Don't Be Played. The Sanders Campaign Hasn't Charged Conspiracy or Claimed Josh Uretsky is a Plant

[Luminous Animal]

http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2015/12/26/1463734/--Don-t-Be-Played-The-Sanders-Campaign-Hasn-t-Charged-Conspiracy-or-Claimed-Josh-Uretsky-is-a-Plant

n article on Yahoo News is causing quite a stir by revealing that Josh Uretsky, who was fired from his position as IT Director for the Sanders Campaign for improperly accessing data belonging to the Clinton Campaign, was recommended for that position by Andrew Brown, the Democratic National Committee’s National Director of Data. The revelation is credited to an anonymous source identified only as “ a top Sanders campaign adviser”.

“It’s not as if we conjured this guy Josh from thin air. This is an individual … who was recommended to us by the DNC and NGP VAN,” the adviser said.
This disclosure is fueling a great deal of speculation and argument regarding possible conspiracy and the suggestion that Uretsky might be a “mole” or a “plant”, all relying on the article for their foundation.

The problem with this is that the anonymous source makes neither of these allegations.

While it’s true that the article mentions conspiracy, it’s important to note that this was a characterization by the author of the article. Nowhere in the article is the anonymous source actually quoted as alleging a conspiracy or suggesting that Uretsky was a “plant”.

Still, given what happened with the breach, the adviser suggested Brown’s recommendation of Uretsky could be evidence of a conspiracy.

What form did this “suggestion” take? Here’s what the author presents by way of substantiation:

“I don’t know how you can more centrally connect this thing than those two entities,” the adviser explained. “Here we are being attacked by both of those entities when, in fact, they recommended this guy to the campaign.”

That’s it. Not a word about conspiracy. In fact, it sounds much more like a description of hypocrisy. Particularly so considering that elsewhere in the article the source is quoted as saying this

“I just think it’s utter hypocrisy on their part,” said the adviser. “I mean here we are being attacked for the behavior of an individual, which we ultimately fired. We agree he acted improperly, but it’s just amazing to me that this … individual that actually caused this trouble in our campaign was recommended by these guys.”

This smacks of journalistic spin for the purpose of sensationalism.

What is evident is that the statements attributed to the source do not support the claim that the Sanders campaign is making any such accusation or alleging that Uretsky was a mole or a plant.

Unfortunately, this hasn’t stopped some of the more rabid Sanders critics from raising a howl about the Sanders campaign engaging in “Conspiracy Theories”. Equally unfortunate is the fact that some over zealous Sanders supporters have played into this false narrative by accepting the article’s characterization at face value.

Here’s the bottom line. There’s plenty in the article to raise both eyebrows and legitimate questions about the DNC’s ethics and actions without falling in with what appears to be an instance of journalistic exaggeration. We should stick strictly to what the source is actually quoted as saying and not allow ourselves to be distracted into debates over things that were, apparently, never said.

© Kos Media, LLC
Site content may be used for any purpose without
explicit permission unless otherwise specified.
“Kos” and “Daily Kos” are registered trademarks of
Kos Media, LLC.

[cui bono]

1. Thank you. n/t

[MeNMyVolt]

3. So, which is it?

You recommended this thread. http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251946750

[ablamj]

4. Oh no

I recced both too!

[cui bono]

5. So? Where is the conflict? Same story, same quotes.

What's with this "gotcha" attitude? Jesus fuck. What happened to civil and reasonable discourse? DU sucks.

.

[MeNMyVolt]

9. I thought I was quite civil.

Just asked, so which is it. I can't help you much if you can't see the disconnect.

Happy New Year.

[Ed Suspicious]

11. I don't think they want the want the unsolicited help.

[cui bono]

24. When you play "gotcha" you are not having civil and reasonable discourse.

So where is the conflict? If you want an answer you must spell out your question. And considering how new you are, I have to wonder why you want to come after someone like this so quickly. Hm...

.

