Former DNC Chair Donna Brazile Claims “Proof” That Hillary “Rigged” Nomination Against Bernie Sanders

The Daily Beast reports:

Former interim Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Donna Brazile claims Hillary Clinton secretly took over the DNC before she had won the Democratic primary.

In an excerpt from her new book published by Politico, Brazile said she promised Clinton’s opponent, Bernie Sanders, that she would get to the bottom of whether Clinton had “rigged the nomination process.” She wrote, “By September 7, the day I called Bernie, I had found my proof and it broke my heart.”

Brazile describes a fundraising agreement between the Hillary Victory Fund, Hillary for America, and the DNC that stipulated that Hillary would control the “party’s finances, strategy, and all the money raised” in exchange for Clinton raising money and investing in the DNC. It was signed long before Clinton became the nominee.

The irony here, of course, is that Brazile herself earned widespread criticism and lost her CNN gig when Wikileaks posted a stolen email which revealed that she had leaked a primary debate question to Hillary. Her Politico column is here.

  • TJay229

    SIT YO ASS DOWN DONNA, DAMN.

  • JoeMyGod

    Brazile’s claims hinge on the timing of the process in which the presumptive nominee’s campaign traditionally assumes financial control of the DNC

    • GayOldLady

      Exactly. That’s what I thought. IF Hillary won her campaign would control the DNC.

      • Gerry Fisher

        The financial agreement was signed in August of 2015, well before she won the nomination. (The mitigating factor seemed to be “We’ll help erase your debt if you give us control early.”)

        • GayOldLady

          But if you read this excerpt from her Book it’s apparent there really wasn’t much control exercised. It looks as if OFA left the DNC in enormous debt and Hillary’s campaign saved the DNC from drowning. Like Brazile says in her book, it may have been unethical for the DNC, but it wasn’t illegal and the contract proves that. It’s just a damned shame that the DNC didn’t own it’s failure and that the Hillary campaign tried to control the DNC by covering it’s debt.

          Donna Brazile:

          “I had tried to search out any other evidence of internal corruption
          that would show that the DNC was rigging the system to throw the primary to Hillary, but I could not find any in party affairs or among the
          staff. I had gone department by department, investigating individual
          conduct for evidence of skewed decisions, and I was happy to see that I
          had found none. Then I found this agreement.
          The funding arrangement with HFA and the victory fund agreement was
          not illegal, but it sure looked unethical. If the fight had been fair,
          one campaign would not have control of the party before the voters had
          decided which one they wanted to lead. This was not a criminal act, but
          as I saw it, it compromised the party’s integrity.”

          • unsavedheathen

            The Clinton campaign was determining where EVERY DNC dollar went. To every candidate, in every state, on every ticket. All those super delegates dependent on the party for campaign funding were in fact dependent on the Clinton campaign because they decided who got what.

          • GayOldLady

            And the part you so obviously missed, without the Clinton campaign there wouldn’t have been a DNC. And the other part you missed, that is so obvious that it shouldn’t need explaining, the DNC owed money to the Clinton campaign even while her campaign kept the DNC afloat. She paid off 80% of their debt and was funding their 3-4 million dollar a month burn rate. Of course they were returning money to her campaign because they owed the money to her campaign.

            And why, exactly, do you think super delegates are “dependent on the party for campaign funding”?

            Definition of a super delegate: a group of current and former DNC party members and/or lawmakers that can pledge and withdraw their convention votes. Hillary didn’t need Super Delegates to win the nomination. And Super delegates don’t get campaign funding. Hillary needed pledged delegates that are won by winning primaries and caucuses. Hillary needed 2026 pledged delegates to win the nomination she had 2205. Bernie had 1846 pledged delegates. The super delegates were nothing but icing on the cake, she didn’t need them because she won the requisite amount of pledged delegates to win the nomination. She won 34 contests, Sanders won 23. There’s nothing in Donna Brazile’s story that indicates that the DNC did anything to help her win the nomination.

            And for what it’s worth Hillary campaigned using her own campaign funds for DNC candidates across the board. It was her appearance with those candidates, that was paid for by her campaign, that brought in donations. Bernie only campaigned for DNC candidates that he supported. That was one of the biggest complaints about Bernie was that he didn’t want to campaign for party candidates.

            I personally don’t like the arrangement the Hillary campaign made with the DNC, but I’m not surprised by it. It looks unseemly, but the truth is the DNC was belly up and they were loaned money. The fact that there was a written contract that spelled out terms of repayment and control doesn’t look like some covert conspiracy against Bernie, it looks like a DNC poorly managed by Wasserman-Shultz and a failure of Obama For America to payoff the DNC debt.

          • unsavedheathen

            Clinton didn’t need super delegates? Just icing on the cake? That is demonstrably false.
            Delegates needed to win Dem nomination: 2382
            Delegates Clinton won: 2205
            Clinton super delegates: 602
            https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/democratic_delegate_count.html

            Super delegates running for office received no party funding? Did you really just claim that?

            I really don’t understand the difficulty in understanding the, to be generous, conflict of interest here. The Clinton campaign was determining the level of support that Democratic candidates nationwide received from the party over a year before she was named the nominee. Before the race even officially began. The Clinton campaign kept over 80% of all funds raised thru joint appearances with down ticket Dems.

            It looks unseemly because it is.

          • GayOldLady

            Hillary received 2218/Bernie had 1833. You’re correct, both Hillary and Bernie needed 2383. Still Hillary won the majority of pledged delegates, the majority of contests 34/23 and the popular vote, 16,914,722 to 13,206,428. But you think Bernie should have won the nomination? Bernie who wouldn’t have gotten off the ground without the DNC donor database and the Democratic Debates? His campaign Manager admitted that Bernie would not have been able to run without running as a Democrat.

            “Super delegates running for office received no party funding? Did you just claim that?”

            No, I didn’t just claim that, because what you wrote was that Super Delegates were “All those super delegates dependent on the party for campaign funding were in fact dependent on the Clinton campaign because they decided who got what.”? That’s simply untrue. Many of the Super Delegates aren’t running for office at all.

            437 elected members (with 433 votes) from the Democratic National Committee (including the chairs and vice-chairs of each state’s Democratic Party)

            20 distinguished party leaders (DPL), consisting of current and
            former presidents, current and former vice-presidents, former
            congressional leaders, and former DNC chairs

            191 Democratic members of the United States House of Representatives (including non-voting delegates from DC and territories). We picked up 6 House Seats in the 2016 election

            47 Democratic members of the United States Senate (including Washington, DC shadow senators). Only 10 Democrat seats were up for re-election in 2016. The Democrats picked up 2 seats. And 3 of the Super Delegates that were Senators, didn’t run for re-election. Mikulski, Boxer and Reid. We replaced all 3 with Democratic Senators.

            21 Democratic governors (including territorial governors and the Mayor of the District of Columbia).

            As you can see, the majority of the Super Delegates weren’t office holders. And of those who were we have no idea how much money they did or didn’t receive from the DNC. Besides, according to Brazile, if you believe her which you obviously do, the contract wasn’t common knowledge. She had to review documents to find it. You imply collusion with the Super Delegates for campaign contributions which is absolutely not supported by anything Donna Brazile wrote.

            Still, you should understand that the majority of money that goes to Congressional races does not come from the DNC. It comes from the candidates raising their own money, from State Party Money, the DSCC and the DCCC.

            And Bernie notoriously wasn’t into helping down ballot candidates and consequently didn’t campaign with many, but Hillary did and her campaign paid for all of those fund raising events out of their campaign coffers.

            And For the Record. I think both the Clinton Campaign and the DNC made a terrible mistake with the contract. It was unseemly and if it did nothing else it created the appearance of impropriety. It was entered into before Bernie was even on the radar, so if the DNC gave more favorable terms to the Clinton Campaign it affected anyone who was challenging Hillary, not just Bernie.

          • Mark

            Dump the superdelegates

    • Robert K Wright

      Here, maybe the article you linked to didn’t have all the important stuff. Another quote.
      “Hillary for America (the campaign) and the Hillary Victory Fund (its joint fundraising vehicle with the DNC) had taken care of 80 percent of the remaining debt in 2016, about $10 million, and had placed the party on an allowance,” according to Brazile.

      Normally, candidates take over their respective party’s operations after securing the nomination, but Brazile wrote Clinton had done so almost 15 months before last year’s election.

      The timeline of when all this allegedly occurred was not fully explained by Brazile, but she wrote that the discovery was made “weeks” before the election. She said she told Sanders what she found out and that he took the supposed information “stoically.”

      That second paragraph pretty much sums up how it is supposed to work. You don’t call the shots until you are the nominee. And it seems like you are questioning Brazilles expertise at the DNC and their processes. It isn’t her first time working at the DNC. She does know what she’s talking about.

    • Donna Brazile is trying to save her own skin but the truth is the DNC is corrupt and it needs to fix these issues or they are destined to lose again.

  • Tawreos

    Cool, this will allow us to keep re-fighting 2016 for years to come. It is a good thing that there are no elections for the next three years that we might want to focus on.

    • TrueWords

      This is EXACTLY how you get more people to vote for an Independent candidate (with no chance of winning only splintering votes) or NOT vote at all and then we have another four years with Trump

      • I’ve been saying for several years that there’s never been a better time to run as an independent. Many people are sick of both parties. Of course it’s hard to get on the ballot in most places without party backing so that’s an issue.

        • Steve

          The only problem with an Independent President is the fact that the rest of congress will be against most of what you want to do.

          • Yeah, because that doesn’t happen now to the Democrats and Republicans that hold that office? LOL

            But actually I meant for local and state offices.

        • Chris Gardner

          If you put up a 3rd party progressive nominee, you guarantee a win for Trump or Pence’s 2nd term.

          • AJD

            And that’s exactly what happened in 2000 and 2016. Part of the problem is that despite all their infighting, conservatives get with the program on Election Day because they’re focused on the most important thing: winning. Meanwhile, progressives prize ideological purity and treat the election like they’re ordering off a restaurant menu, demanding that their every desire be met, or they’ll walk. Not only is it egotistical, but it’s a surefire way to lose elections. They don’t seem to understand that at the end of the day, the election is on you, the voter.

          • Again, not talking about for president. I’m talking about other offices. I thought I already clarified that.

      • chiMaxx

        Yes, we shouldn’t report on corrupt practices, because that might turn voters off. Keeping the corruption secret is the only way to keep it from repeating in the future.

      • Scribble Writer 🌹 ☭

        if the dnc wants ppl to vote dem then maybe offer a candidate with a message & platform that working class people will care about instead of some pro-wall st, capitalist, corporate shill like clinton, zuckerberg, or any of those fucking ghouls

        my days of “lesser evilism” voting is over, it’s never done us any good anyway. you want my vote, give me a reason to give it to you

        you want me to stay home, run kamala harris or cory booker or some shit

        • DJ John Bear

          Good. Stay home and enjoy Trump.

          Loser.

          • DevineBovine

            Uh, the fact that YOUR slippery candidate lost to the most despised, soulless bag of flesh on the planet… well, that kinda makes YOU the loser. Thanks to your misguided judgement, the rest of the civilized world lives every day in fear of nuclear annihalation. Dumb prick

          • DJ John Bear

            Well then, perhaps you should have held your nose and voted for *MY* “slippery” candidate instead of sitting home like the petulant child you are.

            I’m done with you.

          • DevineBovine

            I didn’t sit home, genius.

    • Jeffrey

      SO many Berners are still fighting 2016. Disappointing if Dems don’t come up with a message for 2018 and we lose everything again.

      • Do Something Nice

        Yeah, the ‘Berners’ are controlling the DNC. Or something.

        • Jeffrey

          Berners do not now nor have they ever controlled anything. They’ve merely wielded the power of disruption.

          • justmeeeee

            but, honestly, unlike lying cheating stealing corrupt minions of the QUEEN!!

          • Jack Frost

            If you’re suggesting that only Berners are upset here you are waaaaay off the mark. The Democratic party has been in trouble with several of their own demographics for years now.

            And if you think that the power of disruption is stronger than the bond of an entire politcal party with a war chest of money maybe that party should do some soul searching or get a new message.

            Considering they havent been able to pull off much after the 2016 loss, I’m guessing they’re still reeling from that election.

          • Dave Babler

            You do understand what disruption is right? That’s the whole point to take down an established entity. Don’t look down your nose at it; that attitude along with Russia propping up Sanders, plus normal human emotion, plus 30 years of propaganda vs one person and hardly any vs the other is why we are here today still fighting this.

          • Mark

            Otherwise called democracy

        • Donna Brazile is a Berner?

      • Tiger Quinn

        Right, because hillary lost on “messaging,” not unprecedented Russian interference.

        • Jeffrey

          She lost for more than one reason. Have a nice day.

          • kareemachan

            The *major* reason were the Russkies.

            You have a mediocre day.

          • Jeffrey

            Why would you even waste your time arguing with other liberals about it when you could get off your ass and do something?

          • MonochromeMouse

            She only lost because trump and russia conspired to cheat her out of the win she actually got. Simple math proves that.

          • DevineBovine

            She lost because the majority of Americans see her for exactly what she is – a lying, war mongering, Wall Street whore. Even with her cheating, she still lost.

          • pablo

            Church of Clintonology members can’t admit she did anything wrong. She lost because Russian trolls bought some facebook ads.

        • Wagnerian_thrice

          She actually didn’t lose on Russian interference. Don’t go overboard.

          https://www.wsj.com/articles/you-cant-buy-the-presidency-for-100-000-1508104629

          • And you & the WSJ know that because the Trump administration has completed a deep dive into Russian hacking into the individual election systems in all 50 states?

            And we’re supposed to trust a Murdoch newspaper that only last week & this past weekend called for an end to the Mueller probe & trumpeted White House propaganda?

            Yeah, no thanks.

            But I would agree that it wasn’t just Russian election meddling. We also have the Comey letter ten days before the election.

            Regarding Ms. Brazile, et tu, Donna?

          • Wagnerian_thrice

            It was because she was an awful candidate. Get it correct.

          • 62,979,636 voted for Moron

            65,844,610 voted for Clinton

            65,915,795 voted for Obama in 2012

            Yeah, just absolutely awful.

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/ab953a1cc3a292638b58949fc4ecc880e6c5bc99642c30b039ca7b291aad1b35.jpg

          • Wagnerian_thrice

            Yep she was/is fucking awful. The only way he she had going for her was that she was running against Trump.

          • Wagnerian_thrice

            Yep, she was/is a nightmare. The only thing she had going for her was that she was running against a dangerous moron, and people held their nose and voted for her.

      • Pluto Animus

        Well, here’s a message Democrats can use for the Bernie Brats:
        “I can get you a kleenex to dry your tears.”

        • MarkBuster

          And here’s the response: Just not showing up for rigged elections. Not going to choose cancer Vs polio

        • Wagnerian_thrice

          Hello Trump 2020!

        • Mark

          And then you will complain how come they don’t support the nominee

      • MarkBuster

        Uh, I think that fight is going on both sides, if you read comments here and on other articles here. The establishment Democrats — especially the coasters HATE that the under 40 crowd wouldn’t capitulate to a middle-right candidate, and they (you?) are pissed about it. The DNC won’t be winning any federal elections anytime soon until the rift is resolved. You can’t put a democrat in the white house with just NY and CA, and you can’t put one in without them.

        • AJD

          Sorry, but letting the Republicans win by not showing up or voting third-party because you’re pissed about your favorite candidate not getting nominated is the ultimate example of cutting off your nose to spite your face.

          • Mark

            I don’t see any evidence that a significant numbers of Sanders voters did that

      • DevineBovine

        Here’s a simple “message”: Make people the priority instead of Wall Street and Raytheon.

      • Mark

        No actually we are not.

        It was Clinton who says that she lost in part due to Bernie.

        It’s the DNC blaming fellow democrats for Hillary’s lost.

