So, in summary . . .

[Le Taz Hot]

Debbie Wasserman-Schultz tried to go after Bernie Sanders at a time she thought would cripple his campaign -- right before the third Democratic Party Debate (strategically scheduled 6 days before Christmas on a Saturday night). Result: Bernie's getting more attention from the press than he has received before all this happened, his campaign raised $1 million within 24 hours after the incident and he's up another 4 points in New Hampshire (now up by 14 points).

The pushback to Wasserman-Schultz was immediate. Jeff Weaver's first press conference showed what professionalism, and integrity, looks like. He was ready with the facts, stated them, and fired a volley right back at the DNC for unmistakably siding with the Clinton camp. This has been brewing for several months and the DNC fired the first salvo. Weaver hit back hard, followed by DFA and Move On. David Axelrod, a died-in-the-wool Yellow Dog Democrat came out and admitted the DNC had their fingers on the scales for Hillary. That came from the White House. Remember, they did the same thing in 2008 (regular, unexplained access to the Obama campaign data) so Obama knows of what he speaks and he's telling the DNC to knock it off. Shortly after that, Wasserman-Schultz caved.

This issue is far from over as the Sanders campaign has not withdrawn the lawsuit. By opening up this can of worms Wasserman-Schultz opened the DNC up to legal action. That means Discovery which means ALL records, including data excursions into the Sanders data by the Clinton campaign, are subject to review. The lawsuit also calls for an independent auditor.

I think we are witnessing historical events here.

[restorefreedom]

1. excellent recap of the sitch so far.

and I think discovery is going to be

[NCTraveler]

2. Weaver looked like he was in over his head.

The images of who Sanders hired as his National Data Director also shows incompetence. The investigation will be into the crime. The one you could care less about. The possible theft of presidential campaign information. They were so disorganized the his Data Director admitted he knew it was wrong yet continued. What a fool. What did Sanders know? When did he know it? What did a Weaver know? When did he know it?

So sick of watching people desperatley try to cover up what appears to be federal campaign tampering. It's pathetic. Someone steals a mower from Home Depot and Sanders supporters start yelling for Home Depot to be audited.

[daleanime]

5. Will be into both incidents. ....

not that you'll think of that as a good thing.

So why is the "perpetrator" of the incident the one taking it to court?

[Blue_Adept]

16. Typical republican approach; attack others for what you did?

[merrily]

21. Typical baloney

[KittyWampus]

106. that is literally what Sanders supporters are doing. It's the bully-approach

Your 'side' does something egregious to an opponent? Accuse the others of doing it.

[merrily]

109. Um, no. That's a classic Clinton supporter move. And your post is a perfect example.

[Cal33]

189. You are correct. Just look at Schultz's reaction -- she backed down immediately. That

tells a lot about who is the guilty one.

[merrily]

190. I think this is more about Hillary's supporters.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1280&pid=74854

Another one, not mentioned in that post: As Mayor of Burlington, Sanders not only allows the first gay pride parade in Burlington history, but marches in it joyfully and proudly. He votes against DOMA (see my sig line), BUT, like every single House and Senate Democrat who voted against it, including Ted Kennedy, Sanders cites states rights. Seems apparent to me that there was some agreement among those who voted for it as to the explanation they'd give. Hillary does not come out for equal marriage until 2013, citing states' rights. Guess what her supporters cite? That Sanders cited states rights to justify his stand on equal marriage--seven years before Hillary did.



NOT GOOD ENOUGH BERNIE yet so much better than Hillary.

[bjobotts]

139. U don't know what your talking about.

[bjobotts]

140. Go to the server's web site for the truth.DWS lied

[rhett o rick]

142. Sanders is as honest as the day is long and Clinton has been know for a decade for her

dirty tricks. In fact some say that's why they like her, she is tough, Margaret Thatcher tough. She was tough on the Iraqis and half a million died. Now that's tough.

[Nitram]

152. Rhett, you can repeat the Bernana homesty meme as many times as you like, but...

...it doesn't change the fact that the Sanders campaign stole proprietary voter data from the Clinton campaign. Sanders is not a saint and Clinton is not evil. Deal with it.

[rhett o rick]

161. And you don't know the facts. My money is on dirty tricks by the DWS/Clinton team. nm

[Nitram]

164. I'm interested in neither your money nor your speculation.

Just the facts, M'am. Just the facts.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/12/18/the-hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-data-fight-explained/

[rhett o rick]

165. The corp-media has come out in favor of HRC. Why would I expect them to be honest? nm

[Nitram]

166. Only when it supports Berrnie, I know. nt

[rhett o rick]

171. Big corporations love HRC including the media companies. The People love Sanders.

This is a class war. Why would some Democrats choose Goldman-Sachs over the People's choice?

[Nitram]

172. Ah, "the People".

Bernie is fortunate to have all of them on his side.

[Proserpina]

174. I think you will find that even if he doesn't have ALL the People on his side right now

He will have enough of us for all practical purposes...and after a few productive years in office, people will be denying they ever supported Hillary instead of Bernie.

[Nitram]

180. You really do have a dark view of your fellow Democrats.

If Bernie wins and makes good on his promises, I will certainly and proudly admit that I was wrong. I have always been willing to do that. You sound like a very unhappy person.

[Proserpina]

181. I won't tell you what you sound like

But I will tell your mother.

[Nitram]

183. Ok, now that's just creepy.

[Nitram]

184. My Mom died last year, btw.

[rhett o rick]

178. Yep and the Oligarchy better beware. Goldman-Sachs money cant buy everyone. nm

[cui bono]

194. You've got that backwards. The people are fortunate to have Bernie on their side.

We need to have someone on our side. Let's hope this time it will be the president.

.

[JackInGreen]

146. So maybe Debs should have gotten federal cyber crimes involved

instead of the press? That would mean that there was a crime though, which Sanders and team are more than willing to indulge is possible, so let's get to discovery, see what there is to see, and if there's no harm, no foul, right?

[pangaia]

44. ""perpetrator" of the incident the one taking it to court?"

DUH --right on the money.

Weaver knows what he is doing..

