Can anyone point to specific emails sent by DSW that are truly offensive

[pnwmom]

and/or indicate that actions were taken against Bernie's campaign?

Other than Brad Marshall's email, I haven't read any that were truly offensive or show that some action was taken against Bernie.

For example, answering "LOL" to a claim of Weaver's they disagreed with certainly doesn't qualify -- in my view -- but I saw that listed in one article.

[tallahasseedem]

1. They needed a reason to continue the rage...

and this just fed it. I wish that the DNC would have been better prepared as they knew this was coming a couple of months ago. That is what is hard to swallow.

[pkdu]

5. ^^^^^^ THIS^^^^^^

[Scuba]

2. I'm offended by the constant use of "we" when referring to Hillary's campaign vs use of "they" ....

... when referring to Bernie's campaign. Shows the clear bias.

And that doesn't even scratch the surface. Feeding negative info about Bernie's campaign to reporters while feeding positive info about Hillary are actions that clearly violate the impartiality rule and can easily be construed as defrauding DNC donors.

They brought this on themselves through their actions. Self-inflicted wound that may make us all suffer.

[pnwmom]

6. So your answer is there are no specific emails that you can point to.

Because surely, if the offensiveness was "constant," then you'd be able to.

That's what I thought.

[Scuba]

11. You don't need to take my word ...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hacked-emails-cast-doubt-on-hopes-for-party-unity-at-democratic-convention/2016/07/24/a446c260-51a9-11e6-b7de-dfe509430c39_story.html

“Myself and other Democrats who were Clinton supporters, we have been saying this was serious. It truly violates what the DNC’s proper role should be,” said Edward G. Rendell, a former DNC chairman and former Pennsylvania governor.

“The DNC did something incredibly inappropriate here” and needed to acknowledge that, Rendell said.

[pnwmom]

43. Again, neither you nor he pointed to specific emails. That is what I'm asking about. n/t

[annavictorious]

9. If you're so offended by it,

why are you using it?
"They brought this on themselves". Who on earth is "they"?

You need to link to the emails or other actual evidence that supports your claims. I'm not a Republican. I don't engage in witch hunts.

You make the explosive charge that the DNC was, "feeding negative info about Bernie's campaign to reporters while feeding positive info about Hillary."

When did that actually happen? I'm not talking about speculative talking points discussed in an email between two DNC staffers. What information was fed to the media? If your claim is true, where are all the media people who were "fed"? Why aren't they confirming your narrative?

These are not "self-inflicted" wounds.The wounds are being inflicted by people who want to damage the Democratic candidate. These are wounds being inflicted by agents of enemies of our country, Trump supporters, and the "never Hillary" conspiracy theorists.

If there was wide-spread corruption, there should be plenty of evidence. If there was a pattern of behavior, there should be some evidence. Where is it?

[Scuba]

12. "They" are DNC staffers, but you don't have to take my word that they misbehaved ...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hacked-emails-cast-doubt-on-hopes-for-party-unity-at-democratic-convention/2016/07/24/a446c260-51a9-11e6-b7de-dfe509430c39_story.html

“Myself and other Democrats who were Clinton supporters, we have been saying this was serious. It truly violates what the DNC’s proper role should be,” said Edward G. Rendell, a former DNC chairman and former Pennsylvania governor.

“The DNC did something incredibly inappropriate here” and needed to acknowledge that, Rendell said.

[ismnotwasm]

34. Oh that's not misleading , oh wait

"thousands of embarrassing emails"

I don't think so

[Scuba]

35. Where'd you get the "thousands of embarrassing emails" quote? Not from me.

[annavictorious]

36. DNC staffers misbehaved?

They are DNC staffers? Then we should apply the same standards we employed after the Sanders staff stole data. Fire the two staffers, and move on.

Ed Rendell is a good Democrat. He's trying to save the convention. I don't blame him.

[Scuba]

39. So just sacrifice a couple underlings, but don't fix the problem?

That just doesn't flip my flapjacks.

[pnwmom]

44. That is his opinion and it could be based on mis-reporting in the media. For example,

that there are thousands of embarrassing emails, instead of a handful.

[Doodley]

28. Best post of the day. We (meaning Democrats) are on a self-destructive course here,

just at a time when a madman might become president, and this is based on what? Nothing.

[Cary]

10. So it's up to you to perpetuate it, right?

Just doing your duty as a "concerned" citizen

[Scuba]

14. You opposed to cleaning up the DNC?

[Cary]

24. Not at all.

I would love to get rid of all radicals.

[Scuba]

26. Yep, radical conservatism has no place in the Democratic Party.

[Cary]

29. Radicals are radicals are radicals

Horseshoe theory and all of that.

[Scuba]

32. Far-left radicals support Social Security and Medicare. How awful.

[Cary]

33. It isn't the "far left" positions on issues that's the problem

It's their inability to coalesce.

[JSup]

21. Was it always...

...'we' and 'they' or was it only after 'they' started 'insulting' the DNC? Are there dates on the emails?

I'd look but I really, really don't like reading people's private thoughts.

[Scuba]

23. The rule calls for impartiality, not impartiality only until someone is insulted.

[annavictorious]

37. You're still coming up empty with actual evidence of partiality.

If the DNC had been funneling biased information to the media, why aren't any reporters confirming that narrative? Where are all the reporters who were fed information? Seems to me they'd be all over the TV today.

I'm not a Republican. I don't conduct witch hunts.

I'm a Democrat. I require evidence. Apparently there is none.

Other people can do what they like, but I'm not letting Rapey Julian eat my lunch. I'm too smart for that.

[Scuba]

38. Others disagree.

[Lord Magus]

46. Yes that's true. Others disagree about a need for evidence.

[Iliyah]

3. There is none.

Total hype and a reason to dump DWS.

