2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: Very disappointing: Bernie Sanders repeats falsehoods about data breach. [View all]ljm2002
(10,751 posts)...Debbie DID blink and blink and blink. It was truly weird. I noticed it right away, when the thing happened and before reading about the incident on DU. Then I was glad to see that others had noticed. Personally, I think it is a "tell" -- about lying and/or about her ulterior motives. If this is the worst name she ever gets called she'll be doing good.
Secondly, I don't LIKE Debbie Wasserman Schultz. My reasons go back to her tenure in Florida, where she actively supported Republicans over Democrats while serving as an officer of the Democratic Party in Florida (and, by the way, to all of you who require loyalty oaths: please turn your gaze towards Debbie to see a real malefactor). So anyway, after her ridiculous performance in front of the cameras, where she blinked like mad, I like to remind people of it -- since it really did give her away IMO.
Thirdly: Yes the Sanders campaign said things that were wrong at the beginning. Of course, this was in the face of being publicly accused by DWS of stealing data -- words like "theft" and "hacking" were being thrown around in the press -- the campaign was being smeared by a DNC chair who couldn't wait to go public. They were trying to downplay it and were playing defense. Understandable (to me) -- but I do agree, it is still no excuse for misleading statements. Tell the truth, and if you don't know, then say "I don't know, we'll have to get back to you on that" and find out the truth before making statements.
Finally: the reports you have read saying that DWS / DNC had the right to cut off data access, are 100% irrelevant, since that is not what the contract said. As evidenced by the sequence of events that transpired after the Sanders campaign filed suit.
Edit history
![](du4img/smicon-reply-new.gif)