Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Bjorn Against

(12,041 posts)
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 02:17 PM Dec 2015

Debbie Wasserman-Schultz did not go to law enforcement, she went to the press

All you need to do to tell that the allegations against Bernie's campaign are partisan smears is take a look at how Debbie Wasserman-Schultz has handled the situation.

If Bernie's campaign was really involved in illegal activity then it was Debbie Wasserman-Schultz's duty to report that to law enforcement, but instead of going to law enforcement she went to the press.

What does that tell you?

It tells me that this is a political smear job and not a real attempt to get to the facts.

So far we have not received information on this from ANY neutral parties. We have only heard from the DNC, the IT company, and the response of the Sanders campaign.

Not a single neutral person has provided information about this case, not a single law enforcement agency has spoken, we are just supposed to believe Bernie's campaign was involved in criminal activity because Debbie Wasserman-Schultz launched a smear campaign to imply that.

Bernie's campaign was willing to go to Federal Court and present evidence under oath. I don't think a campaign that was trying to cover up a crime would do that.

I am far more suspicious of someone who goes to the press before contacting law enforcement than I am of a campaign that shows a willingness to present evidence under oath.

Debbie Wasserman-Schultz needs to resign. Now.

139 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Debbie Wasserman-Schultz did not go to law enforcement, she went to the press (Original Post) Bjorn Against Dec 2015 OP
I've seen no evidence of a crime. It was a hill shill hit job. morningfog Dec 2015 #1
+1000 Segami Dec 2015 #30
And just before a presidential debate FreakinDJ Dec 2015 #82
+1. The point was to move the dial on Bernie's "trustworthy" numbers. winter is coming Dec 2015 #43
Bingo! Segami Dec 2015 #51
That was my first thought. Enthusiast Dec 2015 #69
all the trust DWS has lost will start to translate into declining trust in Clinton... Betty Karlson Dec 2015 #84
DWS & HRC are now eternally joined at the hip. Segami Dec 2015 #87
Clinton can always be trusted to do the right thing - Betty Karlson Dec 2015 #122
That's my take on it too. They hate the fact that the man azmom Dec 2015 #63
I'm thoroughly disgusted with her. Fantastic Anarchist Dec 2015 #85
Why did Sanders fire people and apologize? Renew Deal Dec 2015 #126
Post removed Post removed Dec 2015 #2
The nice thing about the legal process is it dispense with a lot of bullshit. highprincipleswork Dec 2015 #7
You will get your wish according to some sources. Karma13612 Dec 2015 #33
I'll be having chocolate mint covered grahm cracker cookies notadmblnd Dec 2015 #55
Homemade Recipe? PADemD Dec 2015 #92
No the pharmacy hands out gift wrapped boxes every Xmas when you get your prescriptions filled notadmblnd Dec 2015 #95
too funny!!! love your user name! eom Karma13612 Dec 2015 #130
Thanks, I think I've had this screen name since WINDOZE 95 was out. notadmblnd Dec 2015 #135
Oh those sound absolutely yummy! Have one and nod in my direction! eom Karma13612 Dec 2015 #94
As soon as the Sander's campaign filed a law suit the DNC backed down. Warren Stupidity Dec 2015 #3
The DNC's actions in the face of a court case speak louder than words Jarqui Dec 2015 #11
THIS!! +100000 Fawke Em Dec 2015 #22
you just make too much sense. dana_b Dec 2015 #76
A-freakin'-men! dgibby Dec 2015 #80
Especially since it was a CLEARLY losing one for the DNC Scootaloo Dec 2015 #56
I agree. Looks like the vendor did not secure the data properly. JDPriestly Dec 2015 #115
Damn right katsy Dec 2015 #4
6 people ran 24 queries on HRC's data, saved results Gman Dec 2015 #5
If a crime was committed why did the DNC go to the press instead of to law enforcement? Bjorn Against Dec 2015 #6
Because this was all about politics and public perception, not law n/t Fumesucker Dec 2015 #8
Exactly, but I don't think that public perception thing worked out quite the way they intended it to Bjorn Against Dec 2015 #9
My impression of the DNC and DWS Fumesucker Dec 2015 #10
.seriously. Nt Voice for Peace Dec 2015 #13
Precisely. senz Dec 2015 #17
There is no allegation that Sanders campaign broke or hacked Hillary's data but rather that JDPriestly Dec 2015 #117
And why would Bernie floriduck Dec 2015 #73
Because this is all in the family . And they seem to be the adults. It's bad enough.... PosterChild Dec 2015 #100
The claim that results were saved is in dispute. concreteblue Dec 2015 #18
Have you seen what they named the queries? Fawke Em Dec 2015 #31
Everybody's fault BUT the Sanders campaign Gman Dec 2015 #66
Well, as I'm sure you know by now, dgibby Dec 2015 #81
Doesn't rule out a screen capture and then OCR Gman Dec 2015 #83
What you are saying is beyond ridiculous. BeanMusical Dec 2015 #98
Really? Gman Dec 2015 #101
Really. BeanMusical Dec 2015 #102
Bernghazi!!!!!1 cui bono Dec 2015 #112
They were probing the vulnerability of the data they should not be accessing Samantha Dec 2015 #74
Thanks for that info. I'm just getting caught up with this and it was very helpful. cui bono Dec 2015 #113
You are welcome - this is going to be one of those deals you have follow closely for the duration Samantha Dec 2015 #119
Thanks Fawke Em!!! Fed up in NJ Dec 2015 #104
Thank you. JDPriestly Dec 2015 #118
They even set up two new accounts in order to access more data. George II Dec 2015 #97
Or to test.... Delver Rootnose Dec 2015 #128
Bottom line, a day later now, and Sanders apologized - APOLOGIZED PUBLICLY! If it was..... George II Dec 2015 #133
