Harry Reid On Bernie And The DNC: Everybody Knew That This Was Not A Fair Deal

[think]

Harry Reid On Bernie And The DNC: ‘Everybody Knew That This Was Not A Fair Deal’

By Ryan Grim - 07/27/2016 05:52 pm ET

~Snip~

Reid, a Democrat from Nevada, made his comments in response to a question about whether his party had a Plan B if something truly disqualifying emerged about Hillary Clinton in future email dumps.

“No,” he told The Huffington Post, but went on to talk about the DNC communications released so far in what appears to be a Russian-orchestrated hack.

“Debbie Wasserman Schultz, she’s always been good to me. I like her just fine,” Reid said. “I know she’s tried hard, but as some people probably know, I thought Bernie deserved somebody that was not critical to[ward] him. I knew ― everybody knew ― that this was not a fair deal. So I’m sorry she had to resign, but it was the right thing to do. She just should’ve done it sooner.”

As DNC chair, Wasserman Schultz had scheduled many of the primary debates on weekends, when viewership was likely to be lower. Without the opportunity to debate in front of large audiences, it’s difficult for an insurgent candidate to gain traction against an established rival.

Read More:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/harry-reid-bernie-sanders-dnc_us_5799259fe4b02d5d5ed42db6

Donna Brazile is totally not sorry for leaking CNN debate questions to Hillary Clinton

By Callum Borchers November 7

Donna Brazile is not apologizing for leaking CNN debate questions and topics to the Hillary Clinton campaign during the Democratic primary. Her only regret, it seems, is that she got caught.

“My conscience — as an activist, a strategist — is very clear,” the interim chair of the Democratic National Committee said Monday during a satellite radio interview with liberal activist and SiriusXM host Joe Madison. She added that “if I had to do it all over again, I would know a hell of a lot more about cybersecurity.”

In other words, Brazile would have made sure that her improper disclosures — which prompted CNN to drop her as an analyst — would not show up in hacked emails published by WikiLeaks. The lesson, apparently, is to pick up the phone or perhaps meet John Podesta in a dark alleyway....

Read more:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/11/07/donna-brazile-is-totally-not-sorry-for-leaking-cnn-debate-questions-to-hillary-clinton/?utm_term=.a4e4621a01a1

O’Malley challenges DNC over 'rigged' debate schedule

BY BRADFORD RICHARDSON - 08/28/15 03:41 PM EDT

Former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley thinks the Democratic Party’s decision to limit the number of primary debates is tantamount to rigging the nomination process.

“Four debates and only four debates — we are told, not asked — before voters in our earliest states make their decision,” the presidential candidate said at the Democratic National Committee (DNC) Summer Meeting on Friday.

“This sort of rigged process has never been attempted before,” he added. “One debate in Iowa. That’s it. One debate in New Hampshire. That’s all we can afford.”...

Read more:
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/dem-primaries/omalley-dnc-debbie-schultz-awkward-debates

Howard Dean 'shocked and incredibly disappointed' over DNC emails

By LOUIS NELSON 07/26/16 07:25 AM EDT

Former Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean said he was “shocked and incredibly disappointed” by hacked internal DNC emails that led to the resignation of Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

~Snip~

“I don't want to knock Debbie. I've always admired her as a human being, but this is not something the DNC ever should have done,” Dean said. “We had a really strict rule. We are so strict that I did not vote in the Vermont primary at all, because voting for somebody and keeping your mouth shut is not the same as being neutral.”

“So you’re shocked by some of these emails?” host Joe Scarborough offered.

“I am shocked and incredibly disappointed because I know some of the people involved. I just don't understand how that could happen. I really don't,” Dean replied.

Dean offered praise for Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii), who resigned from her position within the DNC to endorse Sanders and campaign on his behalf as a surrogate. He said Gabbard’s decision to resign was “the right thing to do.”...

Read more:
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/dnc-emails-howard-dean-226199

Jim Webb: "Good for Bernie. The DNC is nothing more than an arm for the Clinton campaign."

https://twitter.com/JimWebbUSA/status/677928400787546112?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

[elleng]

2. TOO many.

[think]

3. I'm not sure anyone can say it any clearer than Harry Reid did. But perhaps some haven't had a

chance read these articles yet.

