The Bernie campaign never stole anything. Discontinue spreading this misinformation.

[retrowire]

Last edited Sat Dec 19, 2015, 12:48 PM - Edit history (1)

Anyone continuing to spread this are going to be marking themselves.

Seriously. Just do the research.

Here is NGP VAN's statement clearly communicating that NO data was stolen --

http://blog.ngpvan.com/news/data-security-and-privacy

First, a one page-style report containing summary data on a list was saved out of VoteBuilder by one Sanders user. This is what some people have referred to as the “export” from VoteBuilder. As noted below, users were unable to export lists of people.

On Wednesday morning, there was a release of VAN code. Unfortunately, it contained a bug. For a brief window, the voter data that is always searchable across campaigns in VoteBuilder included client scores it should not have, on a specific part of the VAN system. So for voters that a user already had access to, that user was able to search by and view (but not export or save or act on) some attributes that came from another campaign.

Finally, here is the Snopes page that has been updating the fact checking on all claims since the event began. Their conclusion? Well read it for yourself!

http://www.snopes.com/bernie-sanders-campaign-data-breach-controversy/

CLAIM: Staffers on Bernie Sanders' campaign deliberately and improperly accessed information about the Hillary Clinton campaign during a brief (30-40 minute-long) data security lapse.

WHAT'S TRUE: During a brief security lapse due to a bug on the part of third-party campaign information data company NGP VAN, four staffers from the Bernie Sanders campaign had unauthorized access to limited data pertaining to the Hillary Clinton campaign. The DNC has since pledged to restore the Sanders campaign's access to the voter files.

WHAT'S FALSE: The data were accessed over a lengthy period; the data were "exported" or otherwise extracted; the data were of high value to the Sanders campaign.

WHAT'S UNDETERMINED: What the staffers' intent in accessing the data was; whether the Clinton campaign engaged in similar activity during the 2008 campaign but was unsanctioned (as asserted in a suit filed by Sanders' campaign against the DNC); under precisely which circumstances the staffers accessed the information; the manner in which the proprietary software operated and the ease with which such data might be accessed deliberately or inadvertently.

There. This is now settled.

UPDATE: Here's a piece of logic that also needs to be mentioned.

We are confident at this point that no campaigns have access to or have retained any voter file data of any other clients; with one possible exception, one of the presidential campaigns.

No one has retained anything, with of course... One possible exception.

If it were Bernie... Then the DNC wouldn't have buckled to his lawsuit threat. They could have kept the data from Bernie and stood proud today.

But they buckled. Wonder why?

Maybe it's because they don't actually have the dirt on Bernie. And maybe that one possible exception is some other campaign.

[LexVegas]

1. Why'd an innocent guy get fired? Real loyalty there. LMAO. nt

[retrowire]

5. spin spin spin spin spin

Nobody is questioning whether or not a rule was broken. But the fact is, Bernie's no thief.

[Historic NY]

33. He's the Capt of his ship.......

isn't that what we keep hearing about DWS. EOM.

[1StrongBlackMan]

162. What rule was broken?

[retrowire]

164. A folder was breached that shouldn't have been. nt

[1StrongBlackMan]

172. How does one look in a folder(s) ...

And not come away with information, one is not entitled to?

[retrowire]

178. Easy,

Go double click a folder on your desktop, anywhere.

See whats in there? Files? Cool. Now don't open them.

There you go.

[SunSeeker]

182. Uretsky SAVED data, he didn't just peek.nt

[retrowire]

191. From the security firm themselves...

So for voters that a user already had access to, that user was able to search by and view (but not export or save or act on) some attributes that came from another campaign.

No, no saving. I'm sorry.

[SunSeeker]

197. The audit subsequently found otherwise. And Uretsky ADMITTED he saved data.

The former data director for Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT)’s presidential campaign said Friday that staffers for the campaign accessed and saved voter information from opponent Hillary Clinton...

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/josh-uretsky-clinton-data-breach

[retrowire]

198. Fine, then who is telling the truth?

I'll just rest knowing that if that WERE true, then the DNC would still be withholding Bernie's data, and they wouldn't be having him in the debate tonight.

But since he is, and they aren't touting this dirt.... Hmmmm....

[SunSeeker]

200. I think the vendor spoke before they had all the facts.

Bernie fired Uretsky for a reason. Is Bernie lying?

The DNC probably would still be withholding data if Bernie hadn't finally agreed to cooperate with the investigation.

I'm sure we'll find out more soon, especially if Bernie insists on going forward with his damages lawsuit and ends up getting deposed in that litigation.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

211. His or her link doesn't support the claim.

Read the link.

[BeanMusical]

218. +1

[Fantastic Anarchist]

210. Nice try but your source doesn't say that.

Nice try with the hoodwink.

[JaneyVee]

208. There's hundreds of ways to save data.

[SCantiGOP]

163. So, if I break into your house

Wander around and look at everything but leave without taking anything with me, that wouldn't be a problem?
They got caught. The reason this is such a big deal is that the Sanders campaign knows they are too far behind to catch up (except, maybe, in NH) and they need the issue.

[retrowire]

166. That's breaking and entering.

You wouldn't be charged with theft though.

And yeah, this is such a big deal that Bernie got his data back, the DNC buckled to his lawsuit and he'll be in the debates tonight. See you there!

[SCantiGOP]

168. I think you just reinforced my point

Thanks

[tdb63]

177. Liar. It's more like adjoining hotel rooms with the adjoining security door missing

NOBODY broke into anything!! Stop spreading lies. You and DWS compare this to breaking and entering someone elses private home. It was more like coming home to your hotel room and the adjoining door to someone else's room is missing. They didn't even go into the room but went and investigated where the door went and why it's open. That's all they did.

[erronis]

185. Good analogy. But THEY don't care. THEY have their scripts and are well paid.

[green917]

187. not to mention

They had already notified the dnc of the security glitch 2 months earlier and were assured it would be fixed. This never would have happened if the contractor, ngp van, had fixed their software in the 1st place. This whole flap is the fault of the dnc for utilizing a deficient contractor (who just happens to have ties to secretary clinton) that didn't shore up their software security when they were notified of it the first time! the staffer was fired because it was the most expeditious way to get out in front of this and because, although i don't believe there was malicious intent, he did break the rules.

[Juicy_Bellows]

196. but but they peeked at my unmentionables!

Good analogy.