The vendor did not properly protect the security of the data. JDPriestly Dec 2015 #116
The vender did not make them access data Gman Dec 2015 #131
very true. But, the news media is keeping it very vague and UN- Karma13612 Dec 2015 #132
From whence comes that information? chervilant Dec 2015 #136
Dunno, she looked pretty damn good last night Gman Dec 2015 #138
Duty? The only duties DWS has is getting Hillary elected and making sure other Democrats lose. Scuba Dec 2015 #12
She has a good track record awoke_in_2003 Dec 2015 #27
Maybe because she's really trying to help the other party win? erronis Dec 2015 #37
Yep awoke_in_2003 Dec 2015 #46
Not Hillary. Scootaloo Dec 2015 #58
Oh, I'm sure Hillary is exactly the kind of politician DWS wants to see win elections. Scuba Dec 2015 #71
I'm not entirely sold that clinton wants ot be that politician, though Scootaloo Dec 2015 #72
Thank You For Sharing These Truths cantbeserious Dec 2015 #14
She's a hack and she serves a hack senz Dec 2015 #15
I agree in the strongest terms. avaistheone1 Dec 2015 #61
Huge +1! Enthusiast Dec 2015 #70
Kicked and recommended. Uncle Joe Dec 2015 #16
Message auto-removed Name removed Dec 2015 #19
Why did she go to the press without doing an audit? Bjorn Against Dec 2015 #23
Message auto-removed Name removed Dec 2015 #28
The audit probably won't be complete until Dec. 2016. Fuddnik Dec 2015 #25
And it's also a self-audit. Fawke Em Dec 2015 #45
Wouldn't that be for the courts to decide? How can they judge something if it is not reported? Hiraeth Dec 2015 #35
I also know they didn't hire a third party security company to gather info, either. Fawke Em Dec 2015 #20
Yeah - and includes the some of the same people that helped SOS Hil set up her "private" server erronis Dec 2015 #41
Thank you. K&R Hiraeth Dec 2015 #21
Of course she went to the press. This was a hit job carried out for Hillary Rodham Fucking Clinton. Still In Wisconsin Dec 2015 #24
Message auto-removed Name removed Dec 2015 #29
We can't help you if you don't want to see it. Fawke Em Dec 2015 #48
heavens, I didn't know about Karma13612 Dec 2015 #62
did you know: Karma13612 Dec 2015 #60
thank you for posting this info. hopemountain Dec 2015 #114
same here. eom #FeeltheBern Karma13612 Dec 2015 #129
Hey, come on. That was not nice. It was Bill that carried that tag. We don't know about Hil. erronis Dec 2015 #42
Excellent point. DWS does indeed need to resign before she jwirr Dec 2015 #26
Not a single "Neutral" person NowSam Dec 2015 #32
Are you sure Clinton hasn't gone to the FBI? NCTraveler Dec 2015 #34
I heard she ate the FBI for lunch. Hiraeth Dec 2015 #38
If she had then I would hope she would give them time to investigate before running to the press. Bjorn Against Dec 2015 #39
Sanders fired an aide. So much more was to be known anyway. NCTraveler Dec 2015 #44
Just because a person got fired does not mean that person committed a crime Bjorn Against Dec 2015 #47
Please show where I said it did. NCTraveler Dec 2015 #49
I'm going to guess, "no." Fawke Em Dec 2015 #50
If she had Cassiopeia Dec 2015 #53
why were they having a fund raiser for her? I didn't know FBI salaries were generous azurnoir Dec 2015 #65
Expect Hillary to go into high dudgeon tonight senz Dec 2015 #36
k+r Attorney in Texas Dec 2015 #40
Victimhood is so sweet! redstateblues Dec 2015 #57
Anger fuels the Sanders campaign. AlbertCat Dec 2015 #109
I'm not aware if anything has changed since last night notadmblnd Dec 2015 #52
How telling. nt retrowire Dec 2015 #54
K&R! Duval Dec 2015 #59
Was a law broken? This all seems to be an internal political party matter. randome Dec 2015 #64
Kicked and recommended! What does that tell you? Enthusiast Dec 2015 #67
Exactly why the press - hmmmm azurnoir Dec 2015 #68
Maybe to let the public know the truth before the Bernie Sanders fanatics moobu2 Dec 2015 #75
ah ya that's it of course why didn't I think of that azurnoir Dec 2015 #77
There's still an ongoing investigation. moobu2 Dec 2015 #78
if a crime was committed DonCoquixote Dec 2015 #79
She really is trying to throw the nomination MissDeeds Dec 2015 #86
I don't think ANYONE involved has called it a crime. thesquanderer Dec 2015 #88
Right. Because every time there is political infighting, the cops are called. randome Dec 2015 #89
+ whatever number > than 0. Silly OP MeNMyVolt Dec 2015 #91
There's no crime. treestar Dec 2015 #90
DWS is truly zentrum Dec 2015 #93
Just as she did in 2008. She bypassed Dean's DNC, took gripes straight to media. madfloridian Dec 2015 #96
HUGE K & R !!! - Thank You !!! WillyT Dec 2015 #99
If she didn't go to the press she would've been accused of secrecy. If she went to the cops.... Hekate Dec 2015 #103
It tells me that Wasserman-Schultz CAN BE ACCUSED of a political smear job rocktivity Dec 2015 #105
Debbie Downer has brought the Democratic Party to a new low, time to go! Dont call me Shirley Dec 2015 #106
It speaks volumes about DWS and Hillary. jalan48 Dec 2015 #107
This scandal has close to zero to do with Sanders. PufPuf23 Dec 2015 #108
And what's the most important thing we've learned from this: AlbertCat Dec 2015 #110
Not only is this disgusting... MrMickeysMom Dec 2015 #111
DWS should go! burrowowl Dec 2015 #120
It tells me that she's smart... NurseJackie Dec 2015 #121
WOW, that's your take? SmittynMo Dec 2015 #123
Yes. I wouldn't have said it otherwise. NurseJackie Dec 2015 #125
They settled before a lawsuit could be heard..... Delver Rootnose Dec 2015 #124
You should be thankful it wasn't taken to the FBI. Renew Deal Dec 2015 #127
Oh, you're right. We should be real quiet now so the FBI won't find out ... JustABozoOnThisBus Dec 2015 #139
Who's alleging criminal law was broke, OP sounds like a strawman uponit7771 Dec 2015 #134
Kick BeanMusical Dec 2015 #137
 