[NorthCarolina]

73. Sanders campaign obviously knows

something that they wish to disclose through an independent review. I think I have a pretty good idea of what it is too.

[Chef Eric]

116. I have a theory too.

But if Clinton emerges as the nominee, and THEN an independent review finds out that Clinton staffers did some snooping of their own, then we're all screwed.

Because in that scenario, there will be outrage against Clinton, and she will likely lose the general election to whatever lunatic the Republicans come up with.

[NorthCarolina]

117. If

Clinton is the nominee she will likely lose the GE regardless of any turn of events related to campaign data snooping. The Democratic base doesn't trust her, unaffiliated voters are apathetic towards her and certainly not inspired by her, the right despises her, and there is very little enthusiasm connected to her campaign.

That's the reality of the situation. Bernie will prevail though, and of that I am pretty sure.

[Chef Eric]

124. I agree that Sanders has a better chance in the GE.

But if we're going to make Sanders the nominee, then we've got plenty of work to do.

[Ed Suspicious]

137. Then let's get busy.

[Nitram]

153. MC, you're just plain wrong because...

...your entire theory is based on false premises. Clinton is winning in all national polls, so your insistence that she will lose the GE is patent baloney.

[DhhD]

156. My theory: The truth will wire or rewire the Superdelegates in the right connections.

[libdem4life]

27. Fantasy thinking..."over his head"...surely you meant DWS at present. If it happened

before, then Hill's group ...the staff of the IT company...better get together for a Come To Jesus meeting.

As the what did they know and when did they know it goes BACK to October and who knows where else? Guess we're going to find out.

So, in conclusion, this is pure Final Stages of Denial.

[George II]

56. His main claim to fame before becoming Sanders' Campaign Manager was....

....owning a comic book store in Burlington Vermont. A real life Stuart Bloom:

In case anyone doesn't know who he is:

[Phlem]

63. Oh Noes!!!!

And Hillary's claim to fame is corporate money.

[catnhatnh]

76. So now we denigrate small business owners???

I guess you figure this is a laugh line. Actually it is just very revealing of your mindset.

[George II]

79. Who is denigrating him?

But while you're judging others' "mindset", how do you feel about those who felt the need to comment on the length of time Hillary Clinton spent in the bathroom on Saturday night?

[catnhatnh]

83. So the Gif on your post

taken from a top-rated tv comedy was put there to show what a comic book store owner looks like? Who's denigrating him-you are. Have the last word if you wish, I'm done.

[LanternWaste]

151. I'd cower behind implication too

"Who is denigrating him?"

I'd cower behind implication too. Illustrating the courage of one's own convictions by speaking directly is so twentieth century... and, as it rarely allows us the opportunity to engage in the pretense of cleverness, it simply become passe.

[Nitram]

154. Denigrate small business owners? Not exactly.

Just question whether they have the skill, knowledge and experience to run a national political campaign.

[Proserpina]

176. Harry Truman was a small (and failed) business owner

It's really good to have some history under your belt.

Truman was born in Missouri and spent most of his youth on his family's farm. In the last five months of World War I, he served in combat in France as an artillery officer in his National Guard unit. After the war, he briefly owned a haberdashery and joined the Democratic Party political machine of Tom Pendergast in Kansas City, Missouri. Truman was first elected to public office as a county official and became a U.S. Senator in 1935. He gained national prominence as head of the Truman Committee formed in March 1941, which exposed waste, fraud, and corruption in wartime contracts.

During World War II, while Nazi Germany surrendered a few weeks after Truman assumed the presidency, the war with Imperial Japan was expected to last another year or more...

wikipedia

[Nitram]

177. The political process was a great deal less complicated in Truman's day.

Just the compilation of data and the use of databases in campaigns requires a high level of very specialized expertise. the average small business owner wouldn't have a clue. Neither would I.

[Proserpina]

179. Pathetic

[Nitram]

186. BTW, Proserpina, you shouldn't have eaten those pomegranate seeds.

Just sayin'.

[tobefree]

80. You're going there!!

Now you want to denigrate a small business owner? For what? Please expound on your thinking...

[BuelahWitch]

115. He's done that since he's retired

He worked with Bernie in Washington for decades. From Mother Jones:
"After Sanders was elected to the House in 1991, Weaver joined his staff as legislative assistant, eventually working his way up to chief of staff. He managed Sanders' successful 2006 Senate campaign, staying on as the senator's right-hand-man."

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/07/bernie-sanders-jeff-weaver-victory-comics

[cui bono]

128. Oh, nevermind.

You aren't worth it and I have to stop letting people bring me down to their level.

.

[George II]

129. Correction - his comic book store is in Virginia, not Vermont. Sorry.

[roody]

144. I love Stuart!

[tblue37]

192. Comic book stores are often very successful small businesses. Also, millenials

can relate to an interest in comic books. I am a 65-year-old woman, but I can sometimes be found browsing our local comic book store. As a teacher of literature and as someone with wide-ranging interests in the variety of ways that mythos (story) is embodied, in social and cultural analysis, in anthropology generally, and in the various ways that the sacred is defined and that worship manifests itself, I find comics and other fantasy forms fascinating.

Don't be so snobbish about comic book stores. Sure, some comic book fans are as silly as your gif suggests, but I don't see any difference between that extreme devotion to trivialities and other forms of extreme devotion to sacralized figures or items.

In fact, much of the worst behavior I see here on DU--from a small number of devoted followers of both front runners--is no different from the sentiments expressed in your gif. Both HRC and Bernie are human beings, not demigods, and both are successful politicians. The difference is in their policy positions and their campaign tactics, as well as in their character. On all these measures, Bernie appeals to me more than HRC, but both of them--and MOM, of course--are light years beyond any of the GOP candidates.

Those who worship any politician as though he/she is a savior are engaging in a personality cult, not in the rational behavior of a citizen fulfilling the civic duty to wisely weigh a politician's character, history, skill, and policy positions before entrusting him/her with such momentous power and influence.

I can understand those who prefer HRC because they have studied her and believe she has the best qualifications, or even if they prefer BS's positions and character but believe HRC is our best shot at protecting the country from further Republican harm.