        • Jeffrey

          Never forget that not only did Hillary lose. We did. And that includes you.

          • Mark

            Yes we all lost

            We all lost

            So let’s stop blaming others and try to find out why we lost.

            The buck stops here. That’s the attitude we want. Not blaming others.

    • PickyPecker
      • Todd20036

        Sigh. They never tire of beating off a dead horse, do they?

        • MarkBuster

          They might stop beating off that dead horse if there was some acknowledgement that the bulk of under 40’s got ripped

          • Todd20036

            You know, I don’t really give a fig what the Bernie bros think about 2016. It’s over. Hillary lost (sort of).
            My issue with them is that they won’t vote for the democrat in 2020 because he/she isn’t perfect enough, and we get Trump, or whoever replaces him after he’s impeached.

          • MarkBuster

            Most that I know would vote for an imperfect candidate. I’ve played team sports, I’m in a union. (well, 2, counting the ACLU).. I know how to support a team. If someone isn’t perfect but is legit elected, I’ll support them.

          • Marie Rose

            I held my nose and voted for HC. Almost any dem is better for us than a repub.

          • Danieruw

            Almost?

          • Marie Rose

            There MAY be a few decent ones, but not many.

          • Wagnerian_thrice

            Under 50s got ripped off, too. Fuck the Baby Boomers.

          • Phillip Wayne Dudley

            Fuck you!

      • Lawerence Collins

        https://www.facebook.com/JordanChariton/videos/726297270897367/

        Uncomfortable facts. But still facts.
        I’ve no intention of rehashing last years race. I’m more concerned with 2018 and 2020.
        I’m also concerned about what’s transpired in the DNC’s unity commission and why the DNC wants to keep their budget, hush hush.

    • Steven Alan Taylor

      There will be no moving on until there is justice. Thus why we still fight racism despite thinking we’ve moved on from Jim Crow, or fight sexism even after the 70s women’s lib movement.

      • Tawreos

        Are you really comparing racism and sexism to a mishandled election? Really? You would prefer that the GOP stays in power and fucks all of our lives for years to come because of a mishandled election? Please tell me this is not what you want.

        • unsavedheathen

          So our only option is to ignore any and all evidence that Clinton and the DNC colluded to ensure her the nomination and support whomever the party put forth without question? If we turn over this rock we’re supporting Trump? You think that’s going to unite the left? How about a little concern for the democratic process and the 40+% of the Democratic electorate who understand that they were rolled?

          • Tawreos

            Fine, stay in the past. Enjoy it

          • Wagnerian_thrice

            How about some accountability?

          • Dave Babler

            Yeh, people like you are probably why I’ll never vote again.
            I’m so sick of the spoiled brats refusing to a) accept factual evidence.
            b) deifying an old man that has *some* good ideas, ideas he largely appropriated from old DNC platforms, and
            c) spite.

            I may work with my local democratic party and support candidates but I didn’t sign any pledges that say I *have* to vote.

          • unsavedheathen

            Because I have the temerity to question the below-board way the DNC ran the nominating process and the bias exhibited for one candidate over another from the summer of ’15 thru the convention… that’s going to stop you from voting? Not the fact that the DNC put it’s thumb on the scale and nominated someone that 35 or 40% of the US electorate despises. That you don’t find upsetting. It’s that I and others have the nerve to point that out to you. Drama!

            Princess, you couldn’t say anything that would keep me from exercising my right to vote.

          • Mark

            I would of voted for a potato over Trump.

            The idea that Sanders supporters stayed home or voted third party and cost the election is BS

            Rationalization from party insiders who think they can dictate who wins.

            If Sanders won the Primary and lost the General. Would the Dems. Be blaming Hillary and her attacks. Or would they blame Bernie for running.

            See the party was right, Hillary would of won.

          • Mark

            So you are upset on the belief that Sanders voters did vote for Hillary

            So your idea is not to vote at all.

            Brilliant

    • unsavedheathen

      Yes because ignoring corruption at the highest levels of the Democratic party will ensure our success going forward.

    • chiMaxx

      Yeah, figuring out who poisoned the horse and how doesn’t matter unless you want to prevent the next horse from being poisoned by someone from your own team once again.

  • olandp

    OMG! Alert the press, a politician played politics!

  • Bluto
    • shellback

      G’Morning, Bluto.

      • Bluto

        G’mooning!

  • Dutchlander

    Oh good. The Democrats are infighting. I see that they are working hard on their strategy of losing the 2018 midterms as well.

    • alguien

      at least the DNC has little if nothing to do with 2018

    • Sashineb

      Stand by for more non-stop raging from the Rump about “Crooked Hillary”.

    • penpal

      They’ll lose the 2018 midterms and quite possibly the 2020 election, too. Not because of infighting, but because Democrats STILL don’t have an effective message other than “we’re not as bad as Republicans”. People are lionizing Clinton in spite of the fact that she lost an election that she should have won handily, rather than asking themselves what it is she did wrong. What could she have done better? Until Democrats start having that conversation, expect continued losses at the polls.

      • Mark

        Yep

        Blame Sanders

        Not our fault

  • another_steve

    Her career is over and she’s apparently seeking attention. Shame on her.

  • Chris

    If you actually read the excerpt, she says she found no proof of fixing primaries, just that Hillary was controlling the budget, prior to receiving the nomination. Most of the blame for this she throws at Wasserman, and she claims that Hillary’s agreement was unethical. However, she words it in a way that attempts to throw Hillary under the proverbial bus, without any actual evidence.

    • Cerberus

      Yup, and it says she was actively looking for literally any proof she could find, so is not really a neutral observer in this thing by any stretch of the imagination.

      • justmeeeee

        The Hill-bots are still here? Give it up, already.

    • Do Something Nice

      Nope. It was much more: “The agreement—signed by Amy Dacey, the former CEO of the DNC, and Robby Mook with a copy to Marc Elias—specified that in exchange for raising money and investing in the DNC, Hillary would control the party’s finances, strategy, and all the money raised. Her campaign had the right of refusal of who would be the party communications director, and it would make final decisions on all the other staff. The DNC also was required to consult with the campaign about all other staffing, budgeting, data, analytics, and mailings.”

      • TK

        What is described here is exactly what happens in all Presidential campaigns. The nominee takes control of the party’s direction. Both sides do it in all campaigns. This isn’t rigging, it’s hubris on the part of Hillary because she and her campaign assumed she’d be the nominee.

        • Do Something Nice

          No, it happens AFTER the primary election, not before. They assumed she’d be the candidate because they stacked the DNC.

          • Todd20036

            Or because, you know, she was winning most of the delegates.
            And Sanders, you know, wasn’t a democrat prior to the election.

          • Do Something Nice

            I agree that there was NO REASON AT ALL for the Clinton campaign to rig the process. But they did.

            If they had instead spent their time on actually setting foot in Wisconsin or returning calls to the DNC heads in Ohio and Michigan, Clinton would be president today.

          • Todd20036

            they didn’t do shit to the process. Bernie became a democrat, then lost, then helped sabotage Clinton
            He lost by millions. Figure it out

          • Duh-David

            Except, for all his whining about the Democratic party treating him unfairly, Bernie never became a Democrat.

          • Mark

            Sure

            Never mind e-mails telling people to bring up that Bernie was Jewish and or atheist.

            Sure who would be upset at that?

          • Do Something Nice

            This isn’t about Bernie. This is about the same type of Clinton (Bill and Hillary) arrogance that the rules don’t apply to them.

            If you want to blame Clinton’s loss on Bernie, go ahead. But that is not why she lost.

          • Xuuths

            Bernie never “became a democrat” then or since.

          • Librarykid

            He rode the Democratic Party like a Remora rides on a shark and for similar reasons. Remoras lack a swim bladder so they have to hitch rides and scavenge from their hosts. Bernie lacked a party so he tried to carjack the Democrats. Being an Independent is very pure, but you have no support network; such is the price for purity. He has never contributed anything to the party except voting with the Democrats. He has some good ideas, but when he came to visit, he not only brought his luggage, he tried to move in with a whole houseful of furniture. That is not good guest behavior, even for a self-invited guest.

          • S. Parilla

            This is disingenuous. The factors that lead to her loss were more complicated than “she didn’t go to Wisconsin or return phone calls”.

          • That’s fair. They clearly fucked up in the midwest.

          • Mark

            I believe the ‘baskets of deplorables comment was the worst mistake’

            Clearly insult all your competition.

            Who could take that seriously. I mean 50 50 it did not apply to you

          • She was exactly right but of course taken out of context across the media (including the so-called liberal media). She mentioned that a lot of people support Trump because they have not been doing well and don’t feel like those in power care about them. And then there are the deplorables. A range of people like those tiki-torch wielding white supremacists that marched on Charlottesville not long ago. There was ZERO that she said that was wrong but as usual the left let the right control the narrative and make it sounds like she was saying that about ALL Trump supporters which she most certainly did not. And those deplorables were never going to vote for a Democrat and most of them never for a woman either.

          • Do Something Nice

            OK, Van Jones, Michael Moore and others are wrong and you are right.

          • S. Parilla

            I didn’t realize being on television was a qualification for being factually correct, but if that characterization makes you feel ‘right’, sure.

          • Do Something Nice

            No, Van Jones going to Detroit to interview some of the 100,000 Obama voters who didn’t vote in 2016, and then meeting with the state DNC chief to ask what happened, and Moore’s doing the same in Wisconsin and Ohio provide no insights compared to what you read on the internet.

          • downtownla

            Hillary lost because, after Trump got the nomination, she basically decided to lay low and let Trump hang himself. She nominated a VP who brought nothing to the campaign, but was someone she thought she could govern with. She announced no major policy or initiatives for fear of having to backtrack on a campaign promise. She made the cardinal mistake in politics of assuming she had won already. She’s even said it herself when she said she thought she had it all sown up before Comey. She should never have been so confident. Not going to WI or Eastern MI was part of that, lay low strategy and not making any mistakes. Instead, she hid out in NYC and LA and raised money.

          • S. Parilla

            Absolutely. It was part of a larger picture that included things that were within her control, mistakes she and her campaign made, as you’ve mentioned but also issues like Comey’s involvement, foreign interference, unbalanced media coverage, misogyny etc. To boil it down to “she didn’t go to Wisconsin” as the reason she lost is inaccurate.

          • downtownla

            To me, one of the most telling things that Hillary has said post-election, is that, and I am paraphrasing here, that “up until Comey, I had this wrapped up.” That tells me that she was overconfident for most of the general election. She should always have ran as if she were 2 points behind.

          • Gerry Fisher

            There’s evidence that they controlled the finances. There still isn’t evidence that they rigged how the money was spent or did anything at all to rig the primary voting. There’s a strong whiff of “She’s going to win, anyway, so why don’t we all just get the fundraising ball rolling early, because the DNC needs the money now.”

          • Robert K Wright

            She wasn’t winning ANYONE a year before the election even started. You’re ignoring the facts of the story, like Trump voters, the actual truth won’t get through to you. Clinton bought the DNC more than a year before the elections even began. Period. It is not normal procedure. Period.

          • penpal

            Sanders determined all of Clinton’s talking points in a way that made her palatable. Just not quite palatable enough.

          • Librarykid

            and still isn’t.

          • unsavedheathen

            Do you understand the generally accepted concept of time? She was winning primaries and delegates months after she took over control of the party, its finances and its campaign arm, as one of three candidates for the nomination.

          • marshlc

            Oh, ffs. They assumed she would be the candidate because it was clear to anyone with eyes and a brain that she would be the candidate.

            Hubris is the right word for it. You could also call it shady. But it wasn’t rigging.

          • justmeeeee

            or you could call it what it is…corruption!

          • marshlc

            Sure, go ahead, if that gets you somewhere you want to be.

          • S. Parilla

            She was always going to win the nomination. She did so easily. If I were a Bernie supporter I would probably be annoyed at this, but the truth is that the DNC, or at least its leadership at the time, chose to cede control earlier than normal to the candidate who was sure to win more delegates (and did by a large margin), and who was actually a Democrat. She went on to win the popular vote, and would now be president were it not for the foolery of the Electoral College.

            If they had ceded control to, say, Martin O’Malley, that would have been crazy. This, however, was a reasonable calculation about the future of the party, and Donna Brazile would likely hold a place within the administration had the EC not awarded the presidency to the person who had less votes. But they did and here we are, and there Donna is, thinking about her future and legacy.

            It’s disappointing; the DNC should probably have clearer and more transparent rules about these issues to avoid what’s happening now and the fallout that may arise, but it absolutely does not help or further the cause going into 2018.

          • Gerry Fisher

            I think the real story is why the DNC was in such financial ruin going into the 2016 election. She blames, in part, Obama and his campaign for dragging out their debt from 2012 until 2015. Schultz comes across as looking very bad for not addressing the problem sooner.

          • EDinMCO

            I am a lifelong Bernie supporter and I AM annoyed by this. It reeks of arrogance and feeds the corruption narrative. DWS is shady as fuck. She is bad for the party and the country. And name calling Bernie supporters who point this out is counterproductive and childish.

            I also supported Hillary after she won the nomination and worked on her campaign. The process, flawed or not, gave us an eminently qualified candidate who would’ve made a great president and deserved our support. That’s how elections work: not everybody get their first choice. And my fellow Bernie supporters need to get the fuck over it.

          • RLK2

            You lost the primary votes. How would you fix that exactly for Bernie to win? Seems Bernie Bots fail to understand how math works.

        • justmeeeee

          She also assumed she’d be president, didn’t she? See what happens when one assumes?

        • Robert K Wright

          Yeah, except this took place more than a year before anyone was a Nominee. You don’t get to control everything BEFORE anyone even casts a vote. If you actually read what she wrote, Clinton bought the DNC in 2015. That IS NOT the way it’s done.

        • Gerry Fisher

          The Clinton campaign assumed control in August of 2015, almost a year before she was granted the nomination. (I think the idea was, “We’re a fund raising juggernaut. We’ll get you out of debt if you give us financial control early.”)

        • unsavedheathen

          No. Just, no. This is not what happens to all national political campaigns 15 months before the nominee is chosen.

      • lymis

        All those things depend ENTIRELY on the point at which this was supposed to kick in.

        If the agreement said that Hillary would assume such control before the convention, then there’s definitely room for investigating.

        If the agreement was that Hillary would assume such control on accepting the nomination, then there’s nothing particularly nefarious about it. It would simply indicate negotiating and signing something in advance of needing it rather than trying to race around and doing it at the last minute.

        It also matters whether Bernie was approached with a similar proposal that would kick in if he were to get the nomination. I don’t think that anyone could object to O’Malley not being approached, though for completeness, he probably should have been.

        Somehow I doubt that if this happened they way Brazile implies, we wouldn’t have heard about it before this.

        • Do Something Nice

          Well, I never considered that Brazile may be lying. Given she help Clinton by cheating, I assumed that she has no axe to grind against Clinton.

    • AC

      If you actually read the article, she uses the most inflammatory language possible; throws everyone else under the bus; and admits the failure was in the oversight for which she and her fellow DNC officers had a responsibility.

    • Wasserman was a disaster. And not because she favored Hillary. I’ve thought this for years. She just wasn’t good at messaging but there she was on all the new channels sucking at her job. It was embarrassing.

      • downtownla

        Typically, when a DNC Chair does as bad as the Democrats did in 2010, 2012 and 2014, that Chair would have been replaced. However, because the only election they cared about was 2016, they overlooked all those losses. It was a monumental failure of epic proportions.

        • It goes back much further than that. I remember in the late 90s several prominent liberals noting that the right was organized at the local level while liberal groups and Democrats were focused solely on the White House. That’s just not good enough, even when you get the White House. At the state level Democrats are an even bigger disaster than in DC. NY state…big blue NY…has a majority of Democrats in the state senate but several caucus with the Republicans giving them a majority. WTF? We wouldn’t be in this situation in the midwest with real moderate and liberal organizations working locally.