Segami

(14,923 posts)
30. +1000
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 03:17 PM
Dec 2015

It's amazing how much leaked detailed info continuously streamed into the MSM's articles. Now why would the DNC try to smear a democratic presidential candidate BEFORE an investigation commenced?


 

Segami

(14,923 posts)
51. Bingo!
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 03:39 PM
Dec 2015

The Hillary camp has been trying forever to rehabilitate her 'untrustworthy' hallmark. So instead, they decided, along with the DNC & DWS, to level the integral playing field by besmirching Bernie's character.

It was a failed hit job that will have big consequences once the dust up begins to settle.

 

Betty Karlson

(7,231 posts)
84. all the trust DWS has lost will start to translate into declining trust in Clinton...
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 05:55 PM
Dec 2015

all the trust DWS is still going to lose may translate into a campaign disaster for Clinton. And if we are lucky that disaster will materialise in the primaries. If we are unlucky, it will do so in the GE.

 

Segami

(14,923 posts)
87. DWS & HRC are now eternally joined at the hip.
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 06:35 PM
Dec 2015
Disclaimer terms for 'Hip' joining:

Only till Hillary feels the breeze of public support slipping.....then its adios Debbie!


 

Betty Karlson

(7,231 posts)
122. Clinton can always be trusted to do the right thing -
Sun Dec 20, 2015, 08:43 AM
Dec 2015

after all other alternatives have been tried and rejected.

Fantastic Anarchist

(7,309 posts)
85. I'm thoroughly disgusted with her.
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 06:08 PM
Dec 2015

Now, I'm fully motivated.

I was getting kind of lazy, but now I'm energized.

Response to Bjorn Against (Original post)

 

highprincipleswork

(3,111 posts)
7. The nice thing about the legal process is it dispense with a lot of bullshit.
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 02:28 PM
Dec 2015

I mean, if it's guilt by association you want, how about the people that Hillary is clearly in bed with?

That, and the fact that her campaign was discovered in 2008 to have broken through to another candidate's data.

I love that they filed suit, and that the DWS so clearly backed down. Frankly, I would like to see the suit continue, and for more facts seen more impartially come to light.

Karma13612

(4,537 posts)
33. You will get your wish according to some sources.
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 03:18 PM
Dec 2015

Apparently the Campaign is NOT dropping the suit.

Make a batch of popcorn.

There's the debate later today, and then who knows what will come out of the law suit.

notadmblnd

(23,720 posts)
95. No the pharmacy hands out gift wrapped boxes every Xmas when you get your prescriptions filled
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 08:48 PM
Dec 2015

but they are as addictive as the Girl Scout's Thin Mints, they're just bigger.