But I absolutely cannot respect those who worship her and attack any who criticize her as though they have blasphemed. I feel the same way about those whose criticism of HRC is a similarly OTT reaction against perceived blasphemy against a man they have elevated to the status of a deity.

There is much in HRC's behavior, campaign tactics, and history to criticize and to be wary of, but the ugliness of the attacks I see from some of the people who support the same candidate I support really disgusts me. Of course I see similar unreasoning and rabid attacks from some HRC supporters against BS.

All that being said, though, DWS really is Satan.

[Android3.14]

59. Vocabulary assistance

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/clueless

[NCTraveler]

91. Exactly. Their appearce is just that. nt.

[catnhatnh]

75. Co-President Hillary helped pick the White House staffers, right?

The White House travel office controversy, sometimes referred to as Travelgate,[1][2] was the first major ethics controversy of the Clinton administration. It began in May 1993, when seven employees of the White House Travel Office were fired. This action was unusual because although theoretically staff employees serve at the pleasure of the President and could be dismissed without cause, in practice, such employees usually remain in their posts for many years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House_travel_office_controversy

[madfloridian]

85. Don't kid yourself.

People are impressed by Weaver.

[ljm2002]

87. Hmmm, so the guy who's in "over his head"...

...gets DWS and the DNC to back down within hours of filing suit against them. Tell me, if Weaver is in "over his head", then how would you describe Wasserman Schultz? How's she doing?

No one is trying to cover anything up -- well possibly DWS and the DNC are, and that is why they avoided going before a judge. The Sanders campaign immediately owned up to what happened and started firing people. While DWS pulled access to the data, against the express terms of the contract, then went to the press and started throwing around accusations like "theft", in an attempt to smear the Sanders campaign (beyond the actual wrongdoing that occurred, which, again, was immediately acknowledged by Sanders and dealt with). She kept stressing how the Sanders campaign "broke the rules", while at the same time she and the DNC were breaking rules that were spelled out clearly and unambiguously in the contract.

She did not expect the Sanders campaign to strike back immediately and boldly. She did not expect they would bring up the issue of whether the DNC and their software vendor were negligent in their handling of security issues.

I hope the lawsuit goes forward. If it does, I look forward to discovery with great anticipation.

[JDPriestly]

89. The DNC had or should have had a contract with its vendor that specified that the vendor had

the duty to maintain the firewall, the separation, between the databases of Hillary and Sanders.

The vendor failed to perform that duty.

Sanders was provided with Hillary's information, with the information in her database.

You can't steal what you are given.

The analogy with walking into someone else's house is inapplicable.

The Sanders campaign was walking into what was supposed to be Sander's own house and discovered Hillary's stuff in it.

That is not theft. That is the DNC and its vendor not performing their duty to maintain the firewall between the databases.

There will be an investigation.

As for Sanders' "apology" during the debate, watch Hillary's eyes when she responds. She cannot look up and at anyone.

I have no proof but I strongly suspect that Bernie's willing apology was part of the deal with the DNC that allowed him to evict Hillary's stuff out of his house and get into the door of his own house without Hillary's stuff blocking the door.

Something I have noticed, Bernie's supporters are really, really smart. Hillary's -- ????? Not as stupid as Trumps for sure.

But to compare Bernie's team's conduct with theft is incorrect.

You cannot steal stuff you are given. If a package that is clearly marked with another person's name arrives at your door, you give it to the person whose name is on it. But you are not stealing just because you read the name and address on the package. That's what Bernie's team did. They verified that Hillary's stuff was in Bernie's house.

[NCTraveler]

107. They weren't given it, they had to look.

It took action on their part. It is a fact that they performed numerous searches. That isn't being given something.

[JDPriestly]

125. Do you have proof that the two databases were completely separate at that time?

I doubt that was possible.

the two databases were most likely combined into one.

The list of queries done would not make sense if Bernie had been able to separate Hillary's data from his, that is if the the data had not been mixed.

If Bernie's list had been separate from Hillary's, that is if there had been two lists, Bernie's staff could have just queried Hillary's list without specifying that it wanted information from Hillary's data.

So since the queries as I have seen them seek to find Hillary's data, naming Hillary, I have to assume that the two databases were fused into one at the time of the queries, the searches.

I wasn't there, but that is what makes sense to me.

Why would the Bernie team specifically ask for Hillary's information by her name if the databases were separate at the time of the search? They would have simply gone to Hillary's database and queried for the information without her name.

That is why I assume the firewall was down and the databases appeared to Bernie's team in the form of one very large database.

Now the question is whether Hillary also had that enlarged database that included Bernie's data. We shall see.

Bernie's team wanted data from their database and I would imagine noticed that some of Hillary's data was there and possibly coming up when they did general searches. I imagine that it was at that point that they did searches for Hillary's data so they could find out the extent of the fusion of the two databases.

Do you have another explanation.

I work puzzles a lot. This is how I work this puzzle.

[tazkcmo]

131. Exactly why they sued.

"Now the question is whether Hillary also had that enlarged database that included Bernie's data. We shall see."

If the Sanders campaign could see all the data so could the Clinton campaign. Thus the lawsuit so they can expose the access Clinton's team had on multiple occasions and used it. It's the only reason the lawsuit makes sense.

[JDPriestly]

135. There is also the fact that Sanders suffered a loss for many reasons because of the

accusation and because of the lack of access to his data for the period in which it was denied to him.

[Nitram]

168. You guys go on and on about poor Bernie's "loss".

When it was his campaign that is guilty of malfeasance, and Bernie had to fire staffers as a result.

[JDPriestly]

173. What "malfeasance" are you talking about?

Bernie sets a very high standard for the conduct of his campaign. Other candidates would not have fired staffers over what happened in Bernie's campaign.

The vendor admits it was responsible for releasing data that had a "bug."

I am tired of posting and posting and posting the link to the NPG Van blog on NPG Van's website. Go there. Read it and find out what the vendor, the only party with access to the full database says about what happened.

There was no downloading. Nothing. Searches were run. Data was viewed. Monstrous amounts of data was viewed. There was no possibility of harm to Hillary's campaign. The breach lasted either 40 or so minutes or a couple of hours. I've heard both versions.

