOT downloaded!

You apparently did not read the DNC press release. The search results were saved within the VoteBuilder database. There is an enormous difference between saving within a database and downloading. You either do not understand complex relational databases or are furthering this lie on purpose.

[NCTraveler]

55. You are wrong. NH.

They exported data. That is known.

[ismnotwasm]

58. K&R

[Scurrilous]

79. K & R

[Maru Kitteh]

80. K & R

[Starry Messenger]

82. k&r

Eleven states. Jesus.

[riversedge]

89. DNC was correct in their response, @BernieSanders drops Baseless lawsuit

Tweet
DNC was correct in their response, @BernieSanders drops Baseless lawsuit http://demu.gr/12511869141 #feeftheBern #ImwithHer

[snowy owl]

90. says who?