[SCantiGOP]

199. Liar ??

You disagree with a point so you call me a liar? Very mature and civil of you, but totally expected.
Welcome to Full Ignore.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

212. No, he called you a liar because your post was bullshit.

[Uncle Joe]

190. It wouldn't be breaking and entry if you left the doors wide open. n/t

[longship]

19. He was not innocent. He violated protocols. He was fired.

Appropriately, I might add.

But I am with retro here. There was no data stolen. Furthermore, the data accessed was limited and consistent with how the fired guy explained it later.

Time to put the stolen data spin to bed.

But no doubt the guy did something wrong and he is now jobless.

[yeoman6987]

84. I'd love to put it to bed but one side keeps putting endless OPs out

Not sure which side is but I would love to never see one again. Lol.

[randys1]

109. I have just what you need

[newthinking]

67. Bad (political) judgement

This is a political campaign and staffers are expected to be careful. I would imagine that a staffer at that level is expected to clear anything that could have potential political effects, even if he was trying to do something he felt was right.

[Blue State Bandit]

71. Pound Of Flesh

N/T

[Fantastic Anarchist]

209. I see that the OP's point went straight over your head.

[Cha]

225. Yes, why did they fire Josh Uretsky? Because bernie wanted to throw an innocent man under the

bus?

[boston bean]

2. ummm why leave this out!

Our team removed access to the affected data, and determined that only one campaign took actions that could possibly have led to it retaining data to which it should not have had access.

[BlueCaliDem]

13. Exactly!

Apparently, though, the sanitizing of misdeeds, even illegalities perpetrated by Sanders's staff will continue - even if they have to "omit" information in order to attain that goal.

Nothing can change the fact that these senior staff members of the Sanders campaign have taken upon themselves to go spying in Clinton campaign data when they had a chance. NONE of the Clinton campaign staff did the same even though they could've as well. That's the difference.

No one, not Wasserman-Schultz, not Hillary Clinton, not anyone made those four Sanders staff members access Clinton campaign data at the DNC. Let's not forget that. They, themselves, did it and now their supporters from the top to the bottom are trying to excuse it, even blame Debbie Wasserman-Schultz and Hillary Clinton for the acts of these staff members.

And it ain't gonna wash.

[retrowire]

15. No data was retained. Read the OP. nt

[boston bean]

27. regardless of what your OP says, you are wrong.

According to data reviewed by TIME, the Sanders campaign appears to have obtained files with lists of voters that the Clinton campaign had cultivated in 10 early states including Iowa and New Hampshire.

Beyond simply reviewing the data, the logs show the Sanders staffers took deliberate steps to harvest and store the information. According to the logs, the Sanders staff created from scratch no fewer than 24 lists—consisting entirely of data pulled down from the Clinton campaign’s database—and saved them to their personal folders.

http://time.com/4155185/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-data/

But this comes from Time, which named Angela Merkel person of the year to help Hillary and hurt Bernie.

[retrowire]

48. Hmmm... trust the media orrr trust the actual security firm responsible? Hmmmm... nt

[Spitfire of ATJ]

86. Amazing how Hillary can't seem to secure her stuff.

[Scootaloo]

203. Maybe she needs to upgrade from wiping clothes to chamois?

[Fantastic Anarchist]

213. Bam! Great point.

[LuvLoogie]

96. I don't think The Revolution gets that cut-and-paste

of data into a freshly created list is still an ill-gotten gain of prorpietary data. Not a classic CSV export, but intent and actions are clear from the audit. Their argument in this case is like a murderer claiming innocense because he didn't shoot the guy. "No, your'e right, the victim was stabbed--and the bloody knife is in your hand."

[retrowire]

108. Here's some logic for you.

If Bernie's campaign had stolen anything...

Why did the DNC buckle to his lawsuit threat?

If he had actually stolen anything, they could've stood strong and even forbid him from participating in the debate.

But that's not happening so... I'm sorry your fantasy isn't coming true. :/

[pandr32]

167. That's not logic

Sorry. How do you know that the DNC "buckled?" Why if true?
Please use reason to show how you reached this assertion. Perhaps there is another explanation you refuse to consider.
We already know that data was saved (downloaded into their files) by BS staffers, so the discussion is really both an ethical and a legal one...does unauthorized gleaning of sensitive data belonging to a presidential opponent constitute a theft? Of course we also have to solve the problem of whether the fact that the firewall was temporarily down changes anything...just because one can, should one?
Then there is the problem of the lawsuit itself...could it possibly be a strategy? Investigations usually take time, and sometimes a long time, just as a point to consider. There are so many legal steps and filings. Anyone can file a lawsuit.
Your assertion in line three is based on what fact? Please link.

[libdem4life]

115. Who took this to Time" and further, from the IT's words

So for voters that a user already had access to, that user was able to search by and view (but not export or save or act on) some attributes that came from another campaign.

Perhaps one should read carefully before posting.

[brush]

134. What about screen shots?

Very easy to do then printout and input the info to create a file.

[retrowire]

136. Well obviously if this had been done...

Then the DNC would still have Bernie restricted from his info.

But since they buckled to the lawsuit threat, it seems to me they don't actually have that dirt on Bernie.

They could have forbid him from the debate tonight! But since nothing actually happened.... Hmmm...

[brush]

153. Didn't the DNC want an audit done to see if any data was taken?

[Lancero]

169. Them dropping in face of a lawsuit puts that in a odd light...

If they actually had proof of wrongdoing, they wouldn't have backed off.

So knowing the above - That they had no proof, whatsoever, of any wrongdoing - it puts their desire for a time consuming full audit into question.

The full audit would have been, in part, to determine exactly what information was taken. They had been 'saying' that info was taken, but they didn't know exactly what was taken. As the lawsuit progresses, they would have had to reveal their proof showing that info was taken. Them backing off after the lawsuit threat no longer requires them to 'actually' show their proof. In comparison, they can have a 'anonymous' person releasing whatever statements they want to the media.

Of course, I suppose they could have backed off due to the other fires they need to put out - That is, why they hired a firm with close ties to the Clintons, which is a massive conflict of interest, and why they revoked data access to the Sanders campaign in direct violation with their own rules.

[1StrongBlackMan]

170. Allowing the lawsuit to proceed was a political non-starter ...

For the Democratic Party, despite the high likelihood the DNC would have prevailed. First because it would have dragged out for month ... everyday of which Democrats would have been fighting Bernie followers.