[ejbr]

15. My guess

is that if Bernie's integrity is not impugned enough to cause a distraction to Hillary's then this spygate scandal will be completely worthless.

[Pryderi]

2. I don't think he was a plant. I'm hoping the emails are looked at to see if there has been

coordination between the DNC and the Clinton campaign.

[SusanCalvin]

6. All I want is a timely, independent investigation. nt

[Dustlawyer]

10. True dat!!!

Just want the truth to come out before the Iowa caucuses for good or ill! Not too worried about Bernie either way, he does the right thing. Maybe this was intentional or not on behalf of the vendor and DNC, maybe not. Maybe Clinton campaign had something to do with it, maybe not. Just need the truth.

[PatrynXX]

7. always took yahoo news to be a faux news clone n/t

[LuvLoogie]

8. Bernie's lawsuit will expose the DNC conspiracy against Bernie.

Any suggestion that Bernie's campaign has suggested that the data breach was a conspiracy against Bernie is a conspiracy against Bernie.

[SusanCalvin]

12. Could be.

I'm going to try real hard to stop all speculation - I don't *think* I've done much, but in future I'm just going to be a broken record for investigation, investigation, investigation.

[Luminous Animal]

16. That is, indeed, a wise move.

[Vattel]

13. The bullshit story has certainly brought out many rabid Hillary supporters on DU.

[Luminous Animal]

14. And the concern trolling is hilarious.

[MeNMyVolt]

17. Most of us are laughing.

Though, not at SBS. Let's see what he says tomorrow.

[joshcryer]

18. I don't know how this thing still has legs.

It's a non issue that everyone should just let go.

[Number23]

21. The people who should be doing everyting in their power to encourage this thing to die are the very

ones spreading it far and wide. The same crowd that's now saying "the plant story is fake" is the same crowd that's spreading it all over the Internet and rec'ing it to the hills here. They don't seem to know whether they are coming or going.

The level of confusion and chaos over all of this is absolutely astonishing.

[MeNMyVolt]

23. Making my head spin.

I'm not sure I've seen anything like this on this board. Going back through the memory banks for '08, and still I can't find anything close. Though, I have to say that I hated that period on DU more than any other.

[joshcryer]

25. You were completely right, BTW.

I said this shouldn't have the same lasting factor as the anti BLM crap, I was wrong.

[Number23]

32. Josh, I think you as a Sanders supporter, were just hoping it would blow

away and quickly because you understand exactly what a massive and needless distraction all of this is.

I tend to be far more cynical. But I knew that this was an angle too juicy for the media to let go of. But I am incredibly surprised that not only has the Sanders campaign not looked for any and every available avenue to make this go away, but that there are actually people that support this chaos and think it makes Sanders or anyone look valiant or noble.

This is a big pile of crap for everyone involved.

[Luminous Animal]

28. You seem a little miffed that you got played. And a look at GD-P, it is mostly Hillary supporters

who are amplifying this "plant" canard. And they are crying big crocodile tears while doing so.

[Number23]

29. LOL You run with that if it helps you. That KOS diary is very light on substance

and doesn't actually dispute anything. Not only was there a Yahoo! story on this but Raw Story and other media outlets have picked up on the non-subtle attempts from the Sanders campaign to suddenly "remember" that it was the DNC that pointed them in the data guy's direction.

Not that I'm sure any of this will make even the tiniest bit of difference to Sanders extra special supporters who have been all over DU high fiving and rec'ing pieces about the "plant," that this is all some glorious conspiracy, or hollering about how much it "stinks" that this guy was referred to the Sanders campaign from the DNC. That is, when they're not pretending that this story is fake or even more delicious, also a plant from the DNC.

[Luminous Animal]

31. Yeah. Raw story calls Josh a hacker (snort). And yahoo states the journalist's opinion & Hillary supporters

run away with it as an actual statement from the campaign.

Did you know that Al Gore invented the internet?