          And yes, every time there’s a loss as big as 2010 or 1994, people should be fired. That includes Speakers. Republicans get that. Why don’t Democrats? Why reward failure?

          • downtownla

            I agree. I think Pelosi should have been stepped down for the good of the party a loooooong time ago. It’s why we have such a weak bench.

  • Gigi

    I used to really like her. Now I don’t.

    • Todd20036

      I used to respect Sanders. Now I don’t.

      • Do Something Nice

        Yeah, Sanders made the Clinton campaign create a contract with the DNC that minimally, has the appearance of rigging the process. Or something.

        • Todd20036

          Sanders rigged the campaign by pretending to be a democrat. Or something.

          • unsavedheathen

            There’s nothing harder than admitting that you have been taken for fool. Trump supporters are the prime example of this but diehard Clinton supporters are right there with them.

  • TexasBoy

    washed up has been seeking attention.

  • FAEN

    Now Bill’s protégé is going to harp on this forever.

  • Boreal

    Yay, now we can have more infighting and snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in 2018 and 2020.

    • unsavedheathen

      Yes. Of course. Make sure to bookmark this page so that when the corporatist DNC under Perez fucks up the next two elections you’ll have someone else to blame.

  • Gerry Fisher

    The DNC worries me. It’s at its weakest when we need a strong, highly strategic, effective response. This “wait for Trump to implode and waltz into power” strategy is driving me nuts.

    • Boreal

      Yup. I think Perez was a big mistake. He doesn’t seem to being doing much of anything thus far.

      • Gerry Fisher

        Talk about a Nothing Burger.

      • Keith D Plane

        AMEN….I wasn’t a fan of him at all. I’m all for something drastic to take place with the Dems, so far I’m not seeing anything.

        • AlternativeQuacks

          I miss Howard Dean.

          • Berdawn Hutchinson

            and Bill Richarson

      • Cucker “Dick” Tarlson

        Should have gone with Elliott.

        • gaycuckhubby

          Or Pete

      • Agreed. I didn’t think that either he or Ellison were good choices.

      • Steve

        If they do not do something with the superdelegates (anything), it will be the biggest mistake that they could do. The primary has to be as fair as possible to maintain it’s credibility. Remove lobbyists, reduce the possible impact, something-anything, get rid of them. I don’t care, just something.

        • Boreal

          The superdelegates is a double edged sword. The republicans removed superdelegates from their process and that is how trump won.

      • gothambear

        Agree 100% – we need Howard Dean back ASAP.

    • liondon#iamnotatraitor

      ..”We’re not them” has never been a winning strategy…but it will be this time.. our internal polling tells us.

      • That’s fine as part of it. But Democrats have at least a dozen proposals that poll over 60%. Run on those. This isn’t complicated.

        • chiMaxx

          I think you missed the hidden tags in liondon’s comment.

        • liondon#iamnotatraitor

          Exactly…medicare for all?… infrastructure bill?… there is so much to choose from.

    • This has been their strategy for 30 years now. The Democrats only win after the GOP has imploded. 1992. 2006/2008. And then a couple of years later they lose in a landslide and we start over again. This is obviously not a winning strategy but they keep doing it. And the one person who talked about a winning strategy at the DNC (Howard Dean) was shown the door. smh

      • Steve

        And not having a 50 state strategy is a profound mistake.

    • penpal

      That was Clinton’s strategy, too. She thought reason would prevail and that she would stroll into the White House. It was a shitty strategy and we’re now all dealing with the consequences.

      • Wagnerian_thrice

        It was ‘her turn’.

    • Gerry Fisher

      I read the whole article. How the hell did we go from Howard Dean to the financial and strategic mess that Debbie Wasserman Shultz created in so few years? Wow. Major mismanagement.

      • pablo

        Howard Dean isn’t in Hillary’s pocket. That’s how we got DWS, and Perez.

        • Dave Babler

          Actually Obama hated Dean

  • james1200

    http://www.wikitree.co.kr/webdata/editor/201401/14/img_20140114103237_f378526d.gif

    And here comes the Democratic civil war for the soul of the party. What infuriates me is that the Clintonistas also took over the DNC leadership even AFTER Hillary lost last year instead of going the fuck away! Ridiculous!

    • Ninja0980

      Bernie was rejected even earlier so why don’t his bots go away?
      And how about they stop appearing on Fox to bash Democrats?

      • james1200

        I don’t watch Fox but I’ve read what they do is get some right winger to pose as a Democrat to attack the party, which is probably what u saw. Now, how about the Clinton bots that took over the DNC resign in disgrace for giving us Orange Hitler?

        • Ninja0980

          They aren’t right wingers posing as Democrats unless you think Konst, Turner etc. are DINOS.
          How about the folks who spent just as much time attacking Democrats and Hillary and saying both sides were the same etc. resign instead?
          I’ll take the folks who actually care about this party and issues of minority groups over many of the Bernie Bots who don’t.

  • clay

    By, like, donating to the party and its candidates?

  • Rex

    Seems like everyone has an unhealthy need for attention these days.

  • Ninja0980

    Thanks for revising the 2016 primaries Donna.
    Now go away.

  • Todd20036

    And this is why I have as much respect for Bernie bros as I do for Trumpanistas.
    They both worked equally against Clinton, with the same lack of ethics… just from different political directions.

    • FAEN

      But her emails! 🙄

      • Steverino

        But her uranium!

        • FAEN

          HA!

    • blackstar

      before the investigations are all said and done Bernie’s gonna be busted.

    • unsavedheathen

      Yes, it’s not that we nominated a woman who 40% of the electorate rabidly, beyond logic and reason, hates. It’s not that we selected as a nominee the object of an almost thirty-year-long smear campaign. It’s not that in a “change” election we nominated the quintessential establishment candidate. It’s Sanders.

  • alc2018

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/2388b5a86537aecab163933fc52edf0162bd531b3a290f28e86890d215c5e353.jpg Donna, girl plueeze with all this crying, its over with, you’re broke, you were broke then and this lame book that won’t sell solidifies it, now go sit down,

  • crewman

    Given the dire straits the country is in, I see this as a very unwelcome distraction.
    1) It will fuel the Trump administration claims that Hillary is crooked, that she funded the Dossier that (Trump claims) is the basis of the Russia collusion charges, and that therefore the entire Mueller investigation is discredited and should be dropped.
    2) It will require people who should be focused on Trump and Republican races to instead turn and focus on this.

    • blackstar

      a few weeks and a it will all be forgotten 😉

      • zherazhera

        GOP never forgets anything they can use against Hillary, and the Dems.

        • blackstar

          GOP is dead. will never recover from all they have done.

          • Jeffrey

            That’s absolutely not true and it is dangerous thinking. Repubs will vote R when they step into the booth and it won’t matter if Charles Manson is the candidate. It is up to Dems and Dems alone to win 2018 and 2020. We will get no help from Repubs or disillusioned Repubs or Independents.

          • blackstar

            lets see after Mueller is done with everything. but I do get your point.

          • Todd20036

            The GOP is dead. The Nazis replaced them
            There is no party of lower spending and less government intrusion

          • Tread

            It won’t keep “Republicans” from voting for them.

          • The only help we ever get from that crowd is when they stay home like in 2006. It doesn’t happen very often and shouldn’t be something we have to count on to win elections.

          • gaycuckhubby

            Lol. Yeah right

          • zherazhera

            The Evangelicals are embracing Donnie. They will accept anything as long as the platform includes racism and anti-abortion.

          • lymis

            If we’ve learned nothing from horror movies, it’s that you don’t count the villain out just because they’re on the floor with an ice pick through their temple.

          • So basically America is Jamie Lee Curtin is Halloween? That’s scary because it’s true.

          • I wish that were true. We said that in 2006/8 too.

      • bobbleobble

        Problem is next week there is a gubernatorial election in VA which in some ways is a rehash of last year. Bernie’s candidate Periello was defeated by the establishment candidate Northam in the primary and is now facing a right-wing goon in Gillespie. If Bernie/Periello Bros don’t turn out then that’s another governor’s mansion in the hands of the GOP and a major blow to the Dems. This sort of story just might tip the balance in favour of Gillespie.

        • HozillaSmallpox

          Northam is not a bad candidate and I preferred Periello but Gillespie is a racist monster and I think Dems will go with Northam. But the truth is, at least in my locale, people will always vote Republican because of guns and abortion. Fortunately there is more diversity in university towns and metropolitan areas (except Roanoke and Lynchburg, VA).

      • Days, not weeks.

  • Bluto

    The Democratic party; no spines, no balls, no leaders, no direction, no message, no focus, no loyalty, no support, no cohesion.

    • Todd20036

      And the GOP has Twitler. Unfuckingbelievable.

      • Bluto

        Right, we can’t even defeat nazis.

        • David L. Caster

          Or conmen, frauds, traitors and crooks.

  • worstcultever

    This is called beating a dead squirrel.

  • Boreal
  • Slippy_World
    • blackstar

      Tina got away just in time 🙂

  • Do Something Nice

    The tortured tone in the article makes me think that Brazile struggled to write this.

    The DNC recently purged progressives and they were replaced by Clinton supporters, including Brazile.

    What pisses me off about all of this is the DNC continuing to bash of progressives. We keep hearing about we need to be a ‘big tent’ and support candidates who are anti-abortion to win, and there is even an anti-gay “Democrat” running for the Georgia state senate.

    So the emerging Democratic party big tent welcomes those who are anti-abortion and possibly anti-gay, but progressives are not welcome.

    • joe ho

      DNC had the most progressive platform in history. Yet many on far-left continued to sabotage after the convention. That’s why far-left is not taken seriously. Too greedy and self-destructive.

      • Do Something Nice

        The far left is throttled by Wall Street candidates.

    • Cucker “Dick” Tarlson

      If it weren’t for Adam Schiff, Kamala Harris, and Joe Kennedy III, I’ve lost hope that the Democratic party can get its head out if its ass in time for 2018.

  • Jeffrey

    Then President Hillary Clinton should be impeached immediately!

    • AmeriCanadian

      I’m truly surprised that Republicans haven’t begun the process to impeach Clinton already. Purely in a “non binding” theatrical manner of course.

      • Tulle Christensen

        Stop giving them ideas

  • gaycuckhubby

    #InfightingIsFunny

    • greenmanTN

      You left out the NOT, in this instance.

      • gaycuckhubby

        Sarcasm implied.
        But we have WAY too much schadenfreude on this page

  • greenmanTN

    I haven’t been able to stand Donna Brazile since 2000 since she said Bill Clinton was racist for calling Obama’s speeches “fairy tales.” Don’t get me wrong, I love Obama and voted for him then, but really felt there was some pretty nasty playing of the race card in that race. I haven’t liked her or trusted her since.

  • Cucker “Dick” Tarlson

    And this helps fight encroaching fascism in America… how?

    This is why I am deliberately moving further and further to the left. I have a dream of a truly progressive third party. Enough is enough.

    • zherazhera

      Umm, you seem to be contradicting yourself. Too far left and the fascists win. I don’t think the US can ever become a social democracy.

      • zherazhera

        To add, the way to make the country go left is to do it the way GOP made it go right: Slow and steady. Win all elections, from president to dog catcher. It takes effort and a united front.

        • Lizard

          And a metric assload of money…

      • gaycuckhubby

        Also. I dont want a far left government

    • joe ho

      lol. Good luck with that. Third parties are not viable in our political system. You can take your ball and go home, but you’re going to only be helping the fascists maintain power.

      You’re typical of the pouting, hurt-feelings self-destructive response of the far-left.

    • gaycuckhubby

      Im the opposite. Becoming more moderate

  • Jacob

    The DNC sure love to finger point. Brazile should be sharing a cell with Schultz.

  • carrot festival

    Bernghazi!

  • Joe in PA

    Fuck. Good to know you got a fat ass $$$ advance for the book. Good job.

    WTF is wrong with people?

    • David L. Caster

      Avaricious ignorance.

    • canoebum

      This gets her invites onto the talk shows. It’s all about the money.

      • Joe in PA

        Yup. ;(

  • Kevin Andrews
  • Joe in PA

    And you can dance your ass off the stage. Bye!

    • Steverino

      Vogue!

  • Keith D Plane

    gee thanks Donna for rehashing this crap again. I really don’t give a shit anymore about what happened LAST YEAR! What are we going to do about NEXT YEAR and the one after that! WE have a freakin idiot sitting in the WH and you are doing navel gazing.

    • Duh-David

      navel gazing, i.e selling books. I can hear that meeting: we’ll pay you that much for a book, but only if you stick it to Hillary; that we can sell.

      • Robert K Wright

        So, Clinton can speak her mind, but not that “other” woman? Hmm. Why? Brazile has a story that’s worth hearing. Oh, but you don’t like what she’s saying so you want her to shut up. I see. It’s okay if you’re a Clinton….

        • Duh-David

          I do not write between the lines, for anything you read there, I am not responsible.

          • Robert K Wright

            You certainly do. The implication is evident. Don’t deny your bias.

    • Robert K Wright

      So, when Clinton writes a memoir, she’s “allowed” to tell her story, and that isn’t called “navel gazing” , but Donna Brazile writes hers and somehow she should just shut up? I see.

      • Keith D Plane

        HRC should shut the fuck also, there you feel better. My point is move the fuck along people this constant what if crap is tiresome and does nothing.

    • Wagnerian_thrice

      There needs to be accountability. Up to this point people like you have been in complete denial about how the Dems rigged the election for Hillary. Now you are saying it doesn’t matter cause it was last year. This kind of shifting enables further corruption, and delays the chance for economic justice for poor and working class people in America. Let’s face what is happening with open eyes, and work for substantive change.

      • Keith D Plane

        take your condescending Crap and stick it where the sun don;t shine. i’m sick of all you Sanders fans with your holier than thou attitude. Fucking sanders isn’t even a Democrat. Accountability? how long are we gonna keep doing this? My point AGAIN is to move past this and start doing SOMETHING. and don’t come back with some :What are you doing? garbage. I vote and I volunteer. It’s been one year and we still are doing the blame thing over and over and over.

        • Wagnerian_thrice

          Holier than though attitude, huh? Project much?

          There needs to be accountability. There needs to be massive change, and a hard shift leftward in the Democratic Party. All the blame shifting, avoidance and accusations in the world aren’t going to change that or start winning elections for the Democrats. Sanders is the Defacto leader of the Democratic Party, the only person, almost, who is articulating a vision of economic justice and a vision that actually benefits workers my class and poor folks. You can be sick of it all you want, but that’s how it is.

          • Queensbridge

            Sanders is the most popular politician in the country, while Clinton’s numbers are even worse than Trumps.

  • Rebecca Gardner
    • Lizard

      Wow. If the worst they’ve got is “cricket fields,” they must be squeaky clean candidates.

    • Daveed_WOW

      Well, it certainly makes the bigots easier to identify when they are this blatant!

  • Michael R
    • Daveed_WOW

      What’s going on with your hair? You’ve got mousse and squirrel?

  • Cucker “Dick” Tarlson
    • MichaelJ

      Good message for everyone whose continual comments on JMG focus their blame on the Sanders and the “Bernie bots” for everything that went wrong in 2016.

  • Eric Lewis

    One lesson we could learn from the GOP …. shut up & support the nominee or you end up losing.

    • joe ho

      Our self-destructive far-left hasn’t learned that basic lesson. In the general election, vote blue no matter who.

      They lack the tribal loyalty that conservatives have. They will gladly sabotage their own tribe if they don’t get most of what they want or if their feelings are hurt.

      Irony is that it’s only through the DNC that they can get any of their agenda enacted. But they prefer self-destruction to incremental progressive change.

      • Lizard

        Wait, I thought we criticized right-wing voters for voting lockstep. We criticize them for voting against their own interests to spite liberals.

        Voting for, say, an anti-choice Democratic candidate as a young woman doesn’t make me politically savvy. It makes me an idiot.

