General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWell, well: NBC News obtains August 2015 Clinton-DNC memo read this important caveat:
Last edited Fri Nov 3, 2017, 07:59 PM - Edit history (1)
there was no conspiracy. Brazile was wrong.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/memo-reveals-details-hillary-clinton-dnc-deal-n817411
Link to tweet
Link to tweet
ok, then, enough of that, hugs & back to work......kp
mcar
(42,474 posts)I await all the retractions from media and social media. But I won't hold my breath.
Control-Z
(15,682 posts)K&R
Justice
(7,188 posts)Why didn't Politico demand to see actual document?
Control-Z
(15,682 posts)I guess she found what she wanted to find even though it wasn't really there.
onetexan
(13,081 posts)fleabiscuit
(4,542 posts)GeneMcM
(69 posts)Warren is trying to do a Sanders and cut out her little corner of regional relevance with the far left. Brazille. I don't know. Maybe she has more debt than I know about. The GOP has been courting her for years and she was all buddy with Matalan I'd like to see HER tax returns.
DownriverDem
(6,237 posts)Neither Warren or Brazille are newbies. They know to keep their eyes on the prize: To beat the crap out of the repubs. I do not believe that the Democratic Party is finished either.
renegade000
(2,301 posts)Trying to run interference for trump...
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Clarity2
(1,009 posts)Is the one that put out the opinion piece Sean hannity used for the uranium story, and ended up legitimizing it to repubs
kerry-is-my-prez
(8,133 posts)Gotta make a book juicy....
Skittles
(153,310 posts)rzemanfl
(29,585 posts)guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)An interesting addition to the continuing debate.
boston bean
(36,225 posts)There must be consequences.
Madam45for2923
(7,178 posts)pandr32
(11,644 posts)joshcryer
(62,287 posts)If she can so easily throw her party under the bus for some potential future gig, she has lost. No one will trust her after this.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Her extremely unethical supposed attempt to pass debate questions to the Hillary campaign wouldn't just cost her one position, but probably all future.
If all those stolen DNC emails taught us anything it's that they normally scrupulously turned down unethical offers. Nothing else remotely like Brazile's actions surfaced. In any case, Hillary could have answered those questions in her sleep (and probably still does).
Brazile's trashing of the Democratic Party as part of joining Sanders (surely she could have just announced with dignity and honor that she was joining him) makes me wonder just when she first decided to attack the party. The slimy email business happened during the primary.
joshcryer
(62,287 posts)This attempt just clenched it for her.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Her reputation is in the sewer. Sure, she wants her book to be published and sell well, but forever burning her bridges with the Democratic Party via a major hit job timed to damage the party even more seems a bit overkillish.
She needs a job that'll keep her out front and is trying to join Sanders. Did Sanders want Brazile before? Why would he? Is this her version of resume building? Will he give her a job now? Tulsi Gabbard was allowed to introduce him at a few events after she theatrically torched the DNC and endorsed him, but not much more.
quartz007
(1,216 posts)and she will need those millions, because she will never work for DNC or CNN or MSNBC.
fleabiscuit
(4,542 posts)quartz007
(1,216 posts)from the publisher. It can go as high as $10 million if the author is very famous. This bonus is before a single book copy is sold! The fame can be good or bad. It does not matter.
DURHAM D
(32,618 posts)boston bean
(36,225 posts)DURHAM D
(32,618 posts)DNC does not seem to be answering their phone today. I left messages (nice ones) and no response.
True Blue American
(17,996 posts)Does that mean we all,Unfriend, her,the way the old Lady in the cartoon does?
Baitball Blogger