Hillary's supporters have so exaggerated this problem that it makes them look ridiculously hysterical.

I support Sanders' call for an independent investigation going back to the beginning of the campaign.

If Wasserman-Schultz has been honest and fair in her management of the DNC, I'm sure she will not mind if all three campaigns look at her e-mails and her statements as she organized the handling of the database and the entire campaign.

[Nitram]

175. This.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/12/18/the-hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-data-fight-explained/

I wouldn't dismiss the possibility out of hand that Bernie staff are trying to cover for the campaign. If they did run a query on Clinton's data, they would certainly have a good reason to try to cover that up. When the dust settle I assume we'll have a clearer picture of what happened. I too support a full investigation, wherever it might lead.

[JDPriestly]

187. That article is poorly researched.

NGP Van, the vendor made a full explanation of what happened on its blog. The NGP Van statement is not a guess.

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

First, the Washington Post article does not state WHY Sanders campaign had access to Hillary's data. Here is what NGP Van says about that missing link in the WAPOst article:

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.

Sanders' campaign did not hack into Hillary's information. The bug in the NGP Van code opened up the full database including SOME of Hillary's information.

When I saw very briefly the list of queries or searches that Sanders' campaign did, based on my experience with databases, I figured that Sanders' employee was looking to see whether Hillary's information really was visible and the extent to which it was visible. The list of searches that the Washington Post published is not the list I saw. The list I saw was longer and began more generally.

The information was not savable for Sanders. That's according to NGP Van.

The Washington Post article is conjecture. The NGP Van blog states what the manager of the NGP Van website and database KNOWS about what happened.

The Washington Post should issue a correction of the inaccuracies in their article and should have asked for information from NGP Van before publishing sheer speculation as fact.

[Nitram]

191. Are you suggesting that NGP Van has no reason to cover up or huge the facts?

After all, they are liable for allowing the firewall fail. They have much to lose if it is revealed that valuable data was stolen as a result.

[JackInGreen]

147. Please don't read this post

it's behind a firewall, and if that's malfunctioning, you're stealing my written thoughts you NAUGHTY little squirrel you.

[Paka]

114. Great summary

Love this statement: "I have no proof but I strongly suspect that Bernie's willing apology was part of the deal with the DNC that allowed him to evict Hillary's stuff out of his house and get into the door of his own house without Hillary's stuff blocking the door."

[PosterChild]

102. Good summary. eom

[mhatrw]

127. LOL. A Clinton staffer wrote the program and has full unfettered access to the database! nt

[Jarqui]

3. Unfortunately, with lawyers involved, it's unlikely to transpire before iowa.

Hopefully, behind the scenes, the Democratic Party is going to get the the bottom of those who compromised Sanders campaign data last October. Because if that comes out during the general election that Clinton's campaign did that last October, and her campaign didn't own up to it nor stop using that data and the DNC didn't stick up for Sanders last October, when they should have because they were in Clinton's pocket, that could be devastating for Hillary's campaign - close to Watergate (not criminal or not as criminal but pretty low cheating during an election just the same). No majority will support someone who did that to become president of the United States. So not checking it out could hand the presidency to the GOP.

I would like to know before a candidate is declared the primary winner how the above shakes out. Sooner is better than later.

[restorefreedom]

4. agree, which is why a completely independent audit is necessary.

the dnc will hide the tracks of their collusion with hrc, thinking they can squeak through the primaries and the ge. but it won't happen. even if hillary wins the nom(a big if), this will come out and be a major shitstorm during the ge

we need to know now.

[Jarqui]

12. While they're at it in the computer department,

hopefully they can get some assurances this isn't going to blow up:
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/12/hillary-clinton-bryan-pagliano-emails-state-department-216679

The State Department has told Senate investigators it cannot find backup copies of emails sent by Bryan Pagliano, the top Hillary Clinton IT staffer who maintained her email server but has asserted his Fifth Amendment right and refused to answer questions on the matter.
...
the FBI has taken possession of Pagliano’s government computer system, where traces of the messages are most likely to be found, according to the letter.

Grassley, an Iowa Republican, has been considering whether to grant Pagliano immunity in exchange for testimony on who approved Clinton's private email setup and whether anyone raised any objections to the system.

Convince me there's nothing to be concerned about there. The FBI did recover Hillary's deleted emails.
http://www.businessinsider.com/fbi-recovered-clintons-deleted-emails-2015-9

For Sanders campaign manager to be "very confident" their data was compromised and there was something about finding traces of Clinton's stuff, losing backups may not be enough in this case. He may already have evidence.

So in the wake of deleted emails on several computers & lost backups for several computers, the FBI, the Senate, the House, the IG, 12 GOP candidates, a bunch in the media and now the Sanders campaign are after you. How does she sleep at night?

[restorefreedom]

49. it is a disaster in the wings

and i doubt sanders team would continue with the lawsuit if they didn't already have some evidence that their data set was compromised. not to mention the people getting email suddenly from clinton when they only gave their address to sanders...

[Nitram]

185. I hope your right, merrily.

Because if it's a desperate measure by a desperate campaign, it's going to be very sad to watch.

[restorefreedom]

188. which campaign are you thinking is desperate?

clintons or sanders?

sorry, the comments are fast and furious, hard to keep track.

in either case, an act of desperation will not serve any of the dems well, no matter which team its coming from

[merrily]

23. Given how closely related the vendor is to the Clintons and little Debbie,

confidence that even an independent audit is going to tell the full story.

[restorefreedom]

48. yeah i worry about that too

no doubt they are strategizing now, not to mention all the wiping and shredding going on as we speak....

[AgingAmerican]

148. An active cover-up would be disastrous for Hillary

It isn't the crime that sunk Nixon, it was the cover-up.

[restorefreedom]

158. and the impeachment of bill clinton, as ridiculous as it was,

was for the lie not the sex

its always the coverup that gets em

[Qutzupalotl]

6. The only reason DWS caved is

she was plainly in violation of the contract which stipulates that in event of a dispute, a campaign has ten days to resolve it before any punishment. Unfortunately, that's the only reason. The calls, emails, facebook posts, while damaging, meant nothing to her. DWS does not have a history of listening to people.