Way better than the calendars they used to hand out, those tasted nasty.

notadmblnd

(23,720 posts)
135. Thanks, I think I've had this screen name since WINDOZE 95 was out.
Sun Dec 20, 2015, 02:05 PM
Dec 2015

I used to have another screen name (not here on DU, but on other sites) however, I abandoned it because it made men think I was looking for cyber sex instead of simply having my underwear in the dryer.

 

Warren Stupidity

(48,181 posts)
3. As soon as the Sander's campaign filed a law suit the DNC backed down.
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 02:20 PM
Dec 2015

It seems the threat of discovery motions was a bit too much to risk.

Jarqui

(10,119 posts)
11. The DNC's actions in the face of a court case speak louder than words
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 02:43 PM
Dec 2015

Who here thinks Bernie would want to go before a judge and plead "we need access to our data so we can steal more of Clinton's data!!" That's what he'd effectively be asking in part if his campaign had really stolen Clinton's data. He'd have a real problem and the Clinton campaign could put the boots to his campaign in a court of law in front of the media - burying him as a data thief.

But when they had the opportunity to do just that, they backed down in a real hurry. It's ok to lob BS at Bernie in the media who are too lame to hold you to account but when you know that BS wouldn't fly under the scrutiny of a court, you'd better run away. Which is exactly what the DNC and Clinton did here. Not only were the DNC in gross beach of the DNC contract with Sanders - the Clinton claims of data theft were going to get clobbered and they bloody well knew it. That's just more evidence that there was no real theft of data. A thief is not going to go out of their way to stand before a judge while the media looks on - particularly when he's running for president.

I'll tell you something else that smells. It would appear that this voter data application is controlling data security at the application level - not under the hood at a file/network level because an application bug seems to be what opened the security door. What that suggests to me is that under the hood - below the application, the data is available to anyone that knows their way around a computer system at that level - maybe with some basic encryption to crack in the worst case. So DWS probably has a lot more explaining to do if someone really wants to go there.

Since Clinton folks are the ones who founded this vendor, they probably have the ability to get routine updates of Sanders data if they so choose.

If the Sanders folks don't want the Clinton folks to have their data, they should probably migrate their data to a server elsewhere and get away from these folks.

 

Scootaloo

(25,699 posts)
56. Especially since it was a CLEARLY losing one for the DNC
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 03:51 PM
Dec 2015

Cut-and-dried breach of contract. The sanders campaign acted in good faith even though the contract does not obligate them, and in return the DNC outright violated its agreement with the sanders campaign.

There's no judge in the country who would sit with the DNC on that.

katsy

(4,246 posts)
4. Damn right
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 02:20 PM
Dec 2015

Now both those candidates seem opportunistic. Hillary for using stats and analysis which seems impersonal. Beanies staff for wanting it.

The DNC has NO business keeping that kind of info for any candidate. Let them keep it themselves.

DWS should resign

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
117. There is no allegation that Sanders campaign broke or hacked Hillary's data but rather that
Sun Dec 20, 2015, 03:19 AM
Dec 2015

There were breaches of the firewall. That looks bad for the vendor that the DNC hired, which, I nderstand employs people close to Hillary. And DWS. The facts will emerge.

 

floriduck

(2,262 posts)
73. And why would Bernie
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 04:36 PM
Dec 2015

continue forward with the lawsuit? This is his chance to show America what a slimy, crooked organization the Hill backing DNC and DWS are.

The poster would be wise to self delete or correct the posting.

PosterChild

(1,307 posts)
100. Because this is all in the family . And they seem to be the adults. It's bad enough....
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 09:30 PM
Dec 2015

..... having a campaign do something so obviously stupid and unethical as accessing a rivals private data, and, worsen yet, to take legal action against the party after doing so. That does a lot of damage to our reputation . It would have been much, much worse for legal charges to haven't been filed in retaliation.

Over all the DNC has been reasonableand acted responsibly.

The DNC isn't an issue that most, or even very many, voters care about. They want to hear about economics and foreign policy.

Sander's campaign already screwed up by breaching common sense ethics, I hope he doesn't screw up any worse by trying to make this misfeasance into some sort of self righteous crusade .

concreteblue

(626 posts)
18. The claim that results were saved is in dispute.
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 03:04 PM
Dec 2015

The vendor has said no data was saved. The claim appears to be from spinners, and/or reporters who are injecting heresay into a story that is still developing. Thinking people are waiting and watching.

Fawke Em

(11,366 posts)
31. Have you seen what they named the queries?
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 03:18 PM
Dec 2015

They weren't hiding themselves, they were documenting the breach since it was obvious the DNC and the vendor weren't going to fix the issue.



Honestly, be logical. Why would you name your queries "Not Sanders," which obviously points to your candidate, and why would you report it if you meant to be nefarious? Sure they had to fire the guy, but he doesn't sound mad. He probably realizes that the campaign had to do that to avoid the appearance of impropriety.

But, the answer your question, yes, Sanders was the victim.

The tech company breached their contract by not providing the security and privacy it promised and the DNC breached their contract when it failed to give Bernie's campaign formal notice in writing of the breach and cutting his access immediately rather than wait the 10 days, required by the contract, to allow his campaign to address the issues.