[George II]

8. "Facts", or opinion?

[BainsBane]

34. What facts?

Last edited Sun Dec 4, 2016, 05:27 AM - Edit history (1)

That DNC emails from May showed some of them favored Clinton? Or that the votes of the 16 million Democrats who chose Clinton don't matter?

[LisaM]

4. I liked the weekend debates and they got high ratings.

I am on the West Coast and could not get home in time for debates on weeknights. I am glad they had some that came on when I could watch.

[think]

6. The DNC introduced a new exclusivity rule which forbid candidates from attending non DNC sanctioned

debates.

If not for that rule there would have been many more debates for people to see.

Martin O’Malley raises legal questions with Democratic debate plan


By Alex Seitz-Wald - 08/11/15 10:05 AM—UPDATED 08/11/15 05:01 PM

~Snip~

“Shame on us as a party if the DNC tries to limit debate.”

Sandler — O’Malley’s lawyer who served as general counsel to the DNC from 1993 through 2008, first in-house and then through his law firm — also says the party has never used an exclusivity clause in the past.

“Although the DNC announced a schedule of sanctioned debates both in 2004 and 2008, it has never before attempted to require debate sponsors to exclude any recognized candidate as punishment for participating in non-sanctioned debates,” wrote Sandler. All major candidates in 2008, including Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, participated in unsanctioned debates, he said.

After the DNC announced the schedule of it debates last week, O’Malley launched a crusade against the party to increase the number of debates. “Shame on us as a party if the DNC tries to limit debate,” O’Malley said on msnbc Monday. “I believe we need more debates, not fewer debates. And I think it’s outrageous, actually, that the DNC would try to make this process decidedly undemocratic.”....

Read more:
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/martin-omalley-raises-legal-questions-democratic-debate-plan

In 2007 we had 13 debates in the spring and summer. In 2015 we had our ZERO debates in the same time frame. Our first debate in 2015 was in October.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_presidential_debates_and_forums,_2008

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_presidential_debates_and_forums,_2016

[George II]

9. How many DECLARED candidates did we have in the summer of 2007 vs 2015, and how many were Democrats?

[think]

12. 13 debates in 2007 before the 1st debate took place in the same time frame in 2015.

That's a significant difference in the EARLY part of the primary regardless of how many participants there were.

[George II]

57. Two totally different "dynamics" in the campaigns - 2007/2008 was nothing like...

....2015/2016. It makes no sense to try to compare the two.

First, if the debates started in the "same time frame" in 2015, Sanders wouldn't even have been there - he declared his candidacy three days after the date of the 2007 debate. Then we'd have heard the complaints from the Sanders camp "they started too early"!!!!

Second, by the time of the third debate in 2015/2016, in 2008 there were only three of the eight candidates remaining, and only two a week later.

Finally, in 2007/2008 all the declared candidates were Democrats.

[think]

58. Even O'Malley called the debate process rigged. Was O'Malley wrong too? /nt

[Iggo]

5. Thanks, Debbie!

[progressoid]

7. My wife agrees.

And she was a Hillary supporter over Bernie.

[George II]

10. My wife doesn't agree.

[stone space]

26. My wife doesn't care one way or the other. (nt)

[TheLibIn615]

55. I don't have a wife.

[mcar]

72. I'm a wife

I don't agree.

[nini]

13. Maybe if Bernie was a Democrat before needing the DNC it would've been different.

[think]

15. Bernie chose to run within the party and had every right to. O'Malley was also upset at how it was

So was another Democrat Jim Webb who ran.

And the DNC was suppose to be impartial to all those candidates. Were they not?

Over 12 million Democrats voted for Bernie Sanders. The DNC was suppose to be representing their interests and respecting their candidate. That did not happen.

And Bernie ran on very strong Democratic issues. It's not like he was promoting right wing values. He's caucused with the Democrats since the early 90's. Rather than running outside the party and risk being a spoiler Bernie chose to run within the party for unity as he continues to do.

[NWCorona]

65. Too bad he was allowed to run as a Dem huh?

[tblue37]

80. Bernie chose not to go third party because that would throw the election to the GOP.

He initially ran just to push the discussion to the left in the Dem primary, not expecting to be at all competitive.