I do. Because the media told me that is what Gore said.

[Number23]

33. That was relevant and incredibly convincing. Really.

[Luminous Animal]

34. Indeed. Looking forward your evidence that the campaign called Josh a plant or it's a conspiracy.

The Yahoo reporter claims that the campaign hinted as such leading a reader to the reporters bias.

The claim that the Bernie campaign considers Josh a plant is the reporters opinion. Not based in any fact in evidence.

[Number23]

35. It's called "anonymous" or "unamed advisers" for a reason

Though I am truly enjoying watching you guys play this "we don't understand how politics or the media works" game. It is incredibly entertaining and not nearly as unconvincing as you may believe.

[Luminous Animal]

36. Again. Please point out where this unnamed advisor said that Josh is a plant or part of a

conspiracy. Reporters opinion will not be accepted.

[Luminous Animal]

19. Kick.

[Vattel]

20. Whover wrote this has a brain. It's nice to see journalists who can reason.

While it’s true that the article mentions conspiracy, it’s important to note that this was a characterization by the author of the article. Nowhere in the article is the anonymous source actually quoted as alleging a conspiracy or suggesting that Uretsky was a “plant”.

Still, given what happened with the breach, the adviser suggested Brown’s recommendation of Uretsky could be evidence of a conspiracy.

What form did this “suggestion” take? Here’s what the author presents by way of substantiation:


“I don’t know how you can more centrally connect this thing than those two entities,” the adviser explained. “Here we are being attacked by both of those entities when, in fact, they recommended this guy to the campaign.”


That’s it. Not a word about conspiracy. In fact, it sounds much more like a description of hypocrisy. Particularly so considering that elsewhere in the article the source is quoted as saying this


“I just think it’s utter hypocrisy on their part,” said the adviser. “I mean here we are being attacked for the behavior of an individual, which we ultimately fired. We agree he acted improperly, but it’s just amazing to me that this … individual that actually caused this trouble in our campaign was recommended by these guys.”

Beautiful stuff.

[Luminous Animal]

30. It truly is. After decades of the media slanting stories, you'd think DUers would approach this

accusation with a bit suspicion.

One of the most valuable classes that I ever had was Civics… in 7th grade. Once a week we had our own copy of the New York Times on our desk and then taught how to read the articles and OPeds throughout the rest of the week (amongst other things). What we were taught to look for was bias and reporter interpretation and incongruity between the headline, the lede, and the irrefutable facts of the story… ordinarily presented near the end on an entirely different page.

[Bonobo]

22. There is dirty politics and then there is FILTHY politics.

We are seeing a meme being planted here. Do not respond to it.

It's an old, old strategy.

Get the guy to deny beating his wife and suddenly you have people talking about whether or not he is a wife beater. Same thing here.

Filthy. Clinton. Politics.

Nothing new here. It is what we expected when Bernie became a real threat.

[bvf]

26. This ^

And the tinfoil-hat smilie is getting quite the workout lately, it seems. Shiny things, those.

[Live and Learn]

27. +1000 nt

[Babel_17]

37. Hypocrisy indeed

It's like if you recommended a staffer to a fellow congressman. That staffer then somehow violates your shared space on the server. You then shout out "you scoundrel!" to the guy who hired the person you sent him. lol

Btw, there was a story (very) roughly a decade ago about the Republicans surfing the files of some of our Democratic representatives. And IIRC it was because our firewall was down.

Hopefully a commentator with a better memory for that event will recount it.

[senz]

38. THANK YOU. The desperados are gettin' even more so

of late.

But I seriously HATE this rumor. Dirty pool all the way.

[mhatrw]

39. The conspiracy is the Clinton Cronyforce software the DNC has forced every candidate to use.

Clinton's cronies have the backdoor keys to all of Sanders' voting data!

[brooklynite]

41. How was Sanders "forced" to use the database? Evidence please.

[Douglas Carpenter]

40. thank you. knr