[Le Taz Hot]

13. The fact that she didn't have a legal leg to stand on

from the beginning but released to the press that the DNC had blocked the Sanders' campaign from their own data was breathtakingly stupid. It honestly opened up Pandora's Box. I think she probably realized shortly after the shitstorm that came her way that she was in trouble. I think Axelrod going public against her decision and her meddling was the nail in the coffin for her. If she keeps her job after all her other failures I would say the DNC is done.

[Proserpina]

19. And yet, Debbie STILL has a paycheck

And for all his prior knowledge and stuff, Obama hasn't fired her. He's the Decider.

What's up with that?

[Le Taz Hot]

26. Understandable as that would

create a huge scandal and further expose the DNC's weaknesses. I can understand why he would choose not to do that. For now. However, I'm guessing within the next week or two, DWS resigns her position.

[Proserpina]

29. Well, then, you are far more "understanding" than I am

It's already a huge scandal, and the longer Debbie hangs on, the worse it will get, especially when the lawsuit starts its discovery process.

She should be canned. Not allowed to "resign" gracefully. Those that live by the sword...

[davidpdx]

159. +1

[Scootaloo]

92. Sadly I agree

Canning the DNC chair in the middle of a presidential campaign, as fucking satisfying as it would be, would also be a political train wreck.

[FlatBaroque]

31. Wasserman Schultz Reportedly Wanted to Paint Obama as ‘Anti-Woman,’ ‘Anti-Semitic’ If Ousted

http://www.mediaite.com/online/report-dws-wanted-to-paint-obama-as-anti-woman-and-anti-semitic-if-ousted-as-dnc-chair/

[Proserpina]

33. so?

You know how far that would go? As far as the circular file.

Nobody except his immediate family gives a care about Obama's "reputation". He's done his best with it, and it isn't going anywhere--it's a matter of public record.

[FlatBaroque]

41. SO??

You asked a f'ing question and I replied with a media report of why Obama did not fire her in 2014.

Jesus I am starting to despise this place

[appalachiablue]

99. That's incredible but good to know.

[ecstatic]

7. So far, the ONLY wrongdoing that has been proven is the theft

of data committed by Sanders' campaign. Everything else is just desperate, wild eyed speculation. And it's disgusting that their response is to try to sink the entire Democratic party because they've been caught red handed.

[Buzz Clik]

10. +1

[artislife]

11. A full independent audit will either support this or prove something else.

Don't you want to know all of it? Maybe Bernie is truly horrible and hillary is white as driven snow. The independent audit would disillusion so many of his supporters that she will easily waltz to the white house.

Or it won't.

I am willing to know the whole truth. I would think you (all of you) would want to know it as well.

[Le Taz Hot]

14. Nice.

[LovingA2andMI]

20. Great Post!!!

Great Summary Thus Far. Let's see how many Spider Legs this investigation have. Gotta Feeling the Legs are A LOT longer than they initially appeared on surface and some might not like the end result of those legs. #JustSaying!

[ecstatic]

15. Seriously....all this drama when the white house is at risk of going

to Trump or Cruz is NOT welcome. I'm voting for the nominee, whoever it may be. Of course, I'm actually a registered Democrat.

[artislife]

28. I am a registered Democrat and I plan to caucus.

The question for me is whether I stay one or not.

[ybbor]

37. Don't you want to vote for the best candidate?

You know, the one who has the best interest of the nation's citizens, and not just looking to put another feather in their cap.

[ecstatic]

51. Nobody is perfect. Any of the three would be light years better

than the GOP. I'll never agree with anybody 100% of the time. That being said, all the whining around here is becoming unbearable. Back in 2007/2008, Obama supporters didn't have to be obnoxious because the candidate himself was exceptional. I happily got on board once his strengths became undeniable. No nasty insults, memes, or lawsuits necessary.

[reddread]

53. Is that Fear no.5 I smell?

Not with a bang, but protracted whimpering.
Holding the DNC like a captive prize left outsiders hungry
for the right opportunity to make it theirs.

[winter is coming]

54. I find it interesting that Bernie supporters want a full audit and HRC supporters want to move on.

Says something about their confidence in the outcome of the investigation, now doesn't it?

[ecstatic]

60. It really doesn't. Pragmatic dems look at the landscape and what's at stake

and prefer to move on. Not only that, but really, who cares? It's not like the data has helped. Personally, I don't think Hillary's camp is guilty of anything, but this saga is only creating more division and making it easier for the GOP.

[winter is coming]

67. This saga isn't creating more division than already existed, it merely exposes what observant

individuals already knew was there. Right now, the DNC looks pretty corrupt, which hurts us in November. If it truly is, we should clean house and take our lumps now, as far away from election day as possible. If it's not, we can demonstrate that and it will only help us. If there's been collusion between the DNC and the Clinton campaign, discovering that after HRC becomes the nominee would sink us in the general. We need to get in front of this problem instead of trying to sweep it under the rug.

[madokie]

123. The whole truth and nothing but the whole

fucking truth is what I want and am willing to let the chips fall where they may

[Betty Karlson]

145. Very well said, madam.

I for one would love a full audit, if only to restore some general trust.

[riversedge]

34. Yoda is never wrong-

Dems need to focus on the light..




:large

[saidsimplesimon]

68. riversedge, I've never watched "Star Wars".

Who is Yoda? I do agree that this story hurts the prospects for unity within the party for GOTV efforts in the General. My goal is that we come together after a "fair and square" democratic process. We need the next generations involved in the political process. Political moves that attempt to influence the outcome of the primary will not be well received.

Keep it classy dems, we should not be the trumpets of division. Let's get busy registering voters instead of wasting time on meta wars.

Go Bernie, a win in either Iowa or New Hampshire or both is the prize.

[merrily]

38. Wrong. Debbie clearly violated the contract with Sanders by seizing his info and not releasing it

without giving him ten days notice and she's clearly not been neutral in this primary, which it is her duty to be.