        • Ninja0980

          Bernie supports anti-choice Democrats or did you miss the Nebraska mayor’s race that he injected himself into?

          • Tread

            Shhhhhh. She’ll self-immolate if you tell her the truth about her savior.

          • Lizard

            I’m not a Bernie bot. I happily voted for Hillary.

          • Lizard

            I happily voted for Hillary.

        • joe ho

          What are you smoking? I don’t criticize right-wing voters for their political discipline–voting in every election, including midterms and voting red no matter who. It’s why they control most of the government.

          Dems only come into power when the GOP has burned everything down. And that’s because the Dems lack political discipline. How the game is played.

        • marshlc

          You vote for the candidate, of those you actually have, whose election is most likely to move things in a positive direction.

          If you have three choices:
          one of whom is pro choice, but unelectable in this district at this time
          one of whom is anti choice but reasonable on minimum wage and the environment, possibly electable
          one of whom is anti choice, anti worker and anti environment and very electable

          You pick option B and use your voice, as a voter in that district, to push your candidate toward the position you want on choice.

          You’re not a little kid wishing for your very best toy for your birthday, you’re a citizen using the only power you’ve got in the most useful way you can.

          • Lizard

            Would you say the same thing if option B wanted to put gay people in conversion therapy? Would you think “using your voice” would make any fucking difference, or would you consider them irredeemable because they see you as less than human?

            I’m a liberal in Georgia. I voted for Hillary last November. My vote meant fuck-all. I voted for the incumbent Democrat in my last House election. He lost to a nutcase. Don’t fucking lecture me on the importance of voting like I’m four years old. Down here, sometimes the choice is “pick the conservative who sucks the least.”

          • marshlc

            Then that is the fucking choice, so you take it.

            Because there never is a way that not going for the best you can get, even if the best you can get is shit, is not better than the worst you can get.

        • An anti-choice Democrat that gives the Democrats the majority and committee chairs is preferable to any Republican. If you can’t see that, then you don’t understand the problem. Obviously we’d rather have a pro-choice representative but a “pro-life” Democrat can mean overall blocking of anti-choice laws from even coming up for a vote. We need to start seeing the big picture.

          • Lizard

            I’m worried “the big picture” will become Republican Lite, and then Dems will be shocked when their elected Dems begin siding with Republicans on those cherished committees.

            I’m frustrated that people are pitching “Push the sane leftist party further to the right” as the only viable option.

          • Fair enough. But the time to make sure we have a pro-choice candidate is in the primary. Sometimes in the general we have to pick the better of those running. But I agree that we often just need better candidates.

      • Daveed_WOW

        The far left is funded by the same plutocracy that funds the right. We are being manipulated.

        • Wagnerian_thrice

          Hi! No. I wouldn’t even say anything by the far left is funded.

          • Daveed_WOW

            Somebody’s payin’ for those signs and those smelly buses full of hippies!

      • Wagnerian_thrice

        The DNC hasn’t learned their lesson, you mean. The ‘far left’ you are bitching about held their nose and voted for Hillary. Many people didn’t vote out of disgust. It wasn’t the ‘far left’ that voted for Trump. The DNC lost this election, and it’s their own damn fault. Bernie would have won.

      • chiMaxx

        That’s because core left-wing values don’t include tribalism: https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/oct/26/the-liberal-left-divide-reshaping-american-politics

        The competing irony is that the only way the DNC can actually win elections is by embracing some of the ambitious policy positions of the far-left to pull those voters into the fold.

        Shouting at the left to become team players will only push them farther away: It is inimical to their core values, which put fairness, an even playing field and compassion (and the issues that are related to that) far above being part of the in-group or respecting authority (of the DNC or anyone else).

        • joe ho

          lol. Too bad for the far left politics is itself tribal by nature. That’s why they’re sad, self-destructive idiots who work against themselves.

          In 2016, if it hadn’t been for Russia and Comey their self-defeating voting behavior wouldn’t have mattered.

          But that’s why they’re not a serious political force. No need to take them seriously.

          The real irony is that the far-left can only get any of its agenda implemented through the DNC. That’s how foolish they are.

          There is hope that they can become more aware of their self-destructive tendencies and become more effective at bringing about the change they want.

          But they’ll have to come to grips with the reality that the USA is not going to turn into a brocialist workers’ paradise.

          • chiMaxx

            No, the left are really anti-tribal: Putting a bunch of GDIs in a room together doesn’t make them a team. They care about issues.

            The real irony is that the DNC has proved again and again that their big-issue-free, values-free “hey, we’re better than the other guys” campaigns lose elections. Again and again and again. They can only win going forward by pulling the left in by adopting some of their core issues and values.

            That’s how foolish and self-destructive the DNC loyalists are.

            And clearly they are a serious political force: The Democrats need them to come to the voting booth in order to win. If the DNC loyalists keep dissing the left and taking for granted that they will come to the polls (or keep trying to motivate them trough counter-productive slogans like “Vote blue, no matter who” (that just piss the GDI leftists off and make them want to not vote) the Dems will keep losing, and they won’t get the power they so want.

          • joe ho

            lol.

            Politics is a tribal undertaking. One tribe wins. One tribe loses. The far-left can never change that underlying reality. In the US there are only two viable tribes. GOP and DNC.

            THe far-left will find any reason not to vote for Dems–unless things become so bad–as they did in 2008. They’re extremists with no understanding of how to implement their agenda. The DNC had the most progressive platform in history and many on the far-left pouted and walked away because their feelings were hurt–in the face of the existential threat posed by Trump. Why they’re not serious people.

            That’s why the American far-left is not a serious movement–as it is in Europe. The DNC will simply continue to move to the center right since the left is not to be counted on.

          • chiMaxx

            If you ignore and belittle their issues yet expect them to vote for you anyway, then who’s the self-deluded idiot (who loses elections: 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016)?

            Being tribal is not in their ideological core. Whining about their refusal to become that way for your benefit rather than meeting them where they live and taking their core values seriously has resulted in enormous losses of seats and power. But you keep on doing the same thing and expecting it to turn out differently next time, ‘cuz there’s a word for that.

          • joe ho

            lol.

            You’ve shown you’re clueless again. The DNC’s problem was abandoning Howard Dean’s 50 state strategy and decidingd to concentrate on DC instead. That was their big mistake, which they’re now trying to correct. It was not refusing to cater to far-left socialists. THe aggressive gerrymandering after the 2010 census and voter suppression led to most of the GOP’s subsequent victories.

            Nothing drives the moderate/independent core voters away faster than the far-left extremists.

            And I guess you didn’t read the DNC platform. It hardly ignores the left’s concerns. Just because it doesn’t give them everything they want doesn’t mean they’re being ignored. But that’s your far-left extremist mindset which is so politically toxic.

            Obama won 2012. As for 2016 it took Russia, Wikileaks, a rogue FBI, GOP gerrymandering, voter suppression, and a prolonged, vicious attack from the left to bring Hillary down. She still won more votes than any other candidate in history than Obama in 2008. And third-term elections are very hard to win unless the economy is booming–which it wasn’t.

            You need to delete yourself.

          • chiMaxx

            Yup, joe ho showing he knows how to win over disaffected voters.. Just tell them to delete themselves.

            Yes, Obama hung onto the presidency in 2012, but in every other way, that year was a loss for Democrats–fewer seats in Congress, fewer seats in state houses, fewer governorships.

            Tapping the cynical middle is not enough. But, hey, keep sticking to that plan and expect it to have better results next time.

          • joe ho

            lol.

            You’re so fucking stupid you still don’t understand the political dynamics behind the losses. Gerrymandering and voter suppression after 2010 redistricting. Russia and rogue FBI sealed the deal in 2016.

            Childish, narcissistic voters like you aren’t worth trying to win over. You obviously don’t understand that the only way you get your agenda passed is to work inside the DNC. Acting like spoiled children who pout if they don’t get what they want is not the way to be taken seriouslly as a political force.

            The USA is not going to turn into a brocialist workers’ paradise.

            You still cling to the delusion that Bernie (who couldn’t even win California with Putin and GOP behind him) could have won. The GOP hate machine would have crushed him like a bug. In the primaries they were propping him up as was Russia.

            Maybe one day you will come to your senses about how politics works.

            Now go crawl up Putin loving Jill Stein’s skirt with the other far-left snakes and fucktards. Or better, go dress up as Che Guevara along with Susan Slurandon and go play in rush hour freeway traffic.

            You’re vile, worthless excrement.

          • chiMaxx

            Ad hominem, much?

          • joe ho

            lol. clueless imbecile, much?

    • Some other lessons we could learn from them.

      1) Every election counts. Every run-off. Every school board, ballot proposal, off-year election. If the polls are open, show up.

      2) Grass roots organization matters. The DNC thinks they can do everything top down. It doesn’t work. It hasn’t worked ever and it’s never going to. New ideas and new candidates come up from the local level to the state and then national. We have weak benches because too many people have been holding on to power for way too long. In Houston last year for example we had a ballot initiative to get rid of the lbgt rights ordinance. Liberal groups flew in a Hollywood celebrity with no ties to the city. The right went door to door. Who won? Do you have have to ask?

  • religion is insane

    Hillary rigged Bernie, and Trump rigged Hillary. If Hillary didn’t start all this rigging in the beginning, Russia wouldn’t use this to rig Hillary, and we wouldn’t have Trump as president.

    • Your username is ironic.

      • Tulle Christensen

        I might have been able to muster some sympathy for the BernieBots if you know Bernie was actually a Democrat

  • Reasonoverhate

    Donna is a washed up has been that needs to go away!

  • DJMTS

    I don’t understand why she is so prominent. I’ve believed her to be incompetent in politics ever since she ran Al Gore’s Presidential campaign in 2000. Florida notwithstanding, had she run a better campaign, we would have had a President Gore in January 2001.

  • PickyPecker

    Anything to sell a new book!

    • Joe in PA

      $$$$$

    • Joe in PA

      I went looking for the Cabaret-Money Makes The World Go Around song on youtube…but youtube is dog-shit SLOW today. 🙁

  • Robincho

    Between Brazile and Wasserman-Schultz, the DNC should be put on suicide watch…

  • Jean-Marc in Canada

    Well now, if that’s not convenient timing for Trump, I don’t know what is. Seriously, this sudden burst of very dubious Hillary bashing should give one pause. Could Sanders actually be working with the Kremlin? As I said, curious timing.

    • Do Something Nice

      Yes, Donna Brazile, a die-hard Clinton supporter, is really controlled by Sanders and Putin, because “curious timing.”

      Thanks for the morning giggle.

      • Jean-Marc in Canada

        Says the person who gleefully supports the Trump administration by proxy. Talk about a morning giggle.

        • Do Something Nice

          How do I support the Trump administration – by voting for Clinton?

          • Jean-Marc in Canada

            No, by continuing to be intransigent and rigidly dogmatic in your puritanical ideology.

            Like many who fail at politics, the left demand 100% purity without any consideration to realistic goals and pragmatism. I know Hillary wasn’t the absolute best choice, but even Helen Keller could see that she was not a the great threat/danger she was made out to be, far from it. Futher, if you’re honest, the standard she was measured by was not applied to the other candidates, which smacked of hypocrisy…she was held to such scrutiny while others were given a virtual pass. The fact remains that those on the left do bare some, note the word some, responsibility for the ascension of Trump, yet they continue to deny, obfuscate and worse, champion the completely irrational notion that Hillary would have been worse, even after everything he’s done. That’s not rational thinking, that’s a neuroses.

            It is my sincere hope that A) the left will learn from this, B) not fuck it up by repeating the same mistake in 2018 and C) that they understand that politics is never pure and that so long as they seek that purity at the expense of any practical movement forward, they’ll only end up shooting themselves in the foot. I’m not right wing, far from it, but I’m not rigid in my political ideology. I understand that, sometimes, you have to vote reality over fantasy.

            Whether the DNC fucked up or not (I believe they did), the fact is, a large segment of the left chose to be petulant rather than practical and now you’ve lost SCOTUS, LGBTQ rights are being threatened, DACA is in trouble, Healthcare is under attack, etc. None of this would be happening under Clinton, that’s fact not fiction.

            So yes, when you continue to attack your own, you de facto support Trump. It’s not a difficult equation. Now, does this mean you shouldn’t try for the best, left/liberal choice? No, you should continue to find the best candidates…but once the candidate is set, there should be a degree of pragmatism in regards to supporting them. Don’t give up trying to get the best, but don’t burn it all down because they aren’t 100% perfect.

          • Do Something Nice

            I VOTED FOR CLINTON. Or make that I voted against Trump. If I was a ‘purity test’ type, I wouldn’t have voted. I did have issues with Clinton but I thought that overall she would do a decent job and she would be way better than Trump, and it would be great for women (and all of us) to have a woman president. But doing that doesn’t mean I relinquish my right to criticize her and/or her campaign when I disagree.

            And Clinton didn’t lose because of Sanders or Sanders supporters. She lost because of Comey, sexism AND her campaign’s mistakes and arrogance.

            The left had NOTHING at all to do with Clinton’s loss. I know that those who hate Sanders like to believe that, but it isn’t true. And since the left was mostly abandoned by the DNC, the DNC is now having problems raising money.

  • “I am not a member of any organized party — I am a Democrat.” – Will Rogers

    As a political party, the Democrats are a shambles: they have no consistent message, no philosophy of governing, few coherent policy positions which they are willing to act upon. It’s really no wonder that they can’t win elections.

    • Daveed_WOW

      Oh poo. They win elections. Remember who was President for 8 years? The chaos comes with the coalition. It’s easy for old rich white men to agree on everything. It’s harder for the rest of us because they’ve divided us. It’s a spicy sauce too rich for the Republicans. They are not our role model. 🙂

      • Dems controlled congress for two years – got very little done, and had no cohesive policy strategy. They have not controlled a majority of state legislatures or governorships in many years. While we can point out that the Republican party is filled with crazy (even fascistic) ideas – at least they have a single unifying message: small government. Democrats are terrified to argue to opposite message and are at a loss to define a platform.

  • Sure you do, now, where IS your proof? We actually have evidence that Russians poured tons of money in to advertising to try to sway the election, where you have no proof of rigging against Sanders.

  • Kelly Lape

    Poor Donna. I guess she’s trying to feel relevant again. The information released here is meaningless without the full memo. Certainly the memo doesn’t run in perpetuity. Certainly there were stipulations regarding when the campaign would have control over the funds. Based on the way the Clinton’s have been treated demanding to control the funds when the nomination was secured would be a prudent move. Donna implies malfeasance yet provides nothing more than innuendo. Sorry Donna, you’re black, Fox doesn’t want you as a Friend.

  • Sam

    OMG, I’m so over 2016 and who did what. There is an election somewhere in this country on Tuesday and people, particularly Democrats, should be focused on that.

    #Virginia #NewJersey #SaintPeteFlorida #Atlanta #Seattle

  • downtownla

    As a former director of outreach for the DNC, this is my take on 2016. In 2008, Hillary thought she was going to be the nominee, but then Obama came in and won by bringing in all these young people and non-traditional Democrats into the primary process. When she and DWS took over the DNC in 2009, they were determined not to let that happen again. So they basically closed off the party to new comers. They immediately killed the 50 state strategy and then for the next several years, basically turned the DNC, which is supposed to be building up the party, into the Hillary 2016 campaign. They only backed candidates who were moderate and self-funding, basically ones who would be Hillary superdelegates, and they failed to properly fund all the Senate and House races that should have been. (If we had won AK and NC in 2014, we would have Merrick Garland as a Supreme Court Justice and not Gorsuch.) They didn’t mount an aggressive voter registration drive in the Spring 2016 because those would have been Bernie voters (like they were Obama in 2008). They didn’t have enough debates because the exposure would have only helped Bernie. Now, some people are okay with all these decisions. After all, it is the Democratic Party and they can do what they want. However, if you want to win the general election, you need to bring in new people. Because the Democratic Party pre-selected their nominee in 2008, instead of waiting to gauge the electorate in 2016, they misread the message. If Hillary had played fair-and-square, she might have been a stronger candidate in the general. She could have honed her message in the Spring and Summer. Because that didn’t happen, she was caught off guard by the time the Fall rolled around.