Gman

(24,780 posts)
66. Everybody's fault BUT the Sanders campaign
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 04:13 PM
Dec 2015

They know the correct procedures. They were either thieves and highly unethical or stupid or both. Thieves in general are not very smart. So what about the data? What did they do with it? Create a .csv file and save it to a memory stick? Was the data and directories named that to provide an in place alibi? Even if they didn't save the data to a memory stick, they could have did a print screen, save the image to a .tif file then OCR it to get to the data and the system has no record The bottom line is HRC data was accessed. I'd like to know what's on their hard drives. And I think they need to take some responsibility here.

dgibby

(9,474 posts)
81. Well, as I'm sure you know by now,
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 05:19 PM
Dec 2015

VAN said they did NOT download, copy, or save any data as that would be impossible. If your don't know that by now, Google (and DU) are your friends.

Gman

(24,780 posts)
83. Doesn't rule out a screen capture and then OCR
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 05:26 PM
Dec 2015

To extract the data. I'd like to see their hard drives examined but that seems like a big deal over probably at best very little. Possibly nothing. Doing what I describe is tedious and it doesn't appear they were on for long enough to grab much data.

No I had not heard that. I'm working around the yard today and haven't read the latest.

Regardless, blaming everybody else isn't going to do anything except increase fundraising. It reeks of right wing tactics and is very unbecoming for a candidate I have the highest regard for, would have no problem supporting in November, but I don't support now.

BeanMusical

(4,389 posts)
102. Really.
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 09:58 PM
Dec 2015

Not talking about freaking OCR, which I was playing with over a decade ago. It's all your Bernghazi nonsense that is ridiculous

Samantha

(9,314 posts)
74. They were probing the vulnerability of the data they should not be accessing
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 04:44 PM
Dec 2015

because they knew the Sanders' data was equally vulnerable to the Clinton campaign. They saved search results because they wanted to create a trail of what they could pull up. One of the people involved with this process has spoken out about it.

Everyone knew the system was vulnerable because three months' prior to this incident, the Sanders' campaign had reported the problem of the breached firewall. Everyone also knew from usage that the problem had not been fixed. Everyone knew whatever activity they performed could be tracked. There was nothing nefarious about this; their interest was in protecting Sanders' data from exposure - not stealing data from others.

And this is why Sanders, in making a statement about the whole affair, said the campaign had fired the one individual who had actually looked at data. He also said it was unfair because he was a part of probing the vulnerability for purposes of handing over the documented results of the technical failures, not someone who chose to be a maverick by stealing data from other candidates. The next day, I heard him say this on air.

And since this incident, reviews from other technical organizations have said purely from a technical standpoint had it been their responsibility to assess the damage they would have done exactly the same thing.

I hope Sanders finds a way to give this man his job back. He didn't deserve to be made a scapegoat in this debacle.

Sanders also stated in his legal documents filed with the court his own data had been breached.

Sam

Samantha

(9,314 posts)
119. You are welcome - this is going to be one of those deals you have follow closely for the duration
Sun Dec 20, 2015, 03:54 AM
Dec 2015

because once you are lost, it just is too difficult to catch up. So I am trying to stay tuned.

Sam

 

Fed up in NJ

(35 posts)
104. Thanks Fawke Em!!!
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 10:27 PM
Dec 2015

Between the Log Picture in your post and IllinoisBrenel's picture of the Hillary Bus with the "Powered by NGP VAN" across the top (http://www.democraticunderground.com/128085702) we are armed to quickly shut up Hillary followers that add nothing to the discussion but the same regurgitated garbage over and over again....

Delver Rootnose

(250 posts)
128. Or to test....
Sun Dec 20, 2015, 10:05 AM
Dec 2015

...if the breach was just data related or authorities related. It is two different issues if data is exposed or security relating to user level access. Testing if it is just a glitch with certain userids or a general category error.

George II

(67,782 posts)
133. Bottom line, a day later now, and Sanders apologized - APOLOGIZED PUBLICLY! If it was.....
Sun Dec 20, 2015, 11:28 AM
Dec 2015

....."innocent" then his Data Director would still be working for the campaign and Sanders wouldn't have apologized on national television.

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
116. The vendor did not properly protect the security of the data.
Sun Dec 20, 2015, 03:15 AM
Dec 2015

There is no allegation that the data was obtained by hacking but rather that there were breaches in the system including one in October.

Karma13612

(4,537 posts)
132. very true. But, the news media is keeping it very vague and UN-
Sun Dec 20, 2015, 11:15 AM
Dec 2015

nuanced.

As we know, many of the American public only hear what they want to hear. The accusations of 'hacked into the Clinton files' is running rampant. And NPR has been very vague. Can't rely on them any more than the MSM.

Instead of being clear up front, everyone is making up their own version of the events.

Citing quotes and stories that are inaccurate and jumping to conclusions that lead to more false stories and more false conclusions.