[Shemp Howard]

14. Dean needs to get back into the race for DNC chair.

We need him.

[LovingA2andMI]

28. Umm....

No, we don't. Keith Ellison will do just fine. Thank you!

[SidDithers]

16. Poor Bernie...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512641260




Sid

[think]

17. It was Debbie Wasserman Schultz that was forced to resign. Bernie chose to ignore all that the DNC

did for the sake of party unity.

And the appreciation here for him doing so has been so heart warming....

[nini]

22. Oh please.. party unity?

JFC.. he was worse than the right half the time bashing the party.

[NWCorona]

67. Sour grapes

[JudyM]

78. Why bother? I think there's an endemic emotional incapacitation... reduced to blaming even in the

face of disprobative facts.

[cloudbase]

82. It's a whole lot easier than engaging in serious introspection. n/t

[NWCorona]

66. Poor Bernie? He's stronger than ever!

[otohara]

75. Sanders Meaningless Tweets & Demands Will Be Ignored by GOP

I don't know how he will be stronger than ever after helping Trump win.

[NWCorona]

79. He's getting more coverage that almost any other Dem right now.

[SMC22307]

18. Geez, even Jim Webb's in on the action. (n/t)

[Warren DeMontague]

19. Medical marijuana passed with over 70% in FL. DWS supports putting medical mj patients in prison.

I wonder if that might have been a bit counter productive to Hillary winning that state?

[ALBliberal]

20. The overall result of limiting debate was.to under expose our candidates. And our

candidates were so good. Meanwhile the Republicans got so much coverage and Trump fostered his following. DNC shooting itself in the foot. Many voters were very angry and turned off. DNC should have stayed out of it...in preferencing HRC they stifled voter interest and ultimately turnout across the board.

[think]

24. It was frustrating watching the GOP have debates while the DNC promoted a GOP watch party game

and encouraged Democrats to watch the Republican debates. That's right. The DNC was actually encouraging Democrats to watch the GOP debates while we had none scheduled during that time.

I couldn't believe it. The GOP got to control the message while we sat on our hands.

We had our first debate on October 13th 2015:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_presidential_debates_and_forums,_2016#Tuesday_October_13.2C_2015_.E2.80.93_Las_Vegas.2C_Nevada


This was the GOP watch party game the DNC was promoting on the DNC website in July of 2015:

https://web.archive.org/web/20150725191956/http://store.democrats.org/products/gop-debate-watch-party-pack



?v=1437576700

[ALBliberal]

30. So frustrating. We should have showcased

Our candidates. And we would have compared very nicely to those bozos.

It was indefensible esp. when compared to the number of debates in 2007. A turn off for sure.

[elmac]

21. The perfect storm

DNC incompetence, GOP election fraud, Putins FBI, Big money swaying elections, this election was doomed from the start. Won't be much left to fight for in 4 years.

[SHRED]

23. And Obama appears unwilling...

...to release the hack info regarding Russia.

Why?
Why protect something that has fucked our Party?

[jalan48]

25. But if you need a Pay Day loan, Debbie's your gal!

[CajunBlazer]

27. BFD!!!

As in "BIG FUCKING DEAL!!!". So Democrats didn't like Bernie's candidacy and didn't want him to win. Who's fault is that? Bernie has been a fixture in Washington for since 1991 - that's 25 years for those who aren't good at math - and he had all that time to make friends and allies and cultivate supporters within the Democratic Party for his primary run. So why was "everyone against him"?

Maybe because from the start he was never a party member, though since he would have been completely isolated otherwise, he always caucused with the Democrats. Maybe it was because during his entire stint in Washington he chose to be an outsider, working with the Democrats only when it pleased him. Maybe it was because he has always been as critical of his Democratic colleagues as he was of the Republicans. Maybe it was because he had the gall to run for the Democratic nomination as an independent, trying to be the nominee of a party he never joined; I'm frankly surprised they even let him into the race.

Bernie lost fair and square. Nothing anyone did or tried top do deprived him of the nomination. In fact I can't point to a single primary in which he received the most votes from Democratic Party members. When he won primaries it was because he received the votes of independents who consider themselves too liberal to belong to the party and because he was the favorite of college age kids and other young people suffering under the crushing debt of their college loans. Why, because Bernie promised them government handouts which he could have never delivered even if he had won the Presidency.