    • Do Something Nice

      “If Hillary had played fair-and-square, she might have been a stronger
      candidate in the general. She could have honed her message in the Spring
      and Summer. Because that didn’t happen, she was caught off guard by the
      time the Fall rolled around.”

      EXACTLY. And Mook should never again be allowed to work for Democrats. He is a smarmy asshole and I think that he is one reason that Clinton lost. As well as Comey, sexism. . .

    • The_Wretched

      Ending the 50 state strategy was political negligence. DWS always was a puppet agent for the oligarch / elite tier. “Hillary at all costs” was a bad idea.

      • Friday’s_cat

        Negligence was dumping money into races there was no chance of winning. Why do you think the DNC was broke?

        • MichaelJ

          Negligence is not supporting local candidates who are not in safe or swing. If the Democratic Party candidates do not get support to compete in places where the party is not dominant politically, the message of Republicans becomes the sole message in the race. It enables Republicans not to have to poor money and other resources into the race. And it doesn’t allow local Democrats to build networks of local support for future races.

        • The_Wretched

          Fiscal management issues are different than supporting every race. There’s more to leadership than buckets of cash.

      • MichaelJ

        The 50-state strategy that was promoted when Howard Dean was DNC chair, from 2005 to 2009, was why I started to donate money to the DNC. And the end of the 50-state strategy that took place under Tim Kaine’s leadership is when I stopped giving them money. In fact, I don’t donate to any of the DC-based politico groups. What I give goes to progressive candidates and state-based organizations.

  • Friday’s_cat

    The DNC was broke and Hillary saved it with her campaign cash. What is wrong in her having say in how it’s spent?

  • Texndoc

    I always had the impression she would have loved to have greased his brakes and pointed his car towards a cliff.

    • greenmanTN

      Personally I would have thought “I lit a candle and sacrificed a goat” was more her speed.

  • Pluto Animus

    Donna Brazile, you are dead to me.
    Along with Bernie, Susan Sarandon and the rest.

  • Tiger Quinn

    Bernie Sanders is not a god damned Democrat, and has, at every opportunity, either slammed the Dems and Hillary, or turned down chances to work with them on his supposed dream legislation. He’s been in gov’t for forty years and NONE of his ideas have ever taken root. If you don’t recognize Sanders as a tool, I don’t know what to tell you, but he is NOT OUR FUCKING SAVIOR.

    • downtownla

      Bernie may not be a Democrat, but he was more in tune with the type of voters Democrats need to win general elections – young voters, independents, and casual voters. Sure, the Democrats can close off their primary and only try to appeal to Democrats, but that is not a winning strategy for the general election.

      • robindaybird

        Except he doesn’t know how to fucking work. He just knows how to throw fits and throw people under the bus. He doesn’t compromise, he scream and rage and point fingers when nothing goes his way.

        He’s all about Him Him Him Him and his Ideas that he doesn’t want to sully even an iota to get it, he prefers perfect impossibilities over actually making good change.

        • downtownla

          That’s fine. But the point of the primary is to test out policies and see what the voters were looking for. Hillary should have recognized that the things that Bernie and Trump were saying were the things exciting people. Instead of trying to understand the electorate, she seemed to resent Bernie for being in the race. Her supporters just wanted the Bernie voters to shutup and go away. Instead, if they had listened to them, maybe Hillary could better understood the mood of the country and how they were really demanding change.

        • Wagnerian_thrice

          This is fiction.

    • Wagnerian_thrice

      I can’t believe how many people upvoted this. Bernie voted with the Democrats more than Clinton even did. Bernie is currently the de facto leader of the Democratic Party and the most beloved politician in America. After 40 years of the Democrats abandoning their base of poor and working class people he is the closest thing the Democrats have to a savior, and ya’ll need to get on board or fuck off.

  • Jmdintpa

    bitter. She got caught giving them answers and now she just bitter.

  • Friday’s_cat

    The republicans laid off Bernie Sanders during the primaries hoping he would win the nomination. There are rumors republicans supported his run with donations. Had Sanders won republicans would have shredded him and Trump would have won in a landslide.

    • GayOldLady

      It’s estimated that up to 12% of Bernie voters voted for Trump or Stein. I wonder how that’s working out for them.

      • The_Wretched

        That 6% wasn’t going to vote D.

        • GayOldLady

          And then there are all those people “D” and “R” who would never vote for a woman.

    • unsavedheathen

      There are rumors that Russian trolls and bots were trashing Sanders campaign on social media sites like this one. Sanders was ahead in every head-to-head poll against the Republican field, including Trump. The Republican focus was on Clinton because they assumed correctly that having lost the nomination ’08, she was never going to let that happen twice. And as long as we’re speculating, Sanders would have taken Trumps head off.

    • unsavedheathen
  • GayOldLady

    Don’t you just love this. Hillary’s people signed a “fundraising agreement” with the DNC. They actually SIGNED AN AGREEMENT, not a secret agreement, not a covert agreement, they actually SIGNED AN AGREEMENT. Now the question becomes, what did they get for that SIGNED AGREEMENT? Does Brazille say that? Were the rules of the primary changed to favor Hillary. Did Bernie not get to join in the debates? Did the DNC take out advertising favoring Clinton? Did the DNC not provide Bernie with it’s Donor Database? What, other than helping the DNC raise money and controlling strategy, happened? Inquiring minds want to know.

    • GayOldLady

      And did this agreement say she would give money to the DNC and control strategy if she lost the nomination? Do we know if this has ever happened before in the DNC? Do they have their candidates sign these agreements pre-primary?

  • Chaz Antonelli
    • She’s already said she’s not running again.

      • Chaz Antonelli

        Let’s see if she keeps that promise…

    • GayOldLady

      She’s not going to run. But even if she did she would be YOUNGER than Trump & Bernie. Get the hell over it!!!

      • Yeah, the ageism and sexism displayed by berniebros is astounding.

        • GayOldLady

          Not exactly the image of youth and vitality, but what difference does that make, it’s a man!
          http://fpif.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/17324932002_8e3d3e30de_b.jpg

          • Do Something Nice

            Yeah, fight ageism with ageism. Hypocrite.

          • GayOldLady

            Please, spare me the drama! Making a point about ageism using a picture isn’t ageism. I’m nearly as old as Bernie and older than Hillary. I experience ageism regularly, not only as a person in their 8th decade of life, but as a woman and I can tell you men and some women see old women as less capable, attractive and vital than old men. Hillary took a beating for her looks during both the primary and the GE, but everyone thought of Bernie with his slouched posture and frumpled hair as their Uncle and Trump, with his 3 chins, his paunch and his ties that covered his fly as a powerful businessman. Hillary, on the other hand, was just an old woman who didn’t smile enough, looked tired, had an illness, wore a wig, talked too shrill and loud, even while Bernie screamed and Trump shouted.

        • GayOldLady

          Another example of the double standard when it comes to how women should age vs. how men should age. But what difference does it make, it’s a man
          https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DG9kqJZWsAEOFeo.jpg

          • greenmanTN

            I wanna know what’s he’s got in that chin thing. A KFC bucket?

            https://m.imgur.com/gallery/B6iNEBs

          • GayOldLady

            A bunch of Big Macs stored away for future consumption.

      • Chaz Antonelli

        Nope.

        • GayOldLady

          What? A he-man woman hater? Or just a Hillary hater?

          • Chaz Antonelli

            Neither. I despised her platform of middle-of-the-road status quo bullshit. Obama got elected because he promised change — Hillary made no such promise, in fact, the banks seemed to own her soul. Trump won because he promised change (sadly, the wrong sort of change!) Imagine how things could have been different if the DNC allowed the voice of the people to win, rather than it being an entitled pro-establishment who declared it was “her turn”. I would have loved for a female president, but we need one that will continue to care for the people and the environment and you won’t get that when you’re in the back-pocket of the establishment.

          • GayOldLady

            Apparently you never looked at her Platform. You just parrot what you’ve been told by others.

            If you want to know the truth, check it out.
            https://www.politiplatform.com/clinton

            And “the banks seemed to own her soul”. Seemed to own her soul? That’s another false narrative pushed out by Bernie campaign. By the way, did you ever see Bernie’s Income Taxes? You did hear about the issues with Jane Sanders and the land fraud? Did you know that Bernie earned over $1 million during the year he ran for POTUS? I don’t begrudge him making money off of his new found fame, but don’t think for a minute that Bernie is different.

            Perhaps you’re still an idealist and put people up on a pedestal who shouldn’t be there. Not Hillary, not Bernie, no one belongs on a pedestal. Especially no politician. They’re both old politicians and neither are pristine. If you want pristine you won’t find it on planet earth.

    • blackstar

      Bot.

      • Chaz Antonelli

        I know you are, but what am I?

        If the DNC allowed fair primaries, we might not have “President Trump” — you only have yourselves to blame for this.

        • Treant

          Bernie lost. I didn’t vote for him. Neither did anybody I took to the ballot box. Go away and enjoy being blocked. Toodles.

    • Do Something Nice

      This kind of bullshit isn’t helping. Go away.

      • GayOldLady

        That photo really pisses me off. The lousy sexism and ageism that comes from people who should be our allies is overwhelming and they don’t even realize the irony of their ageism even as they support Bernie.

      • Chaz Antonelli

        I will NEVER go away and stop BULLYING me. Feel the BERN!

    • Treant

      So…when she looks as ancient, wrinkled, and nasty as Bernie does right now?

      Honestly, folks. Insight and reality. It’s what’s for dinner.

  • fuow

    Why don’t we just give the 2018 elections to the Rethuglicans?

    • Friday’s_cat

      Nancy Pelosi is working on it.

  • The_Wretched

    That CNN firing was BS at the time too. Corey Lewendowski and 4 other paid CNN talking heads were getting paid and directions and under a Trump “non-disparage” contract at the same time.

  • Texndoc

    This explains Schmoe and Mika’s giddy tease at the end the the show today that they had lined up Brazile for an hour or two upcoming. They always hated Clinton. Until she lost.

  • justmeeeee

    And…here come the Hill-bots!!!

    Everybody RUN!!!

  • blackstar
  • GeneInSJ

    WTF is the matter with her???? Now’s not the time to be divisive among ourselves!

  • Leo

    I’m just gonna leapfrog ahead of everybody because I’m so sick of this bullshit.

    Perez ain’t going anywhere barring a revolt and Ellison’s deputy. Hillary’s not running again and Bernie WILL LOSE if he’s nominated as the gain of Rust Belt WWCM won’t make up for the drop off he’ll get in minority voters in other battlegrounds.

    Kamala’s derailed by Bernie fans which has been countered with the point that women of color need $ to run at that level because they can’t make inroads with WWC men.

    Dems aren’t winning back the House. Focus needs to be on keeping the Senate which won’t happen with progressives in red states. “Why don’t we try” they say. I’m progressive as they come and my response is that we can’t afford to.

    • Do Something Nice

      Obama won the 2008 election as a almost far-left candidate. In our system, it isn’t the ideology, it is the candidate that counts. We needs someone sincere and eloquent who will motivate people to vote for them.

      • Leo

        Imho, Obama did not run as a far-left candidate. I don’t have energy to pull up links and stats.

        Trump won on race, not jobs or wages. Countless studies, including one of 3,300 voters from Ohio by PRRI bear that out.

        Bernie is not a sincere saint that his die-hards claim he is when it comes to supposedly championing women then throwing reproductive rights under the bus or kowtowing to gun manufacturers as a necessity when running in Vermont.

        How you can promise to instantly tax Wall St. speculation to pay for almost all of your economic proposals is beyond me. I love his proposals but many see right through his promises on the reality of implementing them.

        Bernie will not be that motivator for enough people living in the right places to win the Electoral College in 2020. I’ve said that since Nov. 8th.

        • Do Something Nice

          But I’m not talking about Sanders. I don’t want to see him run in 2020. I was talking in general. Clinton doesn’t have the same charisma that Obama has.

          But Obama was seen as being far left, especially by Clinton supporters (in 2008), and that is why so many (28%) of them threatened to vote for McCain if Obama won the primary. In the end, only about 12% voted for McCain.

    • Friday’s_cat

      Back when a candidate Trump was still a joke I cautioned coworkers he had a good chance to win the nomination. When Hillary chose a safe (White) running mate I had a sinking feeling it would be a President Trump.

    • Tulle Christensen

      Of the eight Republicans running in the Senate next year, only one race has a good chance of the Dems winning. what you are saying is we are doomed

      we need to win three of the eight

      • Leo

        That is exactly what I’m fucking saying, and no that’s not romanticizing pessimism as some on this board trail me screaming. We need to fight and keep fighting but look at the fucking numbers. Numbers and data don’t lie.

  • Henry Auvil

    I have proof that Hillary not only kidnapped the Lindbergh baby, but that she also shot JR Ewing.

    • greenmanTN

      That second one is fake news. Shooting JR was purely an accident, a ricochet from when she shot JFK.

  • Blake J Butler

    Bullshit. He was weak, he was a one issue candidate who got as big as he did because he was a man who hated Hillary and tried to make her look corrupt. He never was going to win because his base was exclusive and narrow of little people compared to Hillary’s.

    Nothing was ever done to keep him from getting the nomination. Keep in mind it was sanders job and his campaign and his supporters job to get him to win, and they failed, like his several day trip to the Vatican while he was going to show her up on her home turf in New York, and he lost.

    She had loyalty to the party and the people in it down ballot, sanders won’t give support or help unless they meet his purity test and hide the ring on his finger. Not helping more than 3/4ths of the candidates down ballot. Of course support was going to go to her over sanders because he wasn’t reliable to the party and demanded changes that he had no authority to make because he hasn’t helped the party.

    Donna is giving ammo to the purists and the latte liberals who couldn’t vote for Hillary because Bernie lost because they thought he was cheated. 2020 there will be a new Hillary like candidate and it will be the same bullshit. We can’t trust him or her, they’re corrupt because they have a super PAC, she’s fueling the fire, shame on her. Her wording makes this sound horrible.

  • Jeffg166

    It’s a year later and there is a lunatic in the White House who got there with Russian help.

  • Christ. The Bernie folk need to fuck off. They aren’t Democrats, and don’t deserve any control over the party.

  • Publius

    Completely self-serving. She doesn’t believe a word of it.

  • IAMBOWLINGQUEEN

    Rather than the word of the year being ‘fake news’, I think it should be deflection. Brazile should take personal responsibility for mistakes she made, rather than hurling accusations at others.

  • HZ81

    Does Donna know what rigging means? HRC was the only one floating money into the DNC, paying its bills and her paycheck. If it were used to seal her nomination, why didn’t they “rig” Iowa and NH. etc?

    Bernie was eliminated in March of 2016. That everyone at the DNC despised him is not a secret or mystery since all he did was bag on the party he wished to lead but refused to join, which makes so much sense.

    I like Donna. We actually had a back & forth via email regarding the 2008 campaign regarding her strange lack of impartiality then. Anecdotal evidence, I know, but it was cool she wrote me back—a complete stranger, although a beautiful one. 🙂

    But this is drama for the sake of book sales, and Bernie still blows and lost.

    End of story—or is it?/ Dun dun duuuuun.

    • GayOldLady

      I’ve had several email interactions with Brazile too. I wore her out when she was Gore’s campaign manager. Her campaign strategy was pathetic and not fighting harder for the recount and having more people in FL during that fight cost us the election. She basically told me to kiss off, but I basically told her to KISS OFF too, so we were even.