[eastwestdem]

16. That's what I thought...thanks for the only straight answer I could get here all morning! nt

[NCTraveler]

4. Completely manufactured outrage driven by a criminal orginization working for the right.

The DNC gave Sanders a platform he has never had and gave him support he has never seen the likes of.

This is ratfucking we are witnessing.

[annavictorious]

7. There don't appear to be any.

It got to the point yesterday where ratf-ckers were releasing bogus "explosive" emails because real ones don't exist.

And a very entitled and aggrieved faction is going to run with it to ruin the Democratic convention.

[BobbyDrake]

8. It's a manufactured nothingburger designed to bait those who are easily baited.

And those from whom a mindless emotional tantrum of a response is expected are delivering perfectly for the ones pulling the strings.

[Renaissance Man]

13. Read Articke 5, Section 4 of the Charter and Bylaws of the Democratic Party

Article 5, Section 4 of the Charter and Bylaws of the Democratic Party:

"In the conduct and management of the affairs and procedures of the Democratic National Committee, particularly as they apply to the preparation and conduct of the Presidential nomination process, the Chairperson shall exercise impartiality and evenhandedness as between the Presidential candidates and campaigns. The Chairperson shall be responsible for ensuring that the national officers and staff of the Democratic National Committee maintain impartiality and evenhandedness during the Democratic Party Presidential nominating process."

Read the bylaw.

The Chairperson shall be responsible for ensuring that the national officers AND staff of the Democratic National Committee maintain impartiality.

It matters not that the suggestions were not used. It matters that those suggestions were even transmitted from personal thoughts to official DNC communications sent from one staff member to another, and it doesn't help that she

- did repeat appearances on mainstream press publicly bashing the Sanders campaign about their supporters throwing chairs at the Nevada DNC convention (when it didn't happen); and
- was Hillary Clinton's campaign manager in the 2008 primaries.

How do we look as Democrats when our own staffers are atheist and jew-baiting through e-mail suggesting that it could be used against one of our primary contenders when ... wait for it ... the primaries were still happening?

That's what you're missing. The way in which that bylaw is written, the buck stops with the DNC Chair. Granted, DWS could not have known the content of every e-mail sent by every DNC staffer to any other DNC staffer, but from the moment those ideas were transmitted with official DNC e-mail addresses by DNC staff members, that's the point where DWS became responsible.

[eastwestdem]

17. Are these in any way legally binding, or just suggestions? nt

[Renaissance Man]

18. They are GOVERNING RULES. That's why they're called Bylaws.

These are governing rules of the Democratic National Committee, the party structure over which DWS was formerly the chair and the same organization that employs the staffers that sent the e-mails.

Maintaining impartiality is NOT a suggestion. Ensuring that staff maintain impartiality and that the chair is responsible for that is NOT a suggestion. It is a BYLAW.

[eastwestdem]

20. Okay, so is there any evidence that they was bias in the DNC official statements or action, or

is all the fuss over statements by individuals who - as we all do - have their own thoughts and opinions?

[Renaissance Man]

22. Read the bylaw again. It includes officials AND staffers.

Also, it matters not that they have their own thoughts and opinions. You can have a million thoughts and opinions traveling through your brain on a daily basis.

Once those thoughts are transmitted in text through an e-mail from one staffer using official DNC e-mail stored on DNC servers, that becomes an official communication associated with the DNC.

Yes, there is evidence. Read Brad Marshall's e-mail to other DNC staffers about his idea on using atheist and jew-baiting back to his "peeps" in KY and West Virginia during the primary.

http://www.snopes.com/2016/07/22/wikileaks-dumps-dnc-emails/

[eastwestdem]

25. Very small offense if any. I think the Bernie folks were just looking for some little crumb of a

reason to blame on their loss. I really doubt that if those two emails had come out when they were written (no idea when that was, BTW) that it would have made a difference in 3 Million + votes.

[Renaissance Man]

27. This is the first e-mail dump. There's more to come.

By the way, Senator Sanders still supports Hillary Clinton. I do, as well. There are more e-mails to come.

[Orsino]

30. An offense...

...a small one, if one is fine with the DNC predetermining the nominee.

Me, I would like to see the DNC hew more closely to the cited bylaws, and for those officials who won't to get the fuck out.

[Doodley]

31. I doubt DWS read every email sent by every staff member. Do you expect her to?

[Renaissance Man]

42. You're a troll, and I doubt you read my post.

You're a troll, and I doubt you read my post, because I stated:

"Granted, DWS could not have known the content of every e-mail sent by every DNC staffer to any other DNC staffer, but from the moment those ideas were transmitted with official DNC e-mail addresses by DNC staff members, that's the point where DWS became responsible.

Go troll, somewhere else.

[treestar]

41. You seem quite eager to make the most of this

How absurd to hold her totally responsible for what everyone in that organization every thought. Those rules did not intend to go that far. Not to m ind control.

[pnwmom]

47. So you can't point to any specific emails, either. Thanks. n/t

[LexVegas]

15. A woman...in charge....sent them. nt

[Blue_Tires]

19. Now, now... Don't go trying to disrupt a good old fashioned manufactured outrage

[treestar]

40. They are singling out a couple from tens of thousands

If the same were done to any other side, there would be similar things that could be flogged into a "something."

[Powdered Toast Man]

45. In case you've missed it...

Bernie supporters have been calling for Debbie to resign since the debate schedule was released. Too few, and too hidden.

We didn't need another reason.

Let's just compare this to Christie bridge-gate scandal. We're there any emails from him to staffers about the whole thing? Absolutely not.

Did we ALL hold him accountable because we could see what was going on. Absolutely.

I know... Apples to Oranges on the details, but all too similar in the practice.