Bernie and his supporters spent most of the primary season bitching and moaning about how unfair the super delegates were. However, in the end ironically it was the the super delegates which allow him to pretend that he still had a slim chance to win during the last set of primaries and on into the convention. Otherwise, the race would have been over after the California primary. And by the way, most Democrats didn't appreciate the fact the Bernie refused to concede after it was clear that he had been beaten and many of us were very disappointed that Bernie chose to make his REVOLUTION primary above all other considerations.

But here is the bottom line - it is long past time to quit re-fighting the primaries. If Democrats don't bury the hatchet and unite without acrimony we will have no chance in 2018 or in 2020.

[LovingA2andMI]

29. This Right Here....Thank You!!

But here is the bottom line - it is long past time to quit re-fighting the primaries. If Democrats don't bury the hatchet and unite without acrimony we will have no chance in 2018 or in 2020.

[murielm99]

31. This should be an OP.

We should all stop beating the dead fucking horse called the primaries.

Bernie lost. Hillary was the nominee. Bernie went back to being an independent as quickly a he could. I am sick of Bernie supporters. They stalked Hillary supporters off this board, bullied people on social media, and they still won't quit whining about how unfair everything is. Life is not fair. Get used to it!

Thank you, thank you, thank you for this post.

[think]

32. Life is not fair but the DNC was suppose to be. I'd prefer getting use to the DNC being the neutral

party it is suppose to be.

If the DNC had chosen to align with O'Malley and favor him Hillary supporters would just get over that right?

If the DNC fed questions to O'Malley before debates that would be no big deal?

If the DNC had discussed using Hillary's religion against her that shouldn't matter?

If the DNC had used surrogates to suggest that Hillary's supporters were violent that wouldn't be a big deal either would it.

DNC Communications Director Ordered Anti-Sanders Article Be Shared 'Without Attribution'

Hannah Gold - 07/23/16 05:30PM
Filed to: DNC HACK


On Friday, Wikileaks published an email exchange between Western Regional Communicators Director for the Democratic Party Walter Garcia and DNC Communications Director Luis Miranda, in which Miranda requests an article critical of Bernie Sanders be covertly shared, “without attribution” to the DNC.



https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/756968126001115136?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw


The article, by Nevada political reporter Jon Ralston, pushed a narrative that Bernie Sanders supporters were becoming violent and out of control and that Sanders was partly responsible.

The article was published on May 17, one day after the New York Times reported that Sanders supporters threw chairs at the Nevada Democratic Party’s convention and threatened the convention’s chairwoman, Roberta Lange.

http://gawker.com/dnc-communications-director-ordered-anti-sanders-articl-1784191906

And the story wasn't even true

http://www.snopes.com/did-sanders-supporters-throw-chairs-at-nevada-democratic-convention/




What Comey did to Hillary was unfair. The FBI also is suppose to be a neutral party.

Should we just accept that sometimes the FBI might decide to use it's authority to sway an election and accept it?

I would think people would want to make sure it doesn't happen again. I bet some people might even post how WRONG it was for Comey to do such a thing right here in this forum!

For what it's worth i think Comey should step down ASAP. His conduct was horrendous and the damage he caused can never be undone. Likewise the damage by the DNC can never be undone as well.

[mythology]

56. The problem is by that point, Sanders had no viable path to the nomination

So it didn't influence the outcome of the primaries.

Donna Brazile gave a question in the general election debates. That's bad and she should have been fired both from CNN and the DNC for it. But it didn't influence the primaries.

The other issue is that you had people discussing things that then didn't act on. I've had all sorts of ideas that turn out to not be good, but should at least be thought about. The DNC should think about the potential weaknesses of a candidate. It's not like Republicans wouldn't think about our candidate's potential weaknesses and I think campaigns can be too insulated to see their own flaws.

[think]

60. The DNC COVERTLY pushed a false story that Sanders supporters were violent & throwing chairs

in Nevada.

They didn't just think about doing this. The DNC acted upon it. They chose to push a fake news story to smear Sanders supporters. Some people even here probably still believe that event happened.

And this is the DNC smearing the Democrats who voted for Sanders not just the candidate himself. The DNC is suppose to represent the Democratic voters not plot against them.