    • danolgb

      Right? She complains about having to send press releases to Brooklyn for approval as if that’s some huge piece of evidence. Brazille came in right before the convention. At that point Hillary was the nominee. The only people who didn’t know that were Bernie’s idiot delegates. Brazille didn’t put that convention together. That was months of planning and it costs a lot of money. Had Bernie won, the convention might have had to be held in the local Elks lodge since he wasn’t sending in any money.

    • downtownla

      Um, I don’t know where you get your information, but not everyone at the DNC despised Bernie. He had many fans internally. They just couldn’t vocalize it. (I used to work at the DNC. I know these people.) My advice to you. Stop worrying about the Bernie voters who didn’t vote for Hillary. In political terms, they were never gettable and the campaign probably never included them in their GOTV universe anyway. The people that were gettable – the 8 million Obama voters who sat this one out – is where you should be directing your thoughts, concerns, anger, ideas, etc. Why was there a fall off of that proportion from 2008 to 2016, especially given the fact that demographics continued to move in the Democratic direction. These people probably would have voted for Clinton if they bothered to show up, but they chose not to instead. That is the question that needs to be answered moving forward.

      • HZ81

        I am glad to hear not everyone hated Bernie at the DNC. Makes the rigging charges that much more ridiculous, thanks.

        And I am not worried about Bernie voters. I actually don’t give two shits about Bernard and his fanclub today and going forward tomorrow.
        I care about those voters who were tossed off the voting rolls or whose GOP state government put obstacles in their voting path. I care about our voting systems being tampered with and a GOP candidate and party colluding with a foreign government. And I care about the majority of voters who voted against the thing in the oval office.

        • downtownla

          Glad to hear. Let’s hope the DNC can fix their problems before 2018 and 2020. 2016 was an infinitely winnable election. The fact that we lost to a known racist, sexist, homophobic, Russian-lying con artist is just incredible to me. I hope we learn the right lessons moving forward.

          • HZ81

            She lost to the press, the FBI, the GOP and Russia—and Bernouts. It’s incredible to me that somehow those factors are never mentioned and no one seems too angry about democracy getting hacked.

          • downtownla

            They aren’t mentioned because they are present in every election and campaign. You don’t think Obama had shit to deal with? The difference is that a well-run campaign knows how to overcome all the curveballs thrown at them. Unfortunately, Hillary and her team ran a bad campaign. (I say this as someone who voted and donated to her campaign.) They just weren’t aggressive enough. They really, really thought there was no way they could lose to Trump and it was that assessment that doomed their campaign. They severely underestimated Trump and the white anger out there.

          • HZ81

            A foreign government spending millions to infiltrate our election systems and a party colluding with them is not simply “shit to deal with.” It’s rather historic, actually.

          • downtownla

            Not really. You don’t think Iran “meddled” in the Carter-Reagan matchup. They were supposed to release the hostages earlier, but because of some backroom dealings that aided the Republicans, that never happened. Carter lost because of the Iranians. As for the Russians, I am not sure how we deal with these issues in a new global age. As America exports our values and systems around the world, we are impacting other people’s elections. It only makes sense that it would happen to us, too. With that said, like you, I am more worried about the Republicans stealing the election than the Russians trying to influence the outcome.

          • HZ81

            But, they (Republicans) already stole this election with the direct aide of Russia—and Iran didn’t meddle in our voting systems, Reagan co. made a deal with them. The two are hardly comparable.

            Again, this is historic! I can’t stress enough. And because we’ve meddled in elections doesn’t give Russia an “oopsies” pass.

            But I hear what you’re saying and not trying to be kunty. I guess we’ll have to wait until the investigation is wrapped up to truly know the extent. And I wouid have done a jillion things different with the HRC campaign, too, especially over those stupid fucking emails the GOP should have been made to choke on.

            We will have our revenge, downtownla! REVENGE!!!

          • downtownla

            I hope you’re right, HZ81. That will take the DNC learning from their mistakes. I don’t see that happening yet with Perez at the helm. They really still think that the anti-Trump mood will carry them. Maybe, maybe not. But I do think we have a historic opportunity to shift the country back to the left. We don’t need to settle for a moderate this time. We need to draw a clear distinction between us and the Republicans. Only then will we inspire our base to turnout and vote. We need to shift to the left and that’s something the DNC (and their big donors) just don’t want the party to do.

          • Do Something Nice

            You probably won’t see this, but I really appreciate your comments. They provide great insight to the DNC and what happened.

          • HZ81

            I hope so, too. And I don’t want to re-fight the progressive bona fides of Clinton versus Bernie, but they had an identical voting record in the Senate, or close to it. If Wall Street and the Iraq war made her the moderate, I raise Bernie’s anti-Brady Bill votes, inoculating gun makers against lawsuits and his support of droning.

            We’re already left, and chasing white men who’ve been leaving the D party since the 60’s because it’s been getting darker and darker ain’t gonna help us.

            But, we’re on the same page. I think our goal being the same should be the only litmus test, not fealty or purity. Word! 🙂

        • downtownla

          Oh, and there was “rigging,” going on. But the DNC had every right to do what they did. It’s a private organization and they set the rules. Whether those efforts eventually shot them in the foot is the other question. I think in this case, by aiding Hillary in the primary, they ended up hurting in the general. She should have been out there honing her message and listening to the voters and their anger and desire for change.

          • HZ81

            I am sorry, where was this rigging? Donna Brazile took over at the convention and has noted only a fundraising agreement that was in the news last year as proof.

            Not liking Bern, as a few of the DNC emails indicated, is not rigging.

          • downtownla

            I wouldn’t even call it “rigging,” as that implies the DNC did something illegal or inappropriate. They didn’t. They had every right to do what they did. They built a primary system and schedule that favored Hillary, someone who had been a loyal Democrat for decades and someone with deep ties throughout the party. They spent their funds on things that benefited her campaign, and stopped funding things that didn’t. Since she was raising the money and bailing out the DNC, she felt she had the right to do that. I don’t blame her. If I were in her position, I might have done the same thing. However, I do think these decisions proved to be short-sighted. It made the primary process easier for her and therefor, she was less tested. The reason Obama was so strong in the general election in 2008 is that he had a fierce campaign against Hillary and Hillary forced him to be a better candidate. Hillary needed someone to force her to be a better candidate, too, in 2016, but because the Democrats cleared the field for her, she never got an A-list challenger who could have helped her. Bernie was a B-list candidate who lucked out because no one else, like a Biden, stepped up to run against Hillary.

          • HZ81

            Thr primary system was there in 2008 and I don’t understand how the schedule singularly benefited HRC. It didn’t then, for sure.

            I remember hearing how the debates were scheduled so no one would see them, etc., but more saw them than they did in 2008. They had better ratings. Bottom line, she crushed Sanders and some people have a real problem giving this woman her due. Not saying you, but some surely. I just can’t with anyone saying this was just your usual campaign season as it clearly wasn’t.

            But again—revenge will be ours.

          • downtownla

            It was front loaded with a lot of moderate and Southern states this cycle. The more accelerated calendar also prevented any newcomer from gaining enough momentum from a big win and earned media. It basically benefited anyone with early cash and infrastructure, which tends to be the front runner, in this case, Hillary. For an outsider to have a shot, especially a liberal/progressive one, it was harder this time. Again, Sanders, in my opinion, was a second-tier candidate. The only reason he got as far as he did was because people were looking for an alternative to Hillary. If Elizabeth Warren had run, in my opinion, she would have done what Obama did in 2008. Whether Warren could have beaten Trump, I’m not sure, but I think she could have.

          • HZ81

            It was front-loaded with states that include the base of the Democratic party — minorities. Sanders didn’t lose them because they weren’t progressive enough—he lost them because they preferred Clinton and her record, and obviously, her years in the public eye as a Democrat and member of the Obama Administration.

            It surely was harder for an outsider, or in Sanders’ case, a complete stranger to most outside VT. His problem. I think you’re being generous calling him second tier 😉 but I am a kunt anyway. And I think Warren would have done about the same as Sanders and worse versus Trump, but we’ll never know. I am sure she’s in for 2020, though.

      • ultragreen

        Some of the people here spend so much time hating on Bernie supporters that you would think they are right-wing Republicans.

  • kcken

    “…I lit a candle and put on some gospel music before I called…”

    Why are the crazy ones always religious?

    That wasn’t a question.

  • I mean seriously… https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/1b0a12ade0dfc54831f58b6ebde8b1a164b3867cfe01be410413fccc70be71ad.jpg
    Trump still would have “won” the election with his Russian helpers and we’d still be in the same situation we are now.

  • Steven H

    Democrats: DC’s already got two rivers, we don’t need you to cry us a new one.

    Move on. Vote in 2018 (and this Tuesday, Virginia), or stfu.

  • Leo

    All I have to say is y’all better be around here for Virginia’s results. I hope Joe does a live thread. If anyone’s shocked by a Gillespie win (who’s now running almost solely on race) I’ll be pissed.

  • Friday

    It’s almost like Berniebots are trying to divert attention from the Trump administration’s misdeeds.

    Interesting this is the lady who ‘scandalously leaked’ the fact that Hillary would be asked about Flint’s big emergency at a debate in Flint.

    • GayOldLady

      Well, a lot of Berners voted for Trump, so they’re complicit in electing Hair Furor.

    • JackNasty

      Donna Brazil, one of the ultimate Clintonista insiders, exposed Hillary and her campaign organization’s 2016 redirecting DNC funds intended for other candidates, and you want to blame it all on Bernie Sanders? How pathetic is that?

      • Lumpy Gaga

        DB was firmly on Obama’s side in 2008. (Not that there’s anything wrong with that).

        So there’s some math to be done there.

      • Friday

        Does it count as “Exposed” when someone from another party doesn’t like the party’s strategy of not-helping that someone attack all other Democrats”?

    • Lumpy Gaga

      What’s the Russian word for “Bernie”?

    • ultragreen

      Donna Brazile was a Clinton insider at the DNC.

      • Friday

        Whatever opportunism she is pursuing doesn’t actually make the Berniebot accusations or ideas of what a political party even *is* true.

  • Vicious Liberal

    Bernie Bros: “We’re not taking money from the Evil Establishment!”
    Establishment: “Ok, I’m giving it to Hillary!”
    Bernie Bros: “WAAAAAAAAAAH! UNFAIR!!”

    Is there a bigger bunch of useless, political neophytes? Even the Tea Party wasn’t this openly hypocritical.

  • Mike in Texas

    Dems need to get over themselves, stop looking backwards, and do something to get voters out for the mid term elections. So far they’re looking like a bunch of sorry fools.

  • Oy. I was an undecided primary voter until March. I didn’t see any need to pick who I was voting for until it was actually time to vote. (I learned my lesson in other primaries where I decided on a candidate who was already out of the race before my state’s primary day.) All the positions were on their websites and their speeches were on youtube. No amount of money spent on ads I wouldn’t see since I don’t watch broadcast tv or listen to the radio would have swayed me. I think I’m typical in that regard these days. Sorry, but Bernie lost because he didn’t get enough votes in the primaries. I don’t know what’s so hard about that to understand.

  • DJ John Bear

    Folks like Brazile need to stop re-hashing any “conspiracy” against Sanders and focus on winning elections in 2018 and 2020. Sanders did significant harm to the Clinton campaign right out of the gate, where the common goal should have been to beat Trump at all costs. But no, Sanders promised the earth, moon, and the stars, and the petulant children who sat the election out because of some supposed rigging against him cut their noses to spite their faces and now we are ALL suffering.

    The DNC does need to get it together and focus on taking back congress in 2018, and removing the Cheeto in 2020.

    • DevineBovine

      This former democrat will never support the DNC, nor its candidates. It is clear the DNC is as corrupt as the day is long. One can reasonably speculate about what motivates their supporters.

  • Eileen

    LOL… CHEATERS ALWAYS GET THEIR JUST DESSERTS!

  • easygoingmister

    DONNA GO HOME

  • Buford

    I’ll state the obvious… if Hillary really did something shady here to unfairly impact the will of the voters, she deserves whatever punishment, scorn, or derision is appropriate for the misdeed.

    THAT’s the difference between logical, mature Americans who honor the rule of law and who have the country’s best interests in mind and those who blindly defend their political party over all else.

  • jm2

    I have lost all respect I’ve ever had for Donna Brazile. Sorry, the entire Bernie thing was bogus to me right from the beginning…

  • Bob Conti

    Well, this is certainly productive toward countering the shitstorm that Hair Furor and the GOP have created, isn’t it?

  • DesertSun59

    Bad timing. This will be fodder for the Right during this collusion investigation.

  • danolgb

    This quote is being left out of all the snippets being used to say that she found proof. The reality is she didn’t. What she did find was the HRC was keeping the broke DNC alive. But even by her own writing, she didn’t find any evidence that the election was actually rigged.

    “I had tried to search out any other evidence of internal corruption that would show that the DNC was rigging the system to throw the primary to Hillary, but I could not find any in party affairs or among the staff. I had gone department by department, investigating individual conduct for evidence of skewed decisions, and I was happy to see that I had found none.”

    • ultragreen

      And you left out Donna’s conclusion:

      “Then I found this agreement.

      The funding arrangement with HFA and the victory fund agreement was
      not illegal, but it sure looked unethical. If the fight had been fair,
      one campaign would not have control of the party before the voters had
      decided which one they wanted to lead. This was not a criminal act, but
      as I saw it, it compromised the party’s integrity. “

      • danolgb

        Which again is not proof of rigging. It’s the HRC campaign having the foresight to see that a party in financial debt wouldn’t be good for anyone and leaving it up to the current leadership was putting it at risk.

  • The DNC is broken and it needs to be fixed – this is a step in the right direction.

  • GayOldLady

    Excerpt from Brazile’s book:

    “I had tried to search out any other evidence of internal corruption that would show that the DNC was rigging the system to throw the primary to Hillary, but I could not find any in party affairs or among the staff. I had gone department by department, investigating individual conduct for evidence of skewed decisions, and I was happy to see that I had found none. Then I found this agreement.

    The funding arrangement with HFA and the victory fund agreement was
    not illegal, but it sure looked unethical. If the fight had been fair,
    one campaign would not have control of the party before the voters had
    decided which one they wanted to lead. This was not a criminal act, but
    as I saw it, it compromised the party’s integrity. “

    • Wow a politician lied and is now revealing that she lied.

    • Treant

      So…we can now definitively say that she’s a liar. But I’m supposed to believe her statement now because…reasons.

      • GayOldLady

        I don’t disbelieve Brazile, but what I find ironic is that the functions of the DNC, which is to maintain a physical presence in DC, to maintain staff, to maintain donor databases, to pay for debates, to pay for National Advertising after the nominations are codified and to solicit contributions from people like you and I, was paid for by Hillary’s campaign. In other words Hillary’s campaign kept the DNC up and running, paying peoples salaries, etc which benefited her Democratic opponents as much as it did her if you want to look at it that way.

        Brazile clearly states that there was no sign of any corruption in the decision made by staff. What a fucked up mess.

        BTW…..What did Doc Say

        • Treant

          And Brazile now opens her mouth just days after the indictments… Gee, that’s coincidental.

          We’re deferring the decision six weeks until all the swelling goes down. At that point, we’ll see if a septiplasty would help.

          • GayOldLady

            Well at least you get a reprieve for a couple of weeks.

            And yep, I find the timing of Brazile’s book a bit convenient. I’ve not liked Brazile since she ran Gore’s campaign (into the ground). I think she’s playing some sort of CYA game. Not sure exactly why. I have a feeling that Bernie isn’t exactly a saint in all this Russia intrigue either. Both he and Stein had/have quite a fascination with Russia. I find it amazing that Russia got onto the Bernie bandwagon during the primary and onto the Trump and to a lesser degree Stein bandwagon in the General Election. We might end up with a lot more criminals when this is over with than we ever expected.

          • GayOldLady

            And we’re just at the tip of the INDICMENT iceberg. Get well and stay well so you can enjoy this with us.