Secondly, had the lawsuit proceeded, the evidence supporting what the Bernie camp has already admitted to would have ended Bernie's campaign ... for everyone but his most ardent followers (and that doesn't serve the Democratic Party, regardless of what Dean has,said about an early end).

[JaneyVee]

207. How do you know xerox copies weren't made?

[retrowire]

214. Because the DNC gave Bernie back his data?

They said they're withholding the data until they were sure they got what they wanted.

So how do any of you know there's xerox copies?

[cantbeserious]

3. This Citizen Would Never Suspect That Mere Facts Would Stand In Way Of Team HRC

eom

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

4. Thank you!

I was getting damn tired of thread titles proclaiming Sanders' campaign stole data from Clinton. It didn't.

[JaneyVee]

6. See post 2.

And now you guys are going to believe an "evil" corporation that is most likely trying to cover their asses?

[retrowire]

16. No data was retained. Read the OP. nt

[JaneyVee]

41. They could have run off xerox copies.

We'll never know.

[retrowire]

47. Hmmm... trust the media orrr trust the actual security firm responsible? Hmmmm... nt

[Treant]

156. Media.

We've been hearing about how incompetent this firm was, but now we're expected to trust their judgement that this screwup simply wasn't that bad and not their fault, really, because nothing got taken...

Sorry, it's one or the other, and you can't have that both ways.

I'm leaning toward deeply incompetent and utterly untrustworthy as my classification for the security firm in question.

This smells of spin and nothing more.

[retrowire]

110. Plus....

If Bernie's campaign had stolen anything...

Why did the DNC buckle to his lawsuit threat?

If he had actually stolen anything, they could've stood strong and even forbid him from participating in the debate.

But that's not happening so... I'm sorry your fantasy isn't coming true. :/

[PowerToThePeople]

7. They can not stop the lies

It is all they have.

That, and trying to silence the opposition by extremely rude trolling and alert stalking.

[INdemo]

131. Lets face it,this is a typical campaign style

normally reserved for Republicans.
These tactics are/were used by the likes of Lee Atwater,Karl Rove,Reince Priebus and Dick Cheney.
I am really a little surprised the Hillary campaign would stoop this low unless they are seriously worried about the upcoming caucus and primary.

[Duval]

184. Or worried about the outcome of an investigation, perhaps?

We'll have to wait and see how this plays out. I'm very disappointed in DWS and the DNC for what they did to Sanders. It was way over the top, and now it seems all they did was damage their own credibility.

[INdemo]

215. This is so low though as many have said but

with these Hillary campaign shills on here it's really hard to read all the nonsense excuses they come up with,.
To many this is even worse than watching a Dick Cheney speech in 2004 when he would bring up all the bullshit about John Kerry and how the crowd would cheer knowing that what he was spewing was total bullshit. I don't see any difference here with the Hillary supporters. They know what they are spewing is pure bullshit but its in their script.
This is not the Democratic Party here.

I really wish now and think just maybe Bernie should have ran as an Independent.Because after seeing the Republican style campaign tactics by the Clinton campaign,DWS and the DNC,that might have been a better route to go.

[erronis]

188. Atwater, Clinton - perhaps a good link.

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2008/05/05/going-positive

Throw in some Rove and we have a fiercesome brew. Guess it didn't work in 2008 so maybe there are some new ingredients.

[Duval]

194. Interesting link. Thanks!

[moobu2]

8. Yeah it's settled. The Bernie Sanders campaign stole hillary data.

[retrowire]

18. Didn't read the official statement from the security firm in my OP? lol dude stop lmao nt

[Tommy2Tone]

63. They ignore this..from an HP story

Summaries of data logs provided to the AP show the Sanders team spent nearly an hour in the database reviewing information on Clinton's high-priority voters and other data from nearly a dozen states, including first-to-vote Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina.

Some of these voter lists were saved into a folder named "Targets," according to the logs. Uretsky's deputy appeared to focus on pulling data on South Carolina and Iowa voters based on turnout and support — or lack of support — for Clinton.

The Sanders campaign employees who accessed the Clinton voter information without authorization appear to have run afoul of the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, said Jason Weinstein, a former supervisor of the Justice Department's computer crimes section.

Those employees "have reason to be concerned about legal exposure," he said, for what appears to fit the definition of illegal hacking.

[Jester Messiah]

82. lying like a cheap watch.

[Jester Messiah]

104. oh, it's "adult" to just let lies stand?

Nope, I'll call 'em out when I see them.

[99Forever]

9. Truth and facts have no place in Camp Weathervane.

Smearing Senator Sanders is ALL that matters.

Dirty campaigns gotta be dirty.

[DanTex]

14. Dirty campaign, huh? You mean like stealing data? No, not that dirty. That's Sanders territory.

[retrowire]

21. Didn't read the official statement from the security firm in my OP? lol dude stop lmao nt

[DanTex]

26. "only one campaign took actions that could possibly have led to it retaining data to which it should

have had access."

Oh yeah, I read that all right.

[retrowire]

31. No data was retained. Read the OP. nt

re·tain
rəˈtān/
verb
continue to have (something); keep possession of.

Please... Try harder.

[DanTex]

34. The word "retained" was used by the vendor. I get that you disagree with the vendor, but

I'm gonna have to side with the vendor here and not you. That quote I posted was a direct copy-paste from your link. You really should read links before you post. Here's another good one.

We are confident at this point that no campaigns have access to or have retained any voter file data of any other clients; with one possible exception, one of the presidential campaigns. NGP VAN is providing a thorough report to the DNC on what happened and conducting a review to ensure the integrity of the system.

[retrowire]

46. Who's the exception? hmmm... nt

[DanTex]

49. That would be the Bernie Sanders campaign...

[retrowire]

53. And if they had that dirt they would spill it.

And yet... They're protecting someone. Haha. Think.

[DanTex]

58. Conspiracy!

The fact of the matter is, your whole OP is false, disproved by your own link, and now you've retreated to conspiracy theory land.

[retrowire]

61. Whole OP is false?

Nope. Just read it. The facts are right there.

[DanTex]

68. Yup. Bernie's campaign stole data. Your own links show that. May even have retained the data.

[retrowire]

72. ...

May even have retained the data. = DEFINITELY STOLE IT.

You're speculating a bit too hard. I'm sorry that it's not reality.