And we all know that the debate schedule was created to favor Clinton from the very beginning to reduce access and visibility for the lesser candidates. So the viability thing is non starter as the DNC didn't just do things that were wrong after it was too late.

The DNC had been doing things to favor Clinton from the very start thus helping making the results come out in Hillary's favor and that obviously hurt Sanders, O'Malley, Webb, and Chaffee.

[bettyellen]

61. The guy was threatening to throw a chair and those who were intimidating attendees

Should have been tossed out in their asses. The story got exaggerated but the intimidation of fellow voters happened. It was shameful. Especially since the primary was over at that point.

[otohara]

71. Hillary for Prison Was a Big Hit With Diehard Sanders Fans at DNC

"Lock Her Up" was started by Sanders supporters...

Anti-Hillary, pro-Bernie protesters who rallied outside the perimeter at the Wells Fargo Center on Monday afternoon frequently chanted “Fuck Hillary, Fuck Trump!” with equal servings of “Lock Her Up!” Multiple Sanders fans at the organized protest proudly raised placards and sported T-shirts reading “Hillary for Prison.”

“She’s the worst—worse than Trump in my opinion. She’s clearly owned by the bankers,” one Bernie supporter, wearing a “Prison” shirt, told The Daily Beast on Monday. “She’s a puppet of the military-industrial complex.”

Repurposed Bernie supporter sign: "We must rise to get her to prison"

The spillover of the extreme “Hillary For Prison” maxim into certain corners of the left is an episode in this presidential election that, at the very least, plays into Trump’s bizarre, big-tent narrative.


http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/07/26/hillary-for-prison-is-a-big-hit-with-diehard-sander

[think]

76. The actions of a few Sanders supporters AFTER learning about the DNC cheating justifies the cheating

by leaders of the DNC?

You bet Bernie Sanders supporters were pissed off. They knew DWS and the DNC were cheating and the emails right before the convention proved it.

You may have forgot that DWS resigned just the day before the convention after getting caught. People were furious. For months Sanders supporters were called names and ridiculed for claiming that the DNC was unfair and favoring Clinton. Now a few days before the convention there was PROOF.


There only a couple yelling of people yelling"lock her up" and they can barely be heard. They weren't even close to being the majority of Bernie supporters and they aren't leaders of the Democratic party.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jul/25/lock-her-up-sanders-trump-clinton-chant

Your link didn't work for me by the way. I get "page not found".

On the other side of this were leaders of the Democratic party being caught red handed violating the spirit and rules of the party to remain fair and neutral.

So unfair that that even Harry Reid admitted it;

I thought Bernie deserved somebody that was not critical to him. I knew ― everybody knew ― that this was not a fair deal. So I’m sorry she had to resign, but it was the right thing to do. She just should’ve done it sooner.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/harry-reid-bernie-sanders-dnc_us_5799259fe4b02d5d5ed42db6

[otohara]

77. Link(s)

You cannot downplay their efforts to ruin the DNC convention nor the Hillary hate cost us the election.


http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/07/26/hillary-for-prison-is-a-big-hit-with-diehard-sanders-fans-at-dnc.html

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/07/25/dnc-protesters-want-bernie-in-the-white-house-and-hillary-in-jail.html

http://time.com/4425392/dnc-protest-3d-360-degree-video/

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

36. Spot on

[mcar]

73. +1000!

[hellofromreddit]

81. Feet hurting? Bullet holes'll do that.

Now, I'm not saying he would have won, but the interference by the DNC was real, was disgusting, did ultimately did cost us some voters. DWS and Brazile made Hillary a weaker candidate.

The party will be stronger if it can keep fools like them from the helm.

[BainsBane]

33. It takes votes to win

and you continue to make absolutely clear that you hold the voting rights of the Democratic majority in utter contempt.

Bernie lost. He lost by a wide margin. That you continue to think Bernie was owed the nomination and that the votes of the majority were utterly inconsequential shows exactly why his campaign was so loathsome.

The continued fixation on this shows a level of entitlement that is truly mind boggling. The country is facing a fascist presidency. Millions of Americans are heartbroken over the GE results, and all you care about is Bernie being denied his birthright to rule over people who overwhelmingly rejected him.