The "theft" of Hillary's data does no harm to anyone if the Bernie campaign campaign does not use the data. Lil Debbie did harm Bernie.

[R B Garr]

86. Illegal activity or wrongdoing is a bar to a breach

of contract claim, generally speaking, if that's the route it is going.

Weaver was just on MSNBC confirming that two more staffers were let go because of wrongdoing.

I have to laugh that you are saying the theft was okay for any reason.

This whole episode is a glimpse into the absolute chaos that surrounds Bernie's campaign and by extension his leadership.

[PosterChild]

104. +10 !! (NT)

[jeff47]

40. Sorry, no. We also know the DNC violated their contract with the Sanders campaign.

First, the contract required repeated violations to trigger sanctions. Second, the contract required giving the Sanders campaign 10 days to collect their data before throwing them out.

[treestar]

45. Yes. and the accusation of trying to sink Bernie is so silly

It's desperate really. If this had not happened, Bernie would be doing no better in the polls. If the debates were on Tuesday night at 8 ppm and held weekly, Bernie would be doing no better. Instead of campaigning and getting more voters, the Bernie is losing and complaining that it's all someone else's fault.

[highprincipleswork]

52. You don't know that. Easy solution. More debates. Why not? Only ego.

[ecstatic]

62. HRC's numbers increase after every debate

Everything is not a conspiracy!

[highprincipleswork]

97. Are you folks deliberately trying not to get it?

We simply want a fair playing field, whether Bernie Sanders wins or loses. We don't find this fair, and many, many objective observers thinks it is either highly strange or "smells like a rat". Quoting broadcast news media, not generally that coddling of Bernie Sanders.

The DNC and Hillary could gain every advantage they want from holding more debates, and they should!!!! It would be a legitimate, positive way of showing that there is no collusion.

Why don't they do it then?

[PosterChild]

108. A fair playing field? Hum...

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. A fair play field starts at home plate.

[kenfrequed]

110. Then good

Fine, whatever.

If her numbers go up after each debate all the better. I kind of like the idea of a candidate getting more Democratic confidence before they are endorsed by the party. It would be a good thing.

An umbalanced debate schedule that seems designed to protect a front runner from increased scrutiny and to keep their positions as nebulous as possible does not engender a lot of trust or confidence.

If more Sanders supporters decide that Hillary is the better then fine.

One of the advantages of more debates is the opportunity to keep Democratic issues are given more attention. This would of course be assisted if they were scheduled better and reporting on them was better.

[highprincipleswork]

133. Exactly. Why it's so hard to see that this would be in everyone's interest is beyond me.

[treestar]

94. Bernie would be saying the same things

just more often. I doubt that would gain him so many more voters. And you're underestimating the fact that more debates could get Hillary more voters, too. Everyone who is crazy about Bernie forgets that the average person will look at all three candidates.

[highprincipleswork]

98. Are you folks deliberately trying not to get it?

We simply want a fair playing field, whether Bernie Sanders wins or loses. We don't find this fair, and many, many objective observers thinks it is either highly strange or "smells like a rat". Quoting broadcast news media, not generally that coddling of Bernie Sanders.

The DNC and Hillary could gain every advantage they want from holding more debates, and they should!!!! It would be a legitimate, positive way of showing that there is no collusion.

Why don't they do it then?

[treestar]

100. You're exaggerating the huge difference it would make

apparently you are convinced that more debates means only Bernie gets more voters and not either of the other two. That could be wrong.

And the debates alone are not everything. Bernie can go on TV or make speeches whenever he wants. He can make arguments against Hillary in those speeches. So why are the debates so essential? Can't he think of other ways to get more voters? He needs more voters.

[highprincipleswork]

101. More debates and at better times would be more fair.

This policy of the DWS, pointed out and seen by pretty much anyone who is not in the Hillary tank, is sure to lose enthusiasm and support from Democrats everywhere. How do I know? Because I am one of them, more than 40 years.

If Hillary is such a strong candidate, what does she have to lose by calling for more debates, and putting an end to this ridiculous argument. You know, when an important person to you says they need something, you don't get very far by just arguing with them all the time, But particularly when one could argue the debates have only done her good, why not have more and at better times? Why not?

[kenfrequed]

157. It helps all Democratic candidates

It pushes Democratic policies further into the public consciousness. Even if Bernie isn't the candidate it makes people think of the differences between not just our candidates, but between our candidates and the republican candidates.

More importantly it also makes people think about the differences between the parties and what they stand for. Presidential debates help a hell of a lot with getting people excited to turn out for downticket races too.

The way debates were so thoroughly constrained has been a strategic failure on every score. But what can we expect when the DNC has been headed by someone that has been in charge while the party has been bleeding seats.

[Nitram]

182. Principles, did you ever consider the posibility that in completely good faith,

...we don't buy your premise that Bernie is handicapped by the system? Or are you deliberately trying not to get it? I am tired of Bernistas whining about the mean DNC and the mean Hillary Clinton and the mean media and the mean polls. Just get on with it and support your candidate every way you can. But complaining about the playing field and demonizing Clinton just gets old.

[Dustlawyer]

50. So the DNC and DWS breaching the contract with the Sanders campaign on proper notice

and no 10 day opportunity to cure was not wrong? DWS going to the media first was not ill advised? Keeping the Vendor after 3 dropped firewalls, after both the vendor and the DNC assured the Sanders campaign it would not happen again was not either gross negligence or intentionally done, which would also be wrong?

I am pleased that the Sanders campaign has kept the suit in place so everyone's conduct can be examined. I am not worried about what will be discovered, I WANT the truth, as should we all.

[ecstatic]

55. I'm not worried about what will be discovered either

I'm DISGUSTED by the "I'm caught so let's burn everything down" attitude. All it does is reinforce the idea that Sanders is not really a Democrat. This won't win him any additional support.

[frylock]

61. Sanders taking the DNC head-on is rather appealing to those of us who aren't partisan honks.

[ecstatic]

64. I'm partisan. Guilty as charged.

I don't have the luxury of being non-partisan.

[Phlem]

121. +1

I do believe the lawsuit is still active. He'll get to the bottom of this.