We are confident at this point that no campaigns have access to or have retained any voter file data of any other clients; with one possible exception, one of the presidential campaigns.

"Possible exception"'s aren't concrete facts.

Stop being a conspirist.

[DanTex]

76. They definitely accessed it improperly, and they may or may not have retained the data.

So, yeah, the theft happened, but maybe they didn't retain the data they stole, or else they retained it for a while and then deleted it, or whatever.

But was data stolen? Of course it was. You don't think the Sanders camp just fired that guy for nothing, do you?

[retrowire]

81. No that's not theft.

If a man witnesses an open box of valuables and no one is looking. And he's not supposed to look at it, but he sees it, tells others about it, then doesn't copy or take any of it, he never stole it.

Nothing was stolen.

[DanTex]

95. These aren't physical valuables, it's data.

Suppose I break into your computer, look at your password, memorize it, but never make a copy. Have I "stolen your password". Of course.

But even in your silly goalpost-moving definition of "data theft", the best you can say is that you don't know whether or not anything was stolen and retained. Claiming that you have proof that no theft took place is just false.

[retrowire]

111. You gonna memorize hundreds of phone numbers and voter demographics? lol

But here's some logic for you...

If Bernie's campaign had stolen anything...

Why did the DNC buckle to his lawsuit threat?

If he had actually stolen anything, they could've stood strong and even forbid him from participating in the debate.

But that's not happening so... I'm sorry your fantasy isn't coming true. :/

I'm sorry, claiming that you have proof that theft actually TOOK place is just false.

[LuvLoogie]

121. Highlight, cut and paste.

Here, Ill show you.


But here's some logic for you...

If Bernie's campaign had stolen anything...

Why did the DNC buckle to his lawsuit threat?

If he had actually stolen anything, they could've stood strong and even forbid him from participating in the debate.

But that's not happening so... I'm sorry your fantasy isn't coming true. :/

I'm sorry, claiming that you have proof that theft actually TOOK place is just false.

Just like your response to me here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251920927#post108

[retrowire]

130. Clearly.

Since it was confirmed after all that they did this, it makes perfect sense that the DNC buckled to his lawsuit threat and gave everything back to him.

I mean, after all, that's perfectly logical to give in to someone's lawsuit when clearly they stole and you've got dirt on them.

lmao, please. keep trying.

[DanTex]

122. Not me, unlike Bernie's campaign, I don't steal data.

And I have no idea what they did with the data they stole. Whether they retained it or not. Whether they printed it. Whether they just looked over it to try to quickly spot patterns. Apparently that tech firm doesn't know either.

And I don't really care, none of it changes the fact that it was stolen, plain and simple.

[retrowire]

126. lmao you're really trying.

And I have no idea what they did with the data they stole.

Whether they retained it or not.

Which is it? Stolen or not? Hahahaha

[DanTex]

128. It's very simple. The data was stolen, nobody knows what they did with it afterwards.

For example, whether or not they retained it. You're the only person in the world who thinks that looking at someone's password without actually keeping a digital copy is not "stealing".

[retrowire]

132. They stole it, even though no one knows if they stole it.

And yes, looking at a password is different than looking at giant spreadsheets of voter data.

You ain't memorizing that, and even if you did, remembering 2 to 3 names and phone numbers isn't going to benefit anyone. So, really it's worthless.

It's like someone quizzing you on whether or not you remembered a page from a phone book and IF YOU DID, OH, you THIEF. lol

[DanTex]

137. Everyone knows they stole it. Nobody knows what they did with it after they stole it.

It's not very complicated.

I mean, yeah, maybe they stole it and then didn't even look at it and never made any copies or anything. Somehow I doubt that, but it's technically possible.

Like I said, just send me all your usernames and passwords, and then you too can experience the joy of knowing that someone has looked at your private data, but you don't know for sure whether any copies were made or what they did with any of it. I'm sure you'll feel just fine about it.

[retrowire]

139. But nobody knows whether or not they retained anything.

You're so contradictory.

But since he obviously stole stuff it's good to know that he is still restricted from his data and he's banned from the debate tonight.

It's good the DNC stuck to their guns when he threatened suit.

Oh wait, they didn't. Oh wait, they don't have any dirt. I guess it's not concrete.

You are Sisyphus, we are the boulder. Is that depressing?

[DanTex]

141. And you will be in the same situation once you send me all your passwords.

I'm waiting. Obviously, you don't think it's a big deal when people steal your data as long as you can't say for sure what they did with that data. So I promise, I won't tell you what I do with all the data of yours I access. You'll be totally in the dark. All you'll no for sure is that I did access it, but after that, it's just a big question mark.

[retrowire]

145. You're being weird.

But I'm sorry that Bernie stole nothing. I really am. Maybe something else will turn up.

I wish you luck.

[DanTex]

148. LOL. Dodge. But I get it, when it's Clinton's data, there's a whole different standard.

I should have realized that beforehand. Words like "steal" magically have their definitions changed when it's Bernie stealing Hillary's data.

Like I said, it's a good thing that the Bernie bubble is small, and also not going to be around much longer.

[retrowire]

152. Yeah, it's a dodge because I treat people online how I'd treat them in real life.

And since you're harrassing me about my passwords and such, I'd be walking the hell out of the room.

Again, Bernie's innocent, if he wasn't then he'd still be forbidden from his data. It's just logic. It's not difficult.

[DanTex]

160. It's a dodge because you have no response to my argument.

And that's because you take your own data security much more seriously than that of Hillary's data. Which you should. With your own data, you wouldn't play silly games and pretend nothing was "stolen" when a random stranger went through your private data and you don't know exactly what he did with it.

But when it comes to the Bernie camp and Hillary's data, somehow the fact that we don't know exactly what Bernie did with the data he stole makes you think that he's "innocent." Truly absurd, and as I pointed out, there's no way you would apply that same standard to your own data or anyone else's you know.

[Skidmore]

20. Funny how the listing weathervane of Sanders ethics

is A-okay. Theft schmeft-- it's all good if the cause is right.

[99Forever]

102. Now that's fucking FUNNY!

A freakin' Hillary supporter talking about ETHICS!

[Skidmore]

129. Navel gazing will only get you

belly button lint. Yeah, you guys are hilarious. Keep picking that lint.

[99Forever]

205. Dude.

That's just plain pathetic.

[RandySF]

10. Technically correct

They were unsuccessful in the attempt.