I take continued posts like this as an absolute affront to my rights as voter and a citizen. I'm sorry you have such resentment toward the voting rights of the majority of Democrats, disproportionately women and people of color, who had the nerve to vote as they saw fit rather than coronating the man you would have be king. Your continued posts serve as a reminder that just because someone claims to be a Democrat doesn't mean they actually respect electoral democracy.

[BainsBane]

35. How about learning what the DNC actually does?

http://www.newsweek.com/myths-cost-democrats-presidential-election-521044

Fat chance, I know. Funny how we aren't supposed to consider anything other than Clinton's failings in accounting for her electoral college loss but that Bernie bears absolutely no responsibility for his far more decisive defeat in the general election.

[mcar]

74. I was just looking for that link

Thanks BB!

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

37. ....

[paigeatemyshoes]

39. Are we going to get rid of super delegates?

I feel like this is a lost topic....if we didn't have super delegates there wouldn't not have been the presumption that Hillary was the nominee and would have been more fair. Sanders could have gotten so many more states and still wouldn't have been the nominee.

[murielm99]

40. That is the last thing we should do.

We need to keep superdelegates. The GOP wishes they had had them. If they had, they would not have been stuck with trump as their nominee. All the whining about the superdelegates was simply a red herring by the bernie supporters so they could get their way. We need super delegates and closed primaries. We also need to be sure that only Democrats run as Democrats. Independents can come up with their own resources in the future. I am sick of seeing my party used and abused.

[Demsrule86]

43. No we should never get rid of super delegate who always vote with the winner

despite Bernie's attempt to win without winning the primary by having supers select him. One day the GOP will screw with our election and pick a candidate sure to lose as they do on the state level's now during the primaries...and we need supers to stop that.

[TCJ70]

48. "No we should never get rid of super delegate who always vote with the winner"

Then they should wait until there is a winner...none of this declaring nonsense.

[Demsrule86]

62. Bernie lost because less people voted for him...the rest is just an excuse.

Perhaps he should have gotten out when it was clear he would lose...and maybe a concession would have been nice...and was it really a good idea to send protestors to the convention? Sorry Bernie was the worst thing to happen to the Democratic Party in my memory...caused us to lose a crucial election, and we will no doubt lose all hard fought progressive policy going back to Roosevelt.

[Chathamization]

83. Considering both sides were enraged at the thought of superdelegates voting against their candidate

that seems like a no-brainer. I'm surprised that there are still people trying to defend the system. I didn't see any Sanders supporter that thought it was fair when a lot of the superdelegates got behind Clinton in the beginning, and I didn't see any Clinton supporter that thought it was fair for Sanders to try to flip the superdelegates at the end (of course, there were some people against both Sanders and Clinton trying to use them)). It's hard to see how anyone now in favor of them is being intellectually honest.

As seen by the primaries, when they're not useless they end up alienating a large chunk of the base. I'm not sure why anyone would be in favor of them. And no, they wouldn't have stopped Trump - people need to do the math before repeating this falsehood.

[Demsrule86]

41. This is from July and honestly makes me dislike Bernie more.

He couldn't win a primary. Why post something this old? As we lost the election...Bernie's actions look very different now. Hindsight is 20 20 after all.

[think]

46. The DNC breaks the rules and you blame Bernie more. got it.

[Demsrule86]

63. The DNC did not cause Bernie to lose...he didn't get the votes...and our

convention was in July, and it reminds me why we lost...fighting to the convention ...many of us warned about this and now...we are so screwed. What did Bernie get? a revolution. I haven't seen one...a 501 C is what we have...so ironic.

[think]

64. The DNC intentionally pushed a false story that called DEMOCRATIC Bernie supporters violent

This isn't made up. There is now PROOF:

DNC Communications Director Ordered Anti-Sanders Article Be Shared 'Without Attribution'

Hannah Gold - 07/23/16 05:30PM
Filed to: DNC HACK


On Friday, Wikileaks published an email exchange between Western Regional Communicators Director for the Democratic Party Walter Garcia and DNC Communications Director Luis Miranda, in which Miranda requests an article critical of Bernie Sanders be covertly shared, “without attribution” to the DNC.



https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/756968126001115136?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw


The article, by Nevada political reporter Jon Ralston, pushed a narrative that Bernie Sanders supporters were becoming violent and out of control and that Sanders was partly responsible.