  • Michael

    It’s bad enough that there is Democratic infighting, and by “Democratic” I am loosely including Bernie. We could overcome the infighting, but overcoming infighting coupled with as yet not-seriously-addressed external hostile forces will be next to impossible.

  • kareemachan

    Sounds like Book-selling 101 to me.

    • Treant

      She does have one out, don’t she?

  • Lumpy Gaga

    Donna Brazile and Politico, you say?

    Sounds like a shit sandwich to me.

  • kirby7771

    I don’t care anymore. Midterms are coming next year, shouldn’t we be focused on winning instead of whining?

    • leastyebejudged

      The DNC SHOULD be, HRC SHOULD be showing some leadership, a lot of things SHOULD be happening inside the DNC.

      The fact that the DNC is determined to continue to fail should clue some people in to how much of a corporate toadie the DNC has become.

  • chris james

    Donna, not exactly Miss Integrity herself, blames Hillary for trying to control the DNC. Her party, not Sanders the independent, whose only chance in the election was to ride on the coattails of the DNC.
    Bernie reminds me a little of Ross Perot, too far out there for most voters.

  • JWC

    To my way of thinking Bernie hung in too long .GOP had its cast of idiots but one by one they fell off the clown car leaving the biggest asshole to drive. The DNC, on the other hand, had Hillary and Bernie . Bernie was like the sad slightly senile old uncle, in the backseat who felt the need to interject his inanae comments and clouding the message. No amount of pesuasion or dialogue could slow him down, if anything it spurred him on. It’s all water under the bridge now

  • As I see it the Democratic Primary went like this. Chronology
    1. Hillary made sure she was not going to lose the Iowa Caucus. She poured an incredible amount of time and money organizing every last possible vote in this state. Bernie tied it. That is how it was reported.
    2. Bernie won New Hampshire as was expected. He was from the neighboring state. The election was essentially tied between the two through the end of New Hampshire on 2/9/16.
    3. Hillary narrowly won the Nevada caucus on 2/20 but it was essentially reported as a tie.
    3. Here is where Hillary locked the nomination up — starting with South Carolina on 2/27 and the Super Tuesday States on 3/1.
    Hillary won most states including Texas and Massachusetts (which hurt Bernie) – and a huge share of the African American and Latino votes. Hillary also registered with core ethnic Democratic constituencies in the Northeast and Florida.
    Bernie won Colorado, Minnesota, Oklahoma, and Vermont.
    It was essentially over then.
    ——
    There was a chance that Bernie might have won if he beat Hillary in New York (the show down state as I remember) but he lost that primary big — 58% – 42%.
    There was no way this timetable or results could have been bought or changed much by money.

    • leastyebejudged

      You’re partial and revisionist chronology reveals that you are not only remarkably biased, but totally oblivious to your bias and to the lies you perpetuate. As fucking usual.

  • Xuuths

    Oh Donna, oh oh Donna, oh oh oh… (from “Hair”). Turned from respected person and Superdelegate into an attention whore… how the mighty hath fallen.

  • ultragreen

    Trump: Drip, drip, drip…
    Clinton: Drip, drip, drip…

  • netxtown

    Last I heard, a contract has to be signed – which signals acceptance of its terms. So who signed?

  • MonochromeMouse

    I wonder how much Putin paid her to spread this bs.

    • ultragreen

      Nothing.

      • MonochromeMouse

        If you don’t think this was Putin’s doing then you are insane.

        • ultragreen

          It was completely obvious that Clinton and other corporate-friendly Democrats controlled the DNC.

          • ultragreen

            And they still do.

          • MonochromeMouse

            So you’re just an idiot then. Good to know. Bernie lost because he was a shitty candidate with no clear plan other than “I want to be president” and trump would have kicked his ass in the election without having to cheat like he had to do to “win” against Hillary.

          • leastyebejudged

            You’re a liar to claim anything else, it’s obvious at this point, and the only people denying it are scumbags like yourself.

    • I love dim sum

      Probably not as much money as he paid to the Clinton Foundation.

      • MonochromeMouse

        Fuck off trump troll.

        • I love dim sum

          I voted Green Party. There’s loads of anti-Trump people that also can’t stand Hillary.

          • MonochromeMouse

            If you voted 3rd party then you voted for trump. There are only 2 viable parties and voting for anything but them is the exact same as voting for whichever candidate is elected. If you really cared about keeping trump out of the white house you would have voted for Hillary, the 2016 election was about who you hated the least not who you liked the most.

          • I love dim sum

            Wrong, if you vote for 3rd party, then you are voting for that party. Sorry if you can’t deal with that. If the DNC is a viable party, why did they lose so bad in 2016? Oh, and if you cared so much about keeping Trump out of office, then why did you, and continue to support such a deeply flawed candidate like Hillary?

          • MonochromeMouse

            3rd parties cannot win in an American election. Only an idiot really believes otherwise. You are more to blame for trump than the idiots and fascists who voted for him, you knew what your vote would help do but you just couldn’t deal with Hillary keeping things the same as when Obama was president, you had to vote third party so you could be a smug asshole talking about how you voted your conscience or whatever other bullshit you tell your friends whenever the election comes up. Your kind isn’t rare and nobody takes you seriously, the libertarians are the right wing version of your type of smug douchebag.

          • leastyebejudged

            Campaign in your swing states next time, you lying idiot.

    • Treant

      I was just thinking that. We should check her bank accounts for a rubles-to-dollars transaction.

      Apparently the Republicans weren’t the only ones to sell out.

    • leastyebejudged

      How much did he pay you to post that ?

  • JAKvirginia

    “By September 7…” It’s Nov. 2, so where’s your “proof”? (Allegations aren’t proof. Documents please.)

  • BeaverTales

    Too little, too late, Donna. You were part of the problem.

    There were “irregularities” reported by the Bernie campaign in at least 20 different state primaries long before July 2016. I saw them in my state first hand, and discussed many others with Bernie volunteers around the country.

    We now know many irregularities actually happened due to wikileaks’ revelations, but what was most galling to us was the constant stream of lies and coverups from the DNC.

    Virtually all of the independents who joined the Bernie campaign during his late surge in March 2016 joined because they were single issue voters. The people who stuck with Hillary after Bernie lost the nomination (mostly lifelong Dems) were ignored when we brought up what was happening to the former Indies with her campaign “surrogates” in August. We were ignored simply because we had supported Bernie earlier.

    Many Independents were swayed by Bernie’s policy positions, not by his socialism or celebrity (many had never heard of him a few months earlier). Independents are a small demographic in NY, CA and IL, but are a large demographic in states like MI, WI, PA, OH, FL, and NV.

    My recollection locally is that most independents who had doubts about Trump stayed home because they felt the DNC was more corrupt than the RNC after wikileaks. The far left indies voted Stein and the far right indies voted Johnson or Trump. They represented thousands of people. The Comey thing was the penultimate blow in the final days.

    Most Bernie supporters still voted for Hillary, but we universally felt excluded whenever we tried to give her campaign any advice about how her rhetoric on TPP, financial reform, education and jobs was driving people out of the party. I couldn’t convince people to ignore Hillary’s positions on those issues when I didn’t agree with them myself, but I still voted for her.

    The coup de grace was when Hillary took Wasserman Schultz into her campaign despite the cloud over her. The fact that she chose Tim Caine as VP was seen as a complete repudiation as well. I personally think those two things cost her the most support among Democrats.

    You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make her think -apologies to Dorothy Parker.

  • aagold76 .

    congrats, Donna- you just gave Trump, Fox, Breitbart, alt right and Bernie or Bust kids talking points for 6 months……Frankly, why shouldn’t the Democratic Party’s nomination process be ‘rigged’ to help an actual Democrat against someone who isn’t a Democrat, has no intention of becoming a democrat, has never raised a dime for the Party- why should that person get help….???

    • leastyebejudged

      Your fear of what they’re going to do isn’t a mandate to silence people.

      I encourage you to take advantage of your right to euthanasia.

  • aagold76 .

    has

  • aagold76 .

    no

  • aagold76 .

    intention

  • aagold76 .

    of

  • aagold76 .

    becoming

  • aagold76 .

    one

  • aagold76 .

    and

  • aagold76 .

    has

  • aagold76 .

    never

  • aagold76 .

    raised

  • aagold76 .

    dime

  • aagold76 .

    for

  • Treant

    Citation required. Bernie downright packed caucuses, so that would seem to be rather…odd…that it would be allowed in a rigged nomination.

    Bernie couldn’t dominate in primaries, which are much, much harder to influence. Also, he meandered off with Clinton’s voter data–and we now know it’s exactly the voter data he would have needed–by “accident” but suffered no real consequences for that.

    Clinton didn’t force Bernie’s gaffes, lack of attention to “identity politics,” or eventual whining meltdown into a crybaby candidate and nasty asshole at the end, who did little to nothing to work on Clinton’s actual candidacy because his little fee-fees had been hurt.

    Actually, Donna, don’t even bother with the citation, it’s pretty obvious. And go away now, divisive fool.

  • aagold76 .

    jesus fucking Christ- I hit 1 button accidentally and a shit storm gets posted- SORRY- no intention to do that- tried to delete- can’t….edited my comment below- if moderator wants to delete all the 1 word posts- PLEASE DO!!!!!

    • Pip

      Disqus likes to do that now and again.

  • I love dim sum

    Brazile was was fired by CNN last year for giving questions in advance to Hillary before the debates with Bernie, and then the DNC has the gall to hire her again. I love how ‘rigged’ is in quotes in the headline, when there’s plenty of proof that Hillary cheated in the primaries, and then she hilariously pouts about Russians ruining her campaign.

    Looks like Brazile is doing this as a sheepherding tactic to get progressives to come back and vote for corrupt neoliberals that are really just Republicans. It will backfire and more people will leave for 3rd parties, like myself.

    The complete lack of self-awareness by Hillary supporters just shows me that 2018 is just going to be another bloodbath for the DNC, they have learned absolutely nothing. I’m so glad I went to the Green Party.

  • andrew

    Anybody who doesn’t know that the Clintons play political hardball, doesn’t follow national politics too closely. Her hardball game, along with her intelligence and national and international experience, were some of the reasons that I voted for her.

    • Me, too.

    • I love dim sum

      Sorry, but she’s not intelligent at all. She spent 1.3 billion dollars to lose against a buffoon like Trump. If she was intelligent she would have easily won.

      • Parque_Hundido

        I’ll respectfully disagree.

        I despise Hillary Clinton, but she’s not stupid. She’s just shady and unlikeable. No one would claim Henry Kissinger or Dick Cheney were stupid, would they? They both have the charisma of a stop sign and sought power from positions where they could be their creepy, evil selves.

        Hillary is guilty of over-reach. She’s a retail, middling politician who went too far in her political ambitions. Stupid, not so much.

        • I love dim sum

          It’s interesting you bring up Kissinger, since she said in her own words that she considers him to be a mentor.

          When I read that she actually said that, that was my final straw for her.

          • Parque_Hundido

            Yeah, she was super chummy with him. It was revolting.

            She really was a nixonian Republican, idea-wise. Nixon supported the ERA, equal work for equal pay and created the EPA. He was also a war mongering egomaniac. Was there any conflict Hillary didn’t support? Didn’t she fuck up relations with Venezuela, Honduras and Paraguay? She was a seriously awful Secretary of State.

            Cheney made it clear that VP could be the most powerful office in the country. He was a true evil genius.

  • Saul Farias

    Sorry but Hillary supporters were blind from the beginning there was no enthusiasm for her nomination (outside heavy blue areas) among young people, volunteers; I tried to convince older dems of this, but none of you were listening Trump is DNCs (establishment fault.) You need enthusiasm on Dem. side to win Republicans fall in line (no such thing as anti trump wing in GOP they all plugged noses and voted for him). Dems do not fall in line, I spent hours helping Obama campaign but don’t blame me for not volunteering for someone I did not like or have confidence in and had so much baggage a foreign country was able to use, you nominated her you get her elected.

    • andrew

      “there was no enthusiasm for her nomination” She got over 66,000,000 Americans to vote for her. I think that shows that there was a good amount of enthusiasm for Hillary.

      • Saul Farias

        She got my vote as well, but I am in heavily blue county, but lost because of electoral college I was raised in heavily red areas I know the mindset.

      • chiMaxx

        votes ≠ enthusiasm

      • I love dim sum

        I don’t think it shows enthusiasm at all. Most people would have stayed home, if it weren’t for Bernie’s sheepherding and trying to guilt trip people into voting for Hillary, when he should have ran independent after the DNC rigged the primaries.

      • Parque_Hundido

        I’m guessing 65 million of those were votes against Trump.

  • RLK2

    Democrats continue to be stupid. This does not win any elections. Why they keep doing this stuff is bewildering! They seem unable to learn how to win elections.

  • SoCalVet

    She’s obviously become an expert at losing.

    • leastyebejudged

      She’s winning at it.

      Must be on Trump’s payroll.

  • Gretchen

    I would be more bothered by this if there had been another Democrat running for president.

  • Skip O’Brien

    Former DNC Chair Donna Brazille gave Hillary the “surprise questions” for a debate with Bernie, and helped her cheat. When confronted with the proof, she denied the cheating, after she was fired from CNN three weeks before the election, she said to a crowd “she’d do it again”.
    She was DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz replacement, after Schultz was forced to resign during the DNC convention for cheating Sanders.
    All this cheating turned off millions of voters, but go ahead and blame the Russians.

    • I love dim sum

      There’s a bunch of Hillary supporters that are going to accuse you of being a Russian hacker now. They act like feral cats if you dare to be critical against dearest Queen Hillary.

      I’m of the same opinion about the DNC and the Clintons, I went Green Party last year after becoming disgusted with the DNC.

    • Deviancy Behavir

      I wouldn’t care if you were a Russian bot or not, but here’s the thing that people miss. Bernie Sanders was never and still isn’t a Democrat. So a non-democrat running in a democratic primary, he shouldn’t have gotten any help from the DNC at all. He even went on record to say he only filed as a Dem because he was using their infrastructure to use for his election. This would be no different than let’s say someone running for a union president and having someone come into the election that wasn’t a part of the union and never paid any dues into it. Same difference, Bernie’s an Independent and he should’ve ran as one, not used the DNC. As much as I despise her, Green Party’s, Jill Stein stayed in her own party. That’s the point. The same way that a lot of people who were so disinterested in voting and were registered as Independents couldn’t vote in the Democratic primary, in some states, because they weren’t Democrats. It sucks, but if you don’t know the way elections work, that’s on the people who didn’t care enough to pick a party affiliation.

      • leastyebejudged

        Funny, YOU seem far more like a Russian troll to me than he does.

        • Deviancy Behavir

          I’m sorry, google translate can translate basic bitch properly. But thanks for the compliment. BLOCKED!

          • leastyebejudged

            Another coward, this is why we loose.

            Cowardly little bitches like you know you can’t defend your lies and horse shit.

          • Parque_Hundido

            This is precisely the shows Leary tactic that elected Trump. Coward.

          • leastyebejudged

            Kill yourself.

  • SelectFromWhere

    I stopped reading as soon as I saw “…her new book.”
    #oldnews
    #publicitytour

    • pablo

      #nolessonslearned

  • danolgb

    Really, it sounds like Hillary was the only adult in the room with the brain to see that a party deep in debt wasn’t going to be useful to anyone and if that meant taking the checkbook away, so be it.

    This still doesn’t show any attempt to keep any other primary candidate from having a fair shot. Hillary just did a lot more groundwork as one would expect. Had Bernie actually had a shot and won, she probably would have been paying for his convention.

    • I love dim sum

      Haha, some groundwork, she couldn’t even be bothered to campaign in Wisconsin or Michigan. She was too busy attending parties in the Hamptons.

      • danolgb

        There was only one candidate who throughout the primary demanded several longstanding rules be changed because he wasn’t winning and it wasn’t Hillary.