[retrowire]

23. This is clearly opinion and speculation. Which has no room in the world of facts. nt

[NowSam]

11. Truth will win. Bernie will win.

They can repeat it all they want but the people have had enough lies. Bernie is honest and every one knows it. HRC on the other hand. ..I don't know that anyone trusts her or her minion, DWS.

[DanTex]

12. In other words, his campaign stole data.

But thanks for the first link confirming that the Bernie campaign never notified the vendor of an earlier breach on the same system. That lie must have been told about a thousand times by Bernie fans here.

[BlueCaliDem]

17. Yep. Ad nauseam. And they're still in denial that Sanders campaign did anything wrong.

It's just amazing.

[retrowire]

25. It's really revealing and amazing.

The facts are point blank listed RIGHT HERE IN THIS THREAD... And they're still doing it!

Do they really think they're being taken seriously anymore?

[DanTex]

30. "only one campaign took actions that could possibly have led to it retaining data

to which it should not have had access."

It's shocking that you would claim that Bernie's camp never stole anything and then post a link to that sentence. Did you just think people wouldn't read it? Was it some kind of bluff?

[retrowire]

43. Hmmm... trust the media orrr trust the actual security firm responsible? Hmmmm... nt

[DanTex]

45. That quote is from the actual security firm. From your link. Did you even read it?

[retrowire]

50. What's the one campaign? Why not name it?

I mean, if they really had dirt on Bernie, now would be the perfect time to spill it and yet... They're retaining that info....

Wonder why.

[DanTex]

55. Everyone knows who it is. They mentioned the Sanders campaign by name earlier in the article.

This whole OP is false. Sanders campaign did steal data, and your own link proves it, even using the word "retain" that you objected to.

[retrowire]

60. Keep trying. I'm sorry that it's not sticking.

Fact is, they're not naming anyone. If they wanted to destroy Bernie, they would be doing it right now. But... He's allowed to be in the debates tonight, and the issue is quickly fading to the past.

Wonder why? I'm certain the data firm found a culprit that they don't want to name or make publicity over.

[DanTex]

65. Outside of the Bernie bubble, everyone knows exactly what happened: Bernie's campaign stole data.

Inside the Bernie bubble there are a bunch of conspiracy theories and excuses. So, no, I don't expect any Bernie fan to accept the facts here, any more than they accept facts on any of a number of other issues.

Fortunately, the Bernie bubble isn't very big. And soon will be popped.

[retrowire]

70. Keep hoping.

Fact is, we've got statements, factual words that say nothing was stolen.

You've got "One campaign retained something"

And you keep speculating that it's Bernie's, even after the DNC buckled under a lawsuit threat, even after the security firm neglects to just tell the people who the campaign is...

I'd say you're conspiring pretty hard.

[DanTex]

74. Odd, the words "nothing was stolen" don't appear anywhere.

Must be fun, though, making stuff up.

[retrowire]

114. Odd, the words "Bernie's campaign stole data" don't appear anywhere.

Must be sad though, hoping for false narratives to be true.



Again, if he'd stolen anything, the DNC wouldn't have had to buckle to his lawsuit threat. He would have still been without his data. But... He's baaaaackkkk....

[DanTex]

119. The access logs demonstrate that they did. And you're the one who made this OP, claiming that

those links somehow show that Bernie's camp didn't steal anything, when if you actually read them, they prove the opposite.

Remarkable. You didn't even read your own links!

[retrowire]

124. Lol actually...

If only you actually analyzed what you were speculating...

The list of access logs does not show downloading.

What occurred is that the user in question created folders on the database server itself. Queries were made to test the lack of firewall. Results of the simple queries were then aggregated in those folders during the 40 minutes time frame. This is white hat hacking to show with minimal damage and minimal secure data breaching that there is a flaw in the system.

Any tech guy worth their weight knows this.

[DanTex]

125. The list of logs shows improper access, i.e. stealing data. Like I said, what they did with the

data they stole, nobody knows. That's not much of an excuse for stealing, outside the Bernie bubble.

[retrowire]

127. Access isn't stealing. lmao

If you double click a folder at your job, did you just steal that data? Or open a file? XD

[DanTex]

133. OK, send my all your usernames and passwords, I'll just go checking around, I promise I won't

download anything. Or maybe I will, you'll never know, just like Bernie with Hillary's data. And if I do retain any copies, I'll make sure to do it in a way that you won't be able to trace, so that you can convince yourself nothing is stolen.

Since this isn't a big deal to you, then you'll have no problem just posting it all on DU.

[stupidicus]

51. well, hillarians aren't a very bright bunch it would appear

or they are simply dishonest.

"Only one camp stood in front of the door we left open, and looked about" by way of analogy, becomes "they stepped inside and stole stuff"....

[retrowire]

56. And take note... They're not even naming what campaign that is.

If they had dirt on Bernie, it would be the perfect time to spill those beans...

And yet... They're not naming anyone.. Wonder why.

[stupidicus]

73. well

from what I've read, and relying upon recollection, this foray on the part of his campaign has been established, but I don't think they've gone back to see about any and all incidents that may have occurred before or in the wake of the Oct disclosure by the BS camp.

The most humorous (and disgusting) part about this whole affair to me is the undeniable fact that had the shoe been on the other foot in this case, we'd likely have never heard about it -- but HC supporters are likely A-OK with that as they fulfill the role of faux moral paragons in their quest to soil up BS's integrity.

The bottom line to me is, BS has at worst vicarious guilt in this instance, and that if and only if it can be established he had some knowledge of it. It's a nothingburger disguised as a BigAttack...

[retrowire]

77. Exactly.

But what can we expect from the team of "Anything it takes."?

[DanTex]

62. We know that the Bernie camp looked at data they shouldn't have had access to, the only question is

whether they retained the data, and whether they still have it. So, yeah, they stole data, but we don't know if they still have the data they stole, or whether it's gone now.

[stupidicus]

78. what hogwash

how can you "steal" something you don't "retain"?

perhaps amybe you should confine your efforts to hidden top posts, no?

[DanTex]

87. Stealing data isn't like stealing a car.

You can steal it and make a copy of it. Or you can steal it and then examine it live and get all the insights you need from it, and not keep a saved copy.

I'm sure you'd have no problem with random strangers going through all your private files as long as they don't keep any copies of them, right?

[stupidicus]

140. yes, the false equivalence is a 3rdwayer mainstay

"looking" becomes "retaining", etc, and guilt of any and all speculative BS precedes and trumps the innocence presumption.