[Javaman]

69. he's fighting against a system that is supposed to suppport him but has come out to be obviously

against him.

If I were Sanders I would do the same thing.

If he doesn't do this, he would effectively be trying to campaign with both hands tied behind his back.

and for your "this won't wing him any additional support" he has raised an additional 1 million virtually over night and has gone up 4 additional points in New Hampshire.

if this "isn't helping him" we Bernie supports can use more of it.

the DNC violated a contract and chose to put personal preference before the party (they are supposed to be neutral and help all Democratic contenders), they need to be re-centered and taught to play fair.

that is what this is all about.

And by Bernie not backing down and rolling over is exactly what I want in a President. He takes shit from no one.

[Chef Eric]

138. This is not a "let's burn everything down" attitude.

This is a "let's get to the bottom of this" attitude.

And it WILL win him additional support. Don't forget that the Sanders campaign raised one million dollars in one day after the lawsuit was announced.

[Phlem]

66. So Much Bullshit so early in the day.

If that is so then Hillary could have ended his campaign instantly. Instead it was an immediate about face by the DNC.

Jeebus Effing Christ!

[workinclasszero]

84. Exactly

[riversedge]

88. 1+

[bvar22]

96. IF you are loking for Party Unity,

then DWS should have handled it quietly through the proper sources
instead of calling a Press Conference.
It was DWS decision to bring this fiasco into the public realm that could hurt the Party,
NOT the Sanders Campaign response.
Once DWS went public, the Sanders Campaign had not choice but to respond in public.

[PosterChild]

103. Exactly right. eom

[lumberjack_jeff]

112. 'Scuze me? DWS is the one who invited the press.

The fact that she abandoned her unilateral sanction on Sanders within 24 hours shows that he's not the existential threat that she believes.

The sinking of the party is the responsibility of the captain, not the iceberg she rammed.

[Phlem]

118. I don't think it matters anymore.

Can you read the replies? They're in a bubble and will not listen to anything else. Off the deep end.

Oh well, the lawsuit is still active and I'd love to get to the bottom of this. If Bernie were guilty, would he still press the lawsuit. I'm thinking no for fear of exposing himself.

He's clearly going to ride this bull to the end and I wholeheartedly support him.

The DNC and Hillary's collusion needs to be exposed and bathed in sunlight.

[Number23]

141. You are absolutely 100% correct.

[Buzz Clik]

8. The OP reads more like some kid interpreting a poem than an actual summary of facts.

Why is it necessary to make these wild accusations?

(don't answer -- I really don't care)

[CharlotteVale]

9. Pretty much.

[WillyT]

17. HUGE K & R !!! - THANK YOU !!!

[jalan48]

18. Thanks for the post.

I totally agree that an independent audit needs to take place. We're Democrats-let's get it out in the open.

[Proserpina]

22. One has to wonder, as well, why the Oppo Research Dept. is silent

Does Hillary not have one, or was there nothing to find?

The effort so far has been pitiful. I almost feel sorry for "We came, we saw, he died".

Except that the blowback has killed a lot of innocents at home and abroad.

[Hiraeth]

24. Only future generations will have the luxury of looking at this through a microscope.

[shireen]

25. How long will it take for an independent auditor to go through the records?

Are we talking weeks? Months? If there's anything to be found, it has to happen soon or it won't make a difference for the early primaries. If it's found late, it could have a negative impact on the general election. I'm supporting Bernie, but if Hillary wins the nomination, I WANT her to win the election.

[artislife]

30. Time magazine seemed to take hours only. nt

[ShrimpPoboy]

32. Am I the only one who thinks this makes all Dems look bad?

Sanders for his campaign's activities (for which he is and should be ultimately responsible), and Clinton and the party at large for appearing to be conspiring, which of course reinforces the narrative about Clinton being dishonest and corrupt.

This fight is not a good look for any of us.

[merrily]

39. Yes. The difference is, Bernie was not involved in the activities of his staffers. DWS and Hillary

do what they do.

[Nyan]

74. Blame Debbie for that. She could have responded to this in any number of ways

But she went to the press out of desperation to sabotage Bernie's campaign. And now it's an open fight.

[winter is coming]

77. Yes, it makes Dems look bad, and the only way to get beyond it is to find out exactly what's

been going on. Do an independent audit from day one of the campaigns, and take corrective action as appropriate. "Moving on" just makes it look like there's a lot of ugly we're trying to stuff in a closet, and will create even more distrust.

I think of it this way: while I'd very much prefer any business I'm dealing with to get it right the first time, how they respond when things go wrong greatly affects my opinion of them.

[catnhatnh]

81. I doubt you are the only one.

I, however think Bernie comes out looking just fine-he fired the tech guy right out of the gate, apologized for his staffers misdeed, and called for a full investigation.

[dpatbrown]

35. Yep,

a independent investigation. And of course Clinton's campaign will also insist on one, right?
DNC has opened a can of worms and are now squirming to end discussions.

[stupidicus]

36. well, that's talking over the heads of the opposition, ain't it?

I don't think they've had sufficient time to absorb and assimilate all the relevant facts in the case yet.

[Arkana]

42. How about we use Occam's Razor?

The only thing we know for sure is that Bernie's guys did something they weren't supposed to. However, there's no evidence Bernie himself ordered it or knew about it. Nor is there any evidence that Hillary is "sabotaging" Bernie's campaign either directly or indirectly.

Conspiracy theories are for Freepers and tinfoil-hatters. Fire the idiots who took what they weren't supposed to and let both candidates move on with their campaigns.

[ljm2002]

90. We know another thing for sure...

...that the vendor allowed free access of proprietary campaign data to rival campaigns, due to a mistake or possibly negligence on their part.

That being the case, every campaign deserves to know what the logs say from day one of their campaign.

[lumberjack_jeff]

113. Occam would also hasten to point out that the guy who poked around in the DNC negligence...

... was fired, yet the negligent people themselves are immune.

People who get fired probably did something which the boss disapproves of.
People who continue working are probably doing things that the boss approves of.

[Paka]

119. +1

Good point.

[Uncle Joe]

43. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, Le Taz Hot.