I am very happy that Sanders came out quickly to defend their data, quickly to act (fired the staffer) and quickly apologized on National TV at a debate that might have been more viewed due to the controversy despite it being the Saturday before Christmas.

But, make no mistake, this was a DNC/Vendor/DWS snafu that may never get unraveled since it would make HRC look bad. The ties between HRC/DWS/DNC/DataVendor is one big ugly conflict of interest.

I wish Bernie had the funds to have a standalone data system. But, ain't going to happen.

Stay tuned and #FeeltheBern

chervilant

(8,267 posts)
136. From whence comes that information?
Sun Dec 20, 2015, 02:35 PM
Dec 2015

And, which is it? Four people? Six? One?

Were files "looked at"? "Downloaded"? "Saved"?

Really?!?

See, I think it speaks to public perception of Hillary's veracity that so many of us are crying foul. The timing, DWS going to the press rather than LEO, the shifting allegations...

I think this imbroglio has backfired on DWS, and by extension, HRC.

For me, it has further damaged HRC's already tainted reputation, and solidified my resolve to support Senator Sanders.

GO, BERNIE!!!

Gman

(24,780 posts)
138. Dunno, she looked pretty damn good last night
Sun Dec 20, 2015, 09:03 PM
Dec 2015

So you're one of a few that feel that way.

So what? You think the world shouldn't know what Sander's staff did that was pretty damn unethical. Even Sanders thinks so.

Why Sanders keeps my respect is because he's not like his supporters.

erronis

(15,167 posts)
37. Maybe because she's really trying to help the other party win?
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 03:21 PM
Dec 2015

Look at her record in Florida where she supported repugs. Perhaps the scariest thing for DWS is to think that a real liberal/progressive could win.

 

Scootaloo

(25,699 posts)
58. Not Hillary.
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 03:53 PM
Dec 2015

DWS is there to get Republcians elected, and she's done a pretty bang-up job of it. If I were the clinton campaign, I'd be extremely wary of this person's enthusiastic support. After yesterday, I'm pretty sure the Clinton campaign is quietly looking for a bus to kick ol' Goat-Eyes under.

 

Scootaloo

(25,699 posts)
72. I'm not entirely sold that clinton wants ot be that politician, though
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 04:34 PM
Dec 2015

I mean sure, she'll happily smother the Democratic Party with a pillow if she thinks she's not getting her way. she tried in 2008, after all. But that's all about her, and her ego. I don't think she'd jump ship for the Republicans, though. Catch a case of Joementum, sure, but not a full turn to the republicans.

DWS, on the other hand, is in the fucking bag for them.

It's a difference of degrees, i suppose, and both of 'em suck severely.

 

senz

(11,945 posts)
15. She's a hack and she serves a hack
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 02:57 PM
Dec 2015

and we need to kick that entire contingent (Third Way) out of the Democratic Party.

They are fundamentally at odds with the principles of democracy, which is the essential principle of the Democratic Party.

Let them form their own political party.

 

avaistheone1

(14,626 posts)
61. I agree in the strongest terms.
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 03:58 PM
Dec 2015

I would love to see Debbie Wasserman Schultz charged with a felony for maliciously interfering in an election.

Response to Bjorn Against (Original post)

Response to Bjorn Against (Reply #23)

Fawke Em

(11,366 posts)
20. I also know they didn't hire a third party security company to gather info, either.
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 03:08 PM
Dec 2015

I work for one of those and know our competitors (there's not that many - finding people with that background is hard and limits the number of companies who are expert at this).

Had DWS hired one, the knowledge of that would have made it's rounds in the data security community.

erronis

(15,167 posts)
41. Yeah - and includes the some of the same people that helped SOS Hil set up her "private" server
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 03:25 PM
Dec 2015

A reputable security firm would have told Hil and best-friend Deb that the DNC database/access was not compliant with any current best practices.

Oh well. We'll see how HRC conducts "business" if she becomes in charge of all US investments (whoops, that should be activities).

Response to Still In Wisconsin (Reply #24)

Fawke Em

(11,366 posts)
48. We can't help you if you don't want to see it.
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 03:32 PM
Dec 2015

It's so obvious that DWS is in the bag for HRC.

1. The crappy debate schedule.
2. DWS was one of HRC's 2008 campaign chairs.
3. The data management vendor was founded by DWS's relative and his buddy, who both worked for HRC in 2008.

You don't have to be Jerry Fletcher to figure that one out.

Karma13612

(4,537 posts)
62. heavens, I didn't know about
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 04:01 PM
Dec 2015

DWS being related to the data vendor.


This is so much conflict of interest, I don't know where to start!!

Karma13612

(4,537 posts)
60. did you know:
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 03:58 PM
Dec 2015

#1) The cofounder of the 3rd party vendor for the voter data for the DNC (NGP VAN) was the IT manager for Hillary's 2008 campaign
#2) The 2nd in command in the IT department, the fella who answered to the person in item #1 during Hillary's 2008 campaign just happens to be the same person who said he would plead the 5th if he was asked to testify regarding Hillary's email and private server while she was Sec of State.