Gee, do you suppose they maybe lined up 5-10 people with eidetic memories to make sure they didn't lose anything so as to avoid the "retention/possession" problem? I'd bet so, given how much forethought went into it, like not covering their trails, etc. It sure looks like the work of guilty people to me....

[DanTex]

144. Tell you what, send me all your passwords. I'll look at your private data.

I might retain some, I might not, you'll never know. I promise I won't tell you what I do with it. All you will know is that some random stranger accessed your private data. But you won't know for sure what I actually made copies of, if anything.

I'm sure the fact that you don't know what I did with the data will make you feel just great, and you will vehemently deny that anything had been stolen.

[stupidicus]

150. sorry, you seem to be 'sure" some chicanery is involved

while obviously having no difficulties in hypocritically denying others being "sure" that there wasn't.

ANd what's amusing about this, is that as I recall, DWS apparently was satisfied with whatever assurances the Sanders camp provided them about their ficticious "possession of STOLEN articles", or she wouldn't have opened the door again, no?

[DanTex]

151. Not "sure" of anything, just like you won't be after I look through all your private data.

You'll know I accessed it, I might have made copies, I might have done anything with it, but you won't know what exactly. You'll be in exactly the same position as the Clinton camp: their data was definitely compromised, but they don't know what the Sanders camp actually did with the data they stole.

[stupidicus]

158. so DWS let him off the hook then?

I guess she showed your kind no?

How does it feel to be standing on a molehill while confusing it for a mountain?

[DanTex]

165. I don't know the legal details, depending on the contract, it could easily be the case that she

didn't have the authority to suspend access even in the face of wrongdoing. Also, she's a politician, so maybe she thought detente was the best thing for the party. After all, Hillary's going to win the primary no matter what happens with this, so maybe they figured, hey, just let this slide and present a unified front against the GOP. Who knows.

But Bernie's campaign definitely stole Hillary's data. He didn't fire his top data guy for nothing.

[stupidicus]

174. oh, I see

we finally get to the truth of the matter --"Bernie's campaign", not the individuals under question alone, share the guilt vicariously because of what, prior knowledge of (or knowledge they shoulda had) those individuals intended or actual actions?

Why that makes Bernie a data thief, or aider and/or abetter thereof, maybe before but certainly after the fact, doesn't it?

His firing the guy because the ends don't justify the means stands in sharp contrast to the means Hillarians are deploying/employing here to achieve that BSanders ending smear, no?

It's really too bad that Bernie isn't black, then your camp coulda just stayed with the racist, etc, crap they used against BHO. ALl that's forgivable of course to the modern HC supporter, but Bernie should burn over uncertainties he had no role in creating or escalating.

Who is this BS upstart anyway? He should be doing nothing more with his life than bagging HC's groceries, no?

[Florencenj2point0]

22. here you go

this is just a tiny bit of what they downloaded. These files are from CNN.

[link:<a href=".html" target="_blank"><img src="" border="0" alt=" photo 10408850_10100268048256281_8218515325963390102_n_zpsx6vsfzd3.jpg"/></a>|

[link:<a href=".html" target="_blank"><img src="" border="0" alt=" photo 1914807_10100268048301191_6921825928432190922_n 1_zpsgnto6hgs.jpg"/></a>|

[retrowire]

29. CNN owned by Time Warner who is a major contributor to Hillary?

Sorry, I follow the money.

[restorefreedom]

35. well played, retrowire. nt

[Florencenj2point0]

42. yes and they have super powers of creating data files from thin air

lol.... keep digging. I wasn't going to gloat when Hillary won NH...but I so am going to Gloat now.

[retrowire]

44. Hmmm... trust the media orrr trust the actual security firm responsible? Hmmmm... nt

[Ed Suspicious]

112. Yes that table would be impossible to construct without magical mystical powers and a little help

from the hand of God.

[Agschmid]

69. But not the facts...

Oh boy.

[retrowire]

75. Oh dear...

We are confident at this point that no campaigns have access to or have retained any voter file data of any other clients; with one possible exception, one of the presidential campaigns.

A possible exception of an unnamed campaign isn't a fact. Sorry your conspiracy isn't working out.

[Agschmid]

79. It's clearly not a conspiracy... Sanders fired someone.

There is a reason he did that.

[retrowire]

85. He fired the person because they breached a folder.

But no theft happened.

For example, if I accessed the "finances" folder on my network at my job, but didn't copy anything, I'd be fired for even accessing a folder that has co workers W2's and whatnot.

It was just double clicking a folder, noticing that "oh shit I got in?" and then being reprimanded for being stupid enough to risk it.

[Agschmid]

91. You are in denial.

They got access to the folder, they did searches for specific data, they saw the results.

Yet apparently they did nothing wrong.

[retrowire]

93. I just said what they did wrong. They breached a folder.

But they didn't retain or steal anything. So... the theft meme is false.

No denial here.

[Agschmid]

97. You have no idea what they or did not do.

None of us do.

The only thing we know for sure is data was accessed, and it should not have been, and the people involved knew that.

[retrowire]

105. You just blew my mind

None of us have ANY IDEA WHAT THEY DID.

But then you repeat what I said with different words. The data was accessed.

And that's all that happened. Because IF Bernie HAD stolen anything...

1. The DNC wouldn't have buckled to his lawsuit threat.

and

2. It would be all over the news.

But it ain't sooo....

[Agschmid]

138. I'm glad I was able to have such a profound effect on you.

[Duval]

192. So do I! Quoting CNN, we all know they

are Fox News lite. I never go to CNN if I want to read what is really happening. The Corporate Media has ignored Bernie and yet I've seen Hillary all over the MSM. The best place for honest independent news is Free Speech TV. They are not beholding to any corporation.

[Enthusiast]

223. Huge +1!

[Ed Suspicious]

116. If they wanted the data they would grab the data, not fart around constructing detailed queries for

bits and pieces of data. These guys must be the worst data criminals of all time.

[Ed Suspicious]

117. These people have no understanding nor intention to understand how any of this works in real life.

[retrowire]

120. They sure as shit HOPE it works this way in real life. lol nt

[Amimnoch]

204. LOL, this coming from the side that promises a unicorn in every meadow?

[retrowire]

135. Here you go.

Time magazine is contradicting all other sources.