[CanonRay]

46. Sadly, both sides are spending money on lawyers

that could be much better spent registering voters.

[saidsimplesimon]

70. CanonRay, so true, see comment above..

[rurallib]

47. thank you so much for that clear synopsis.

boiled it down very well.

[LiberalArkie]

57. There is the 2008 "data leakage" of Sen Obama's data to Sen Clintons campaign that

I am interested in. How did Weaver find out about it? I am sure that NGP-VAN didn't tell Sanders, I am sure that the DNC didn't tell Sanders, I am pretty sure that Clinton did not tell Sanders about it.

Discovery about the 2008 "data leakage" will be very interesting.

[Divernan]

58. This lawyer (me) agrees with you. It will be historical.

And not in a good way for Debbie or Hill -that's why there's all the screaming and gnashing of teeth by the Clinton supporters.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

65. DWS's days are numbered.

[LWolf]

71. Concise. +1 nt

[Enthusiast]

72. K&R! This post deserves hundreds of recommendations!

Thank you, Le Taz Hot!

[riversedge]

78. We have the Force

Hillary for Iowa Retweeted
Iowa Starting Line ?@IAStartingLine Dec 19

I mean, the Hillary campaign has already shown their allegiance to Star Wars light sabers #MayTheForceBeWithYou

[vi5]

82. DNC gets no money or support from me until DWS resigns...

..and someone independent is appointed in her place. We need someone focused on getting Democrats elected in the GE, all the way up and down the ticket. Not someone concerned above all else with getting Hillary elected.

[cascadiance]

134. She should resign NOW or be FIRED!!!

Not only is what she doing unfair, but her intentional minimizing the audience for Democratic voices in the debate this year, along with the bad publicity for this latest stunt the DNC is pulling under her leadership is working against the party in general and increases the chance that this country will be destroyed by the Republican party winning elections due to her incompetence/manipulation. 2014 results were bad enough. DNC should have been fixed then and not still being a problem for us a year later.

[rhett o rick]

169. Sorry, she only answers to the 1%. nm

[rosesaylavee]

93. Interesting.

Thanks for the summary.

[AzDar]

95. K & R

[KittyWampus]

105. Bernie's staffers STOLE DATA. Of course they were blocked temporarily, to stop them

from erasing evidence/footprints.

What you are "witnessing" is the inability of some of Sanders supporters to come to grips with him running an amateurish campaign with staff that aren't up to the job.

[Phlem]

120. If Bernie is so guilty then why doesn't Hillary just expose them

and end his campaign? Why did the DNC do an immediate u-turn on the issue?

Wait for it...............Because she's just that gracious?

Don't worry, Bernie's lawsuit is still on, he doesn't seem to have any worries.

We'll get to the bottom of this!

[cui bono]

130. Link to that theft please.

Last I heard the IT company said nothing was stolen.

Thanks!

.

[Nitram]

167. here

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/12/18/the-hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-data-fight-explained/

[cui bono]

193. Don't see it there. Can you quote where it says there was theft?

Also, you seem to have forgotten the exchange you had earlier - please reread these posts as they will explain to you how there was no theft plus more:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251932305#post173

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=938403

.

[Fumesucker]

149. I'm so old...

I can remember when Snowwald escaped Moscow in Evo Morales presidential jet.

[Paka]

111. K&R

Spot on.

[Phlem]

122. :)

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/263929-sanders-suit-still-alive-in-federal-court

[Babel_17]

126. R! (doesn't need any kicks)

lol

[zentrum]

132. Maybe with this….

….we can restore the Democratic party to what it was before the DLC.

Agree with you, Le Taz—could be history in the making. The start of the Great Restoration.

[whereisjustice]

136. Soooooo glad Democratic Party is putting all its chips in the Clinton basket... good government

right? Goddamn it. This stinks to high hell.

[Live and Learn]

143. That is how I see it. nt

[stonecutter357]

150. Bernie Sanders Apologizes to Hillary Clinton for Stealing Voter Data.

[upaloopa]

155. What we are witnessing here is the last attempts of a dieing campaign trying to remain relevant.

[sabrina 1]

163. That's for sure. Hillary's campaign has admitted, after the debate 'we could lose this' in their

email asking or money. They have known what a threat Bernie AND the PEOPLE have become to her candidacy for a long time which is why we are seeing DWS try this garbage, ignoring the warnings Sanders campaign re the data security breach months ago, then VIOLATING THEIR CONTRACT with campaigns by going public rather than abiding by the contract which required ten days to investigate the issue..

Thank the gods Bernie is not dropping that suit. We need to know the facts here and I have a feeling his campaign has a pretty good idea of what they are.

Rovian tricks like this should never be a part of a Democratic campaign, but then it happened in 2008 also, same players, didn't work then and it won't work now.

[bigtree]

160. history won't likely remember the political deflections (like this one)

...from the utter stupidity of the Sanders staffers in accessing Hillary's campaign info (you should hope not).

They will, however, remember that Sanders APOLOGIZED for the incident; and that was before the other axes fell in his campaign.

One side of this was practicing politics; however petty, biased, or exclusive.

The other side was cheating.

It's a cinch what 'history' will show.

[sabrina 1]

162. DWS has surely met her match in Sanders. She should have listened when he warned people not to

underestimate him. That lawsuit scared them so badly they caved almost instantly. Are they really that dumb that they thought he would just lie down and let them roll over him OR his millions of supporters many of whom they can be sure will not be supporting their candidate should they succeed due to the perception that the election is being stolen???

Shame on the DNC, shame on the Party for allowing this to happen. Schultz doesn't care about the party, she supports Repubs over Progressive Dems as we all know. But WE DO. Get rid of her someone!

[rhett o rick]

170. DWS and HRC are driving a big wedge between the Progressive and Conservative Wings

of our Party and it may hurt us in the General. Of course the Conservative Wing is sponsored by the 1% who have made it plane that they want Clinton or Bush but NOT a progressive that might help the People.

This is a class war people. The 1% isn't going to solve our poverty problem. Think about that when you side with them. I side with the People's candidate Sen Sanders.