The article was published on May 17, one day after the New York Times reported that Sanders supporters threw chairs at the Nevada Democratic Party’s convention and threatened the convention’s chairwoman, Roberta Lange.

http://gawker.com/dnc-communications-director-ordered-anti-sanders-articl-1784191906

And the story wasn't even true

http://www.snopes.com/did-sanders-supporters-throw-chairs-at-nevada-democratic-convention/



If the DNC did anything remotely similar to Hillary and her supporters like the DNC did to Bernie & his supporters we would NEVER hear the end of it.

The DNC violated the trust of millions of Democrats and that damage is going to take a long time to undo....

[bravenak]

42. Wahhhhhhh!

[think]

47. The DNC broke the rules on several occasions to favor one candidate over the party itself.

Thank you for your response.

[bravenak]

50. No they did not. He was not a democrat and still aint. Thats why he lost. Because there are

millions of DEMOCRATS voting in the DEMOCRATIC primary and he could not appeal to our broad coalition with his message. He never had to try. Because he is not a democrat. Of course the dnc favored a democrat over a non democrat. But they allowed him to run as a dem while not being a dem. Seems like they broke the first rule by allowing him to run.

[think]

51. So you support the DNC breaking rules? Is that what you're saying?

The DNC also favored Clinton over the other Democratic candidates. Are you OK with that as well?

O'Malley called the primary debates a rigged process.

And MILLIONS of Democrats voted for Bernie. The DNC didn't just favor Hillary. They chose to disenfranchise these Democratic voters and the party suffers due to those actions.

And here's the DNC choosing to covertly push a FALSE story claiming Bernie supporters were throwing chairs and violent:

DNC Communications Director Ordered Anti-Sanders Article Be Shared 'Without Attribution'

Hannah Gold - 07/23/16 05:30PM
Filed to: DNC HACK


On Friday, Wikileaks published an email exchange between Western Regional Communicators Director for the Democratic Party Walter Garcia and DNC Communications Director Luis Miranda, in which Miranda requests an article critical of Bernie Sanders be covertly shared, “without attribution” to the DNC.



https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/756968126001115136?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw


The article, by Nevada political reporter Jon Ralston, pushed a narrative that Bernie Sanders supporters were becoming violent and out of control and that Sanders was partly responsible.

The article was published on May 17, one day after the New York Times reported that Sanders supporters threw chairs at the Nevada Democratic Party’s convention and threatened the convention’s chairwoman, Roberta Lange.

http://gawker.com/dnc-communications-director-ordered-anti-sanders-articl-1784191906

And the story wasn't even true:

http://www.snopes.com/did-sanders-supporters-throw-chairs-at-nevada-democratic-convention/

[bravenak]

52. I support them no longer breaking the rules of ONLY DEMOCRATS CAN RUN AS DEMOCRATS

The rest of the rules are like, secondary if you break the first.

[think]

53. Please show where Bernie Sanders broke the rules by running as a Democrat.

[bravenak]

54. The dnc broke their own rules by letting him run

I ignore all emails from the dnc now. Heshould thank them for allowing him to run instead of getting pissy that they prefer their own party member who they know will remain to help build the party to a non party member. The dnc is not a government organization. They do nit have to be fair and impartial to independents who come begging to run as a democrat. It is not a courtroom.

All this whinging after the fact just proves that we better not ever let another indy run as a dem in our primary. I will make it my duty to support the real democrat so we never get a trump on our side.

[NWCorona]

69. ...

[NWCorona]

68. Then the DNC shouldn't have allowed Bernie to run as a Dem.

Every move after has been very salty to say the least.

[PassingFair]

70. The job of the DNC is to raise money and oversee FAIR PRIMARIES.

This incarnation of the DNC operated as if they were Clinton staff members. Sanders and O'Malley ran as democrats and should have expected unbiased support. Disgusting.

[marybourg]

59. He still hasn't become a Democrat.

Neither Democrats nor the party itself owed him anything. Non-discrimination means between Democrats, not between a Democrat and a pretender. As an aside, I support his beliefs, but know that the country is not ready for them