The list of data files does not show downloading. What occurred is that the user in question created folders on the database server itself. Queries were made to test the lack of firewall. Results of the simple queries were then aggregated in those folders during the 40 minutes time frame. This is white hat hacking to show with minimal damage and minimal secure data breaching that there is a flaw in the system.

Any tech guy worth their weight knows this. One last thing, Time magazine's article is dated 12/18 around 3pm. Snopes has updated their facts through 12/19.

Research is essential.

[lunamagica]

24. If they didn't do anything wrong, why was he staffer fired?

Why is that no Sanders supporter wants to answer that?

[retrowire]

28. I did answer that.

Nobody is saying that rules weren't broken. The staffer DID do something wrong.

Was anything stolen? No. Was it even accessible and able to be extracted? No.

[lunamagica]

32. Than what did he do that was wrong?

[retrowire]

37. Breached a folder. nt

[frazzled]

36. Think again

Four different user names associated with the Sanders campaign conducted 25 separate searches of the Clinton data. Audit trails of the logs show that people with the Sanders campaign searched and saved multiple files, creating new lists of their own.

http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/12/18/sanders-campaign-disciplined-for-breaching-clinton-data/?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

According to an audit obtained by Bloomberg, Sanders staffers exploited a temporary glitch in the DNC's voter database on Wednesday to save lists created by Hillary Clinton’s campaign. Clinton spokesman Brian Fallon told reporter there were "24 intrusion attempts" by the Sanders campaign. He and Mook insisted that the Clinton campaign did not take advantage of the bug to look at Sanders' data.

The database logs created by NGP VAN show that four accounts associated with the Sanders team took advantage of the Wednesday morning breach. Staffers conducted searches that would be especially advantageous to the campaign, including lists of its likeliest supporters in 10 early voting states, including Iowa and New Hampshire. Campaigns rent access to a master file of DNC voter information from the party, and update the files with their own data culled from field work and other investments.
After one Sanders account gained access to the Clinton data, the audits show, that user began sharing permissions with other Sanders users. The staffers who secured access to the Clinton data included Uretsky and his deputy, Russell Drapkin. The two other usernames that viewed Clinton information were “talani" and "csmith_bernie," created by Uretsky's account after the breach began.
The logs show that the Vermont senator’s team created at least 24 lists during the 40-minute breach, which started at 10:40 a.m., and saved those lists to their personal folders. The Sanders searches included New Hampshire lists related to likely voters, "HFA Turnout 60-100" and "HFA Support 50-100," that were conducted and saved by Uretsky. Drapkin's account searched for and saved lists including less likely Clinton voters, "HFA Support <30" in Iowa, and "HFA Turnout 30-70"' in New Hampshire.

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-12-18/sanders-campaign-fires-data-director-after-breach-of-clinton-files

And yes, finding and copying the coding of individual voter names for early states like Iowa and NH is VERY valuable. The Clinton campaign spent millions of dollars and thousands of volunteer hours collecting this information. The Sanders campaign did not. They STOLE.

[retrowire]

39. Hmmm... trust the media orrr trust the actual security firm responsible? Hmmmm... nt

[frazzled]

83. Too specific to ignore

Individual file names were retrieved, documented by logs. More users were brought into the effort. Someone was fired. Do you believe HIS account of the escapade? We usually don't rely on the fired perpetrator for information, yet that is what the lawsuit and people here have been hewing to.

[retrowire]

88. And the perp said he never stole anything.

And even though there's proof that things were viewed, it does not confirm that anything was retained or copied.

[frazzled]

171. I'd trust the logs, not the perp /nt

[retrowire]

179. Then why are they even asking the perp? nt

[MoonRiver]

38. Why is Bernie hiding behind his campaign spokespeople?

He needs to get in front of the camera and explain the actions of HIS campaign.

[retrowire]

40. Why is Hillary hiding?

Her spokespeople spoke on it instead of her and she's technically got nothing to lose. why not extend the same courtesy to Bernie that he extended to her about her emails?

[stupidicus]

57. why do Hillarians always change the subject

and then convince themselves they prevailed with a topical argument?

[restorefreedom]

52. you would think this would settle it

but in the world of identity politics, facts are meaningless. otherwise how could a war mongering, corporate water carrier, pro death penalty candidate ever even get this close in a dem primary?

thanks for putting the truth out there, rw...i doubt it will sink in for many, however.

that will have to wait till the lawsuit discovery, or her trouncing in the primaries.

either works for me.

[jalan48]

54. The poor Clintons-everyone is out to get them.

[seabeyond]

59. I do not care if unethically they went into her data and hand wrote notes or downloaded. Theft.

[retrowire]

64. *shrugs* ok, suit yourself. nt

[seabeyond]

80. It is that bright light of integrity that is blinding so many. Cheating, ... Gets one a shrug.

[retrowire]

89. Except no theft was ever confirmed. so.. nt

[seabeyond]

103. ya. See. Sanders fired the dude for nuthin'.

[retrowire]

107. He fired him for accessing a folder.

Retaining data in that folder? Never happened.

If you were to open the folder at your job that lead to the finance sector, your ass would be fired to. I mean, you didn't copy anyone's W2's or anything, but you sure as hell shouldn't have been in there.

The hillary camp is way too desperate to knock a man that supposedly wasn't a threat to her highness. It's very revealing.

Lol, I wonder what would've happened if O'Malley had done it. Hillary supporters would have shrugged.

[seabeyond]

113. He stole data. Download, Notes or Brain. He stole data. This is not a tough one.

[retrowire]

118. Uh... no.

We are confident at this point that no campaigns have access to or have retained any voter file data of any other clients; with one possible exception, one of the presidential campaigns.

No one has retained anything, with of course... One possible exception.

If it were Bernie... Then the DNC wouldn't have buckled to his lawsuit threat. They could have kept the data from Bernie and stood proud today.

But they buckled. Wonder why?

Maybe it's because they don't actually have the dirt on Bernie. And maybe that one possible exception is some other campaign.

[Hoyt]

66. The "crime" wasn't a big deal, the spin blaming Clinton was utter BS.

[retrowire]

92. It may be a stretch yes. The DNC is the true problem. nt

[Jester Messiah]

90. All Camp Weathervane does is lie, lie, and lie some more.

Just like their idol.

[retrowire]

94. The "Anything it takes" campaign.

Her thirst for power is too revealing.