        • I love dim sum

          Again, she lost, because she was too arrogant and entitled to go stump in states that were close races. But nice try at changing the subject.

  • SoCalGal20

    How many times does it need to be said – BERNIE IS NOT A DEMOCRAT.

    Also, Donna Brazile you can fuck right off now. That agreement was made months before Bernie started running and actually kept the DNC going and you didn’t actually find any corruption in the primary.

    • Parque_Hundido

      None of that changes what Hillary did to rig the party and the nomination.

      She was a shitty, divisive candidate. We can thank her for Trump.

      • SoCalGal20

        Bernie wouldn’t have won. So, no, we STILL would have ended up with Trump.

        • Parque_Hundido

          You know this because you’re psychic? The only things we know are that:

          1. Clinton lost. In so doing, she divided the party.
          2. Sanders’ poll numbers always beat HRC’s.

          That’s what we know. Let’s get clear on that.

    • Parque_Hundido

      Sweetie, it looks like a rigged nomination, it walks like a rigged nomination, it talks like a rigged nomination.

      Seems like the shillaries are having a hard time with the right v. wrong thing. Nothing new, but worthy of note.

      • SoCalGal20

        Oh honey, no. Bernie had the same agreement. And he reneged on his. Also, the NOMINATION wasn’t rigged. Bernie lost. Period. He lost on Super Tuesday. He just wouldn’t give it up because he doesn’t actually care about Dems or unity. Also if you’re so interested in fairness help get rid of the caucuses which are extremely unfair and the only thing that kept Bernie going.

        • Parque_Hundido

          No. You’re wrong about that. Bernie did not arrange for pass throughs from state committees. His arrangements were above board and transparent.

          Clinton slimed her way into control of the DNC, filled it with lobbyists and then used everything at her disposal to manipulate the election. And Bernie still out performed her.

          Not that you’ve even pretended to care about fairness, as no shillary ever has, but if you wanted to give that appearance, you should campaign to get rid of lobbyists in the DNC and get public financing for elections. That would take care of 95% of this bullshit.

          But let’s be honest: it will be a cold day in hell before a shillary supports anything remotely related to fairness or transparency.

        • Parque_Hundido

          Just curious if you and the other shillaries are going to try to stick with this lie it if you’re ready to admit that the cult of Clinton is about to collapse into a giant black hole of slime.

          Thoughts?

  • Pip

    So, Bernie having all of these pie in the sky ideas with no plans what so ever to back them up wouldn’t have been the reason he didn’t win the primaries. Right? I mean of course Hillary rigged everything in the primaries. With her ideas and plans. Voters couldn’t have used their logic and voted for the person with the grounded ideas and plans vs the person that just threw out every millennial talking point with no plans to back those points up. Nope, it was one big conspiracy. Just like everything else that Hillary is involved in. Dear and fluffy lord, how is this woman not running the world with as connected and brilliant as she is with all of this behind the scenes wicked plotting. Wait… or is she???

    • Parque_Hundido

      I think the point here is that she rigged the DNC by controlling cash flow. Her ideas were and continue to be shitty.

      Idea-wise, she was a nixonian Republican. Is it any surprise she had a few shady tricks up her sleeve? Isn’t that what the shillaries liked about her?

      • Pip

        By contributing to the DNC she allowed all Democrats, including Bernie once he decided to change parties, to continue campaigning and having a presence. From what I have read and understand this deal was made prior to Bernie flipping from Independent to Democrat during this election period. If I am incorrect on this, then I’d love to see documentation that says otherwise so I can be better educated on this topic.

        • Parque_Hundido

          I think the point is that she channeled the cash and DNC resources to her own campaign. She didn’t even let any cash trickle down to the states to support local candidates.

          It doesn’t matter whether Bernie was pre or post Hillary’s financial takeover. The point is that the DNC is subject to financial takeovers and that’s how HRC got the nomination.

          It brings up questions about party structure, party rules and the role of cash in the nomination process that have nothing to do with any candidate, but have particular importance for understanding HRC’s path to nomination. Obviously, the GOP is no better, but this isn’t good for the Democrats.

          We need publicly financed elections. It’s the only way out of this.

          • Pip

            This is an honest question, where is there any documentation showing that she channeled cash and DNC resources to her own campaign and blocked any from trickling down to other candidates?

          • Parque_Hundido

            Did you read the article? Did you not get the part about how she controlled appointments and how cash flowed from the states to the DNC?

            I worked in a state Dem party. Money went to Hillary, it certainly didn’t come from her. It was like some kind of weird protection scheme.

          • Pip

            I did read it. I will be the first to admit if I missed or misunderstood anything in the article. I’m going back to read it now. To see what I missed here.

          • Parque_Hundido

            Actually, the JMG story is super short. It’s being reported in more detail elsewhere.

            Here’s a quote from Politico that describes the mechanics of the operation:

            “Individuals who had maxed out their $2,700 contribution limit to the campaign could write an additional check for $353,400 to the Hillary Victory Fund—that figure represented $10,000 to each of the 32 states’ parties who were part of the Victory Fund agreement—$320,000—and $33,400 to the DNC. The money would be deposited in the states first, and transferred to the DNC shortly after that. Money in the battleground states usually stayed in that state, but all the other states funneled that money directly to the DNC, which quickly transferred the money to Brooklyn.”

            “Wait,” I said. “That victory fund was supposed to be for whoever was the nominee, and the state party races. You’re telling me that Hillary has been controlling it since before she got the nomination?”

            Gary said the campaign had to do it or the party would collapse.

            “That was the deal that Robby struck with Debbie,” he explained, referring to campaign manager Robby Mook. “It was to sustain the DNC. We sent the party nearly $20 million from September until the convention, and more to prepare for the election.”

            Link: https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/11/02/clinton-brazile-hacks-2016-215774

          • Pip

            Thanks for the link, for some reason when I tried to follow it from here it wouldn’t pull up the whole article. I’ll be reading this in detail so I have a better formed opinion.

          • Deviancy Behavir

            Did you also read where her campaign paid 80 percent of the DNC’s debt that the Obama campaign had racked up and were paying back very slowly? If I paid back a good chunk of your debt and you go back and create more debt while I’m also fundraising and paying you off and I don’t set some stipulations, I’d be a damn fool. So if I’m bringing in the cash, I should be able to set how it’s being used and how much you get. It’s no different if you have a business who takes over and puts it into conservatorship and requires that certain funds are distributed a certain way in certain time periods. People who have worked in finance see this all the times when they have a business or entity that is is very much disrepair and disorganized.

          • Parque_Hundido

            Sorry, no. Political parties are not profit making businesses. Try Chevron.

      • -M-

        She ‘rigged’ the flow of the cash she raised. Bernie had a similar money sharing agreement with the DNC that he opted not to implement, just as he didn’t share his email list with them.

        The over view is Donna didn’t find any actual rigging against Bernie or any crimes just something that looks bad and raises ethical concerns.

        • Parque_Hundido

          Hon, I was in Las Vegas when Nancy Pelosi showed up and threatened delegates who dared question her authority to crown Clinton the winner. It was rigged.

          But it’s not just about the primaries and caucuses. Since Clinton took over the DNC, it’s been pay to play. Lobbyists are in all levels of decision making in the DNC. It’s truly appalling.

          I’m not sure what the fuss is from her acolytes. Isn’t this the quality shillaries liked about her? I find Clinton to be despicable, but she’s a brilliant strategist. If there’s a shady, backhanded way to exercise power, she’ll find it.

          Certainly no one can be surprised by this. In fact, those of us in D politics who aren’t in a coma and who understand that Hilary’s victory was not the purpose of the party all knew this stuff at least a year ago.

        • Parque_Hundido

          Also, please recall the “last call for nominations” email. She raised the cash in a clear quid-pro-quo arrangement with all manner of venial, nauseating donors who wanted to be cultural attaché to Luxembourg or Lichtenstein or god-knows-where.

          She ran a machine. This can’t be a surprise to her supporters.

    • I love dim sum

      The so-called pie in the sky ideas could have been easily paid for with the 800 billion dollar military budget bill passed last month, which almost no Democrats in the Senate or House opposed. Warren, that hypocrite, voted for it.

      • Pip

        I know this will make me unpopular with folks here… But I am one of those crazy Democrats that believes in a military budget. Granted the current one is very bloated and needs to be examined and all wasteful spending discontinued, but you can’t just take away the countries military budget without review. Supporting decent wage increases and medical coverage for our troops, purchasing of equipment and protective gear, and military vehicles isn’t hypocritical. It’s a necessity.

        • I love dim sum

          Trillions of dollars for endless wars in the Middle East is not a necessity.

          It’s posts like yours that truly expose that Hillary supporters are essentially just Republicans that don’t want to admit it.

          • Pip

            Democrats can be conservative when it comes to things like budgets and military spending. I do not have to think just like you, or share the same opinions in order to be a Democrat. It’s a political party, not a cult.

            Endless wars in the Middle East are unnecessary spending. We do not need to be the aggressors of every situation. Especially when it’s a war of greed and nothing to do with defense of ourselves or our allies. We do however need the ability to defend ourselves and our allies when the need arises.

  • Parque_Hundido

    Surprise! Clinton rigged the election by controlling cashflow to/from the DNC.

    Is there any sentient human who was unaware of this?

  • Harold Osler

    This will get the BernieCrats whining about–wait, they’ve never STOPPED whining.
    A non-issue for most people, I’d imagine.
    Let’s see–
    1). DNC–Help us Hilary, help us. We need you to raise money .
    2). Hilary–sure, but anything I raise, I control. (Makes perfect sense to me. I wouldn’t want to spend my time and energy only to have them go, gee thanks but now we’re going with this guy)
    3). There’s no strong competition for the candidacy. So let’s get all the ducks in a row.
    4). Wait–here comes Bernie wanting to take over. Bernie–who raised NO money for the Dems; who didn’t campaign as a Democrat or for Democrats; who didn’t want to have to put together his own party in order to run; whose band of believers felt that they could waltz in after SOMEONE ELSE HAD DONE THE HARD LIFTING and take over; whose attitude was apparently “There’s only this one person over here as a Democrat-that’ll be easier than battling all those Republicans”; whose believers wanted results without doing any of the work involved.
    5). This only counts as a scandal if you’ve got the opinion that the DNC owed you something. That you had the right to show up and take over without any fight. That you could walk in and dismiss other people’s hard work. That you could walk in and USE them.

    • I love dim sum

      “This will get the BernieCrats whining about–wait, they’ve never STOPPED whining.”

      Hillary supporters projecting again.

      All you are doing is encouraging more and more people to leave the DNC to 3rd parties. Enjoy turning going the way of the Whigs.

      • Harold Osler

        You’re making assumptions.
        Yes, I voted for Hilary. I think she’s the best person for the international situations. But I would have rather voted for a third term Obama.
        I never took Bernie seriously as a Dem candidate because I didn’t think he had what it took.
        I’m not a Democrat–I vote for people not party. That’s just the way I was raised. When I was a kid in Iowa, Republicans were way more mainstream than they are now.
        And, if my Facebook feed is any indication, Bernie supporters ARE still carrying on about the election. For some reason, I don’t get posts about Hilary like that.

        • I love dim sum

          I get far more posts from aggressive, hyperbolic Hillary supporters that just like to spout off Correct the Record talking points. Hillary supporters refuse to move on with life. At least Mitt Romney and his supporters had the decency to disappear when he lost.

          I think it’s because Hillary is going to run again in 2020, because she’s that much of a narcissist.

    • Parque_Hundido

      When will the shillaries realize that their party is over?

      We’ve taken over the party. You’re welcome to stay, but we’ll ask that you turn down the volume on the crazy. If you want to support another nixonian Republican, please do so for one who belongs to the GOP.

  • Tony Adams

    Her hair is sensational!

    • Treant

      It really is, isn’t it? I have a mop.

  • Parque_Hundido

    OK – none of this is actual news. We knew that HRC had iron fisted control over the DNC, that the entry of lobbyists into all levels of the DNC was another way she ensured control.

    Didn’t any of you work for your local Democratic party? Money flowed from states to the DNC, not the other way around.

    I despise HRC and think she was the closest thing to Richard Nixon the Democrats have ever had the nerve to put forward. One of the reasons I feel this way is that she did the things we all knew she did, including controlling the finances and holding total power over top-level appointments in the DNC.

    Is any of this actually a surprise?

    • leastyebejudged

      It’s clearly a surprise to the HRC supporters here, look at them double-down on how fucking stupid and dishonest they are !

      Look at the remarks about how fab her hair is.

      I’m done with the Dems, they’re not getting a cent from me ever again, and I’m done with going door to door for them.

  • -M-

    Just before several elections, from the person who got caught feeding Clinton a perfectly obvious question & now has a book. Hmm?

    Not to be totally dismissive. The DNC should be able to raise money and budget on its own and certainly should avoid even the appearance of undue influence or favoritism. And maybe sense enough to require everyone running under their banner to share fundraising and email lists. Just to put those criticisms in a wider context.

  • JCF

    I say we investigate this RELENTLESSLY, letting the chips fall where they may…

    AS SOON AS Drumpf and ALL the DrumpfenKorp are in prison for treason!

    https://media.giphy.com/media/IKpQSl8ts3MYM/giphy.gif

    [And not one day before. Seriously, Donna, PRIORITIES? Shenannigans within a political party, even if regrettable, are hardly the DESTRUCTION OF DEMOCRACY that was the 2016 General Election!]

    • Gianni

      I’m almost certain that Benghazi will be in there somewhere.

  • Jonathan Megerian

    I had the impression that the national committees don’t spend money during the primaries. Can anyone confirm or deny this?

  • Dave Babler

    Excuse me, but didn’t Bernie also have a fundraising agreement with the DNC he just chose not to use it?

    • leastyebejudged

      The DNC owes millions still from over 10 years ago, so you’re a bit of an idiot to suggest there were any funds there to be used. Moron.

  • Andrea_Rae

    How exactly does anything that happens within the DNC change votes?

    • leastyebejudged

      Really ?

      How is it possible that you’re so fucking clueless ?

  • janey

    Did she prevent him from getting the nomination of the Independent Party??? Now, that would have been unfair. But to prevent him from getting the nomination of the Democratic Party seems moot.

  • ECarpenter

    That’s Donna’s interpretation, or spin, on the agreement. Which is not proof of anything. We need to see the documents! She also left a lot of context out.

    The Stranger, a progressive news outlet in Seattle, has more info that Donna left out of the story – http://www.thestranger.com/slog/2017/11/02/25537553/no-hillary-didnt-rig-the-primary-against-bernie-by-signing-that-fundraising-agreement

    This includes the fact that Bernie’s campaign signed a similar agreement with the DNC.

    Seriously, folks, we need to demand good, clean, clear documentary evidence no matter what side we’re on.

    Don’t believe stuff just because it fits with what you think, don’t believe what someone says it says – look to the actual documentation.

  • leastyebejudged

    Now that the truth has come out about the shady financials of the DNC, the rabid Clinton supporters are doubling-down more than ever.

    You’ve basically destroyed the party now, so enjoy the world you’ve forged.

  • DrJustino

    Why don’t we circle this back to the point of this posting, not fighting amongst ourselves. The point is, Donna Brazile is shady, she’s trying to shift blame away from her dishonest behavior, and trying to make money. I really don’t like her. I wanted to, she’s a black woman, she could have been awesome (like Maxine Waters, for example), but she’s shady. Not Republican/Manafort illegal-shady, but still shady. It just goes to show you people everywhere of all backgrounds can still suck, and not in a good way.

    • Parque_Hundido

      No.

      The point is that control of the DNC is for sale and that Hillary Clinton bought it.

      It’s clear that there are real problems that need to be fixed. Deflecting blame onto Donna Brazile doesn’t fix any of them.

  • David Helton

    someone has a book to sell I guess….

  • And the DNC’s recent “housecleaning” of progressives by the corporatist scum means that things are not going to get any better.