So, I think that is enuf to make me say "hmmmm, once again Hillary is knee deep in crap" and this time, she had the help of DWS and the DNC, and tried to sting Bernie.

I can imagine that all the above info would have come out had the hearing gone on. Instead, Bernie got his data back (rightfully so) and the lawsuit, although not being dropped, will probably go quiet for a time.

hopemountain

(3,919 posts)
114. thank you for posting this info.
Sun Dec 20, 2015, 03:12 AM
Dec 2015

i certainly hope the lawsuit continues and that "discovery" exposes the dnc, dws, and hc campaign manipulations/entrapment.

jwirr

(39,215 posts)
26. Excellent point. DWS does indeed need to resign before she
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 03:14 PM
Dec 2015

does any more damage to the party and she needs to take her incompetent vendor with her.

NowSam

(1,252 posts)
32. Not a single "Neutral" person
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 03:18 PM
Dec 2015

No one believes that DWS is a neutral person it seems. Isn't that something?

 

NCTraveler

(30,481 posts)
44. Sanders fired an aide. So much more was to be known anyway.
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 03:28 PM
Dec 2015

The thought it wasn't going to the press yesterday, one way or another, is foolish.

 

NCTraveler

(30,481 posts)
49. Please show where I said it did.
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 03:37 PM
Dec 2015

Though I'm becoming more aware as facts are coming out that's the direction it's going. That's why I want the FBI involved. They make those determinations. Not me.

Fawke Em

(11,366 posts)
50. I'm going to guess, "no."
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 03:38 PM
Dec 2015

I think if this were independently investigated, we'd probably find that Clinton's staff took advantage of the "glitch" too. Or possibly even that DWS's nephew or brother - whoever he is - who is a VP at NGP VAN - has access to that information and shared it.

It's a bit too cozy.

Cassiopeia

(2,603 posts)
53. If she had
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 03:43 PM
Dec 2015

I'm sure they would have focused their questions on other issues more relevant to the Clintons.

azurnoir

(45,850 posts)
65. why were they having a fund raiser for her? I didn't know FBI salaries were generous
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 04:12 PM
Dec 2015

I didn't know FBI salaries were generous enough for that $2700 a plate stuff

 

senz

(11,945 posts)
36. Expect Hillary to go into high dudgeon tonight
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 03:20 PM
Dec 2015

just like she did with Obama in 2008. "Shame on you, Bernie Sanders!" etc.

redstateblues

(10,565 posts)
57. Victimhood is so sweet!
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 03:52 PM
Dec 2015

In Bernieworld there is always something to be angry about. Anger fuels the Sanders campaign. From the top down.

 

AlbertCat

(17,505 posts)
109. Anger fuels the Sanders campaign.
Sun Dec 20, 2015, 12:50 AM
Dec 2015

Oh please....

Yea...anger at what this country has become... and what the Democratic Party has become...

What fuels Clinton's campaign? Just corporate money?

notadmblnd

(23,720 posts)
52. I'm not aware if anything has changed since last night
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 03:42 PM
Dec 2015

But it was said that the Sander's campaign plans on going forward with the law suit they filed.

 

randome

(34,845 posts)
64. Was a law broken? This all seems to be an internal political party matter.
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 04:09 PM
Dec 2015

Why would law enforcement be involved in political infighting?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]All things in moderation, including moderation.[/center][/font][hr]

moobu2

(4,822 posts)
75. Maybe to let the public know the truth before the Bernie Sanders fanatics
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 04:46 PM
Dec 2015

made up some lie they could feed his worshippers? Just a guess but that's what it looks like to me.

azurnoir

(45,850 posts)
77. ah ya that's it of course why didn't I think of that
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 04:50 PM
Dec 2015

because having the FBI or other law enforcement raid his offices wouldn't have made any impression

DonCoquixote

(13,616 posts)
79. if a crime was committed
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 05:11 PM
Dec 2015

you go to the cops first, especially as they may want you to keep quiet while they investigate. True story, when Richard "the night stalker " Ramirez was killing people, Dianne Fienstein let it loose in a press conference that the killer wore a rare brand of sneaker. Needless to say, Ramirez dumped the shoes, which could have cost one more woman her life.

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

So let us say that this WAS and 100 percent, no hint of doubt crime. Debbie yelling to the press not only comes across as a cheap attempt for pop, it shows she is foolish enough to risk comprising the very investigation to that crime. Seriously, this sort of thing is amusing in the primary, but the commercials will write themselves come the general. She NEEDS to be fired. NOW.

 

MissDeeds

(7,499 posts)
86. She really is trying to throw the nomination
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 06:25 PM
Dec 2015

I just read an article on Salon that equated her with Katherine Harris! You can't get much lower than that.

thesquanderer

(11,968 posts)
88. I don't think ANYONE involved has called it a crime.
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 07:38 PM
Dec 2015

If you could go into facebook and suddenly see confidential information on all your contacts, you would not have committed any crime. Even if you saved it.

Since there was no crime, there was no reason to go to law enforcement.

There was only a possible breach of contractual rules, which would be a matter of civil action, not criminal action. The proper procedure if the DNC suspected a breach, from what I've seen, would have been for the DNC to notify the Sanders campaign and give them 10 days to address the matter. Even after that, they wouldn't go to law enforcment, they would proceed with legal actions according to the contract.

In short, breaking a contract is not a criminal matter, and not something you go to law enforcement about.

But why the DNC decided to go to the press rather than address their issues quietly and just follow the terms of their agreement is a different question.

 

randome

(34,845 posts)
89. Right. Because every time there is political infighting, the cops are called.
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 07:44 PM
Dec 2015

They must be sick and tired of Congress by now.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]All things in moderation, including moderation.[/center][/font][hr]

Hekate

(90,510 posts)
103. If she didn't go to the press she would've been accused of secrecy. If she went to the cops....
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 10:13 PM
Dec 2015

...she would have been accused of the worst kind of sabotage of the Sanders campaign.

What, EXACTLY, should she have done? Give them cookies and milk?

rocktivity

(44,571 posts)
105. It tells me that Wasserman-Schultz CAN BE ACCUSED of a political smear job
Sat Dec 19, 2015, 10:49 PM
Dec 2015

And THAT'S why she needs to resign.

Because she was one of Hillary's previous presidential campaign managers, every breath she takes SHOULD be scrutinized for possible bias in favor of Hillary. We need to have complete confidence and trust in our party's electoral process, and regardless of your opinion of her, she cannot provide it.


rocktivity

PufPuf23

(8,743 posts)
108. This scandal has close to zero to do with Sanders.
Sun Dec 20, 2015, 12:45 AM
Dec 2015

What is has to do with is the maleficence by DWS, DNC, HRC, and the database vendor to tilt the system in favor of HRC

Sanders is immaterial as like tricks would have been played on whatever candidate within the DP was most competitive to HRC.

Sanders is the outsider and DWS, DNC, HRC, and the database vendor have conflicts of interest because of existing connections.

The rat fuck is blatantly obvious and they do not care how much the DP or the USA are harmed or if the DP loses the 2016 POTUS election because of their antics.

DWS/DNC would have solved the situation in house or at most aggressive gone to law enforcement themselves. Instead they went to the press on a Friday before a POTUS debate and the holidays and backed down immediately when the Sanders campaign rightfully went to court.

My speculation is that is that it is far more likely to the degree of probably being for sure is the HRC has and has used Sanders data and not what has been offered by DWS/DNC.

IMO DWS should resign and HRC should withdraw from the campaign over the holidays.

The folks that are supporting DWS/DNC/HRC in this matter are delusional. look at their track records.

One has to wonder what other institutions that claim to represent the Democratic Party and Democratic Party Ideals are similarly compromised by insiders that have not been forthcoming?

Neoliberals are Machiavellian and in their lust for power are more than willing to harm the Democratic Party and most of the People of the USA.

 

AlbertCat

(17,505 posts)
110. And what's the most important thing we've learned from this:
Sun Dec 20, 2015, 12:54 AM
Dec 2015

That the campaign data is being "run" by incompetent cronies of DWS.... who is a crony for Clinton.

MrMickeysMom

(20,453 posts)
111. Not only is this disgusting...
Sun Dec 20, 2015, 12:58 AM
Dec 2015

.. but the web of "reporting" what happened follows the same sorry ass talking points from the DNC, which is indistinguishable from the Clinton campaign...

which is indistinguishable from the major media outlets...

which is indistinguishable from the local media outlets...

which is indistinguishable from the talking head-bots on the Democratic debate...

which is indistinguishable from what we'll all see tomorrow on Meet the Press or whatever brings this a full circle jerk... including much of what is on DU.

DWS needs to be removed and a full audit of the DNCs records needs to be reviewed by a third party... not a TURD WAY party.

SmittynMo

(3,544 posts)
123. WOW, that's your take?
Sun Dec 20, 2015, 09:50 AM
Dec 2015

It tells me and many others that she is as corrupt as they come, destroying democracy as we know it.

Smart? Very questionable.

Manipulative? Absolutely.

Delver Rootnose

(250 posts)
124. They settled before a lawsuit could be heard.....
Sun Dec 20, 2015, 09:56 AM
Dec 2015

...discovery can be a bitch sometimes. They didn't want to give the sanders campaign, and the general public, access to internal discussions on the matter and other things. That is the club the sanders campaign had over the DNC. Outing the political dirty laundry.

Renew Deal

(81,841 posts)
127. You should be thankful it wasn't taken to the FBI.
Sun Dec 20, 2015, 10:04 AM
Dec 2015

I wouldn't wish for that. It would probably instantly end his campaign when the indictments came down.

JustABozoOnThisBus

(23,314 posts)
139. Oh, you're right. We should be real quiet now so the FBI won't find out ...
Mon Dec 21, 2015, 05:33 PM
Dec 2015

... because I'm sure they don't have televisions in FBI agent offices or homes.

Shhhh!

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Debbie Wasserman-Schultz ...