[moobu2]

101. Yeah, how dare they make Bernie Sanders staff steal Hillary's data right?

and then lie abut it by telling the truth and up is down and left is right and Bernie Sanders is going to be POTUS. lol you people are something else.

[Jester Messiah]

106. Snopes says you're a liar.

[SunSeeker]

201. No it doesn't. Snopes was pretty equivocal -- and it is an outdated post at this point.

A lot more information has come out since that Snopes post, not the least of which is Uretsky ADMITTING he saved data.

The former data director for Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT)’s presidential campaign said Friday that staffers for the campaign accessed and saved voter information from opponent Hillary Clinton...

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/josh-uretsky-clinton-data-breach


This is what happens when you hire Libertarian types who are more interested in going after Hillary Clinton than supporting Bernie.

[Attorney in Texas]

99. k+r

[SoapBox]

123. So how many times has the Hill Campaign been looking through the Sanders data?

What has the Hill group been looking at when the firewall is down? Or, do they just have flat out access anyway?

[PosterChild]

142. Best summary and assement.....

Best summary and assement:

Jeff Weaver, Sanders’ campaign manager:

"Clearly, while that information was made available to our campaign because of the incompetence of the vendor, it should not have been looked at. Period"

Sanders communications director Michael Briggs:

"After discussion with the DNC it became clear that one of our staffers accessed some modeling data from another campaign. That behavior is unacceptable, and that staffer was immediately fired."

http://www.npr.org/2015/12/18/460273748/bernie-sanders-campaign-locked-out-of-key-voter-file-after-data-breach

What the Sander's campaign did was unethical and stupid.

[retrowire]

146. And they took the appropriate actions and fired the staffer for doing so.

What is clear though, and needs to be communicated, is nothing was stolen.

[PosterChild]

149. Indeed. eom

[stonecutter357]

143. Bernie's campaign stole data.

[retrowire]

147. Yep, sure did.

That's why the DNC buckled to his lawsuit and he got his data back and he'll be in the debate tonight.

See ya there!

XD lmao

[stonecutter357]

154. Yep, sure did.

Sanders campaign's Clinton data searches appear to violate federal law.

[retrowire]

161. Good to see there's a federal investigation ongoing.

Oh wait there isn't.

But Hillary's dealing with the FBI right now, why don't you go ask her what that's like?

[stonecutter357]

176. she may need a private email server.

[PosterChild]

157. I think they "buckled" because...

....they are reasonable folks who have the best interests of the party in mind. Given the potential serriousness of the situation their initial reaction was entirely warrented.

[Lokijohn]

206. Haha

Do you really think the DNC "are reasonable folks who have the best interests of the party in mind"? That is hilarious!

[PosterChild]

217. Yes, of course I do....

..... maybe you don't agree as to what cosritutes the best interest of the party. That's ok, reasonable people can disagree. But there are reasonable people who disagree with you, and I doubt you are in the majority.

I think you should dispense with the derisive, feigned merriment - it doesn't do your cause any good.

[1StrongBlackMan]

159. If I enter your database and look at your modeling files, have I not ...

Acquired something (knowledge I am not entailed to?

[Luminous Animal]

183. Have you noticed the time stamps on the breaches?

I doubt he had time to look at anything. I believe he was doing exactly what he said he was doing. Gathering evidence and saving it to folders. That is what IT people do in order to prove that there is a problem.

[1StrongBlackMan]

189. You have seen the audit report? Can you post a link. n/t

[matt819]

173. I hope Bernie slams the DNC for this

at the debate tonight. As well as Hillary for letting the lies spread. She should be ashamed of herself.

[Matariki]

175. It's a cheap Rovian tactic

Clinton has a trustworthiness problem so try and make the conversation about Bernie 'stealing'

It's laughable, but so, so predictable.

[AlbertCat]

202. but so, so predictable.

This ^


Does this mean we can bring up Clinton's e-mail thingie again?

Of course not! Because that was bogus too... no matter how it appeared on the surface.

[concreteblue]

180. This just gets crazier and crazier. Not the story, but the discussion

The Shrillaries are reaching new heights of low in their desperation to pin anything...ANYTHING, on Bernie's campaign. This smells of Rove and Atwater. It is absolutely astounding that Hillary minions ignore facts, logic and rational thought in a desperate attempt to hold onto their spin. If the "one possible exception" was the Sanders campaign, the lawsuit would not have been dropped, and the DNC would have added this accusation to their released dialogue. End. Of. Story.
Aren't you guys/girls getting dizzy yet?

[Duval]

181. Thanks so much retrowire. I really like

Snopes for fact checking. I wonder why they bucked, also. I'm so glad the lawsuit is going forward. We have a right to know.

[backscatter712]

186. Exactly. This was a white-hat job.

Against the rules, yes, which is why he got fired, but he deliberately left breadcrumbs and explained what he did.

So calling Bernie himself and calling his entire campaign a bunch of thieves is pretty damned disgusting if you ask me.

[Cryptoad]

193. Sorry to find out Bernie lack the stones

to own up to his staff's being where there were not suppose to be.
Now he is painted as the Whining Sore Loser
His supporters werer the reason I left his camp
and now I am more glad that I did!

[retrowire]

195. Uhh where have you been? lmao

He fired the guy who crossed the line and sued the DNC for it.

The DNC buckled to the lawsuit and gave him his stuff back.

Lacking stones? lmao

[BeanMusical]

219. "His supporters werer the reason I left his camp"

Sure you were in his camp.

[Logical]

224. Lol, yes, you were in beanies camp! Lol! IM me! Nt

[smiley]

216. Kick

[Tarc]

220. Sorry kid, this is theft

And Sanders' character is on the line at the moment as only 1 of the 4 involved has been fired.

[mythology]

221. So was it the Clinton campaign or the DNC that took the guy into the back room

and tortured him until he admitted he did save data? Also further reporting from Time and others say that they did download information. And if it's so simple, why has the Sanders campaign repeatedly lied?

Sorry but it looks like you're wrong.

[Enthusiast]

222. Kicked and recommended to the Max!

[ViseGrip]

226. Go to work and turn on your computer, go to your file, and there is Clinton's shit, not once, twice.

Nuff said. We need a full investigation of the data and EMAILS, as Weaver stated.

[MrWendel]

227. Here's What Actually Happened in the Great Sanders-Clinton Data Theft

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2015/12/heres-what-actually-happened-great-sanders-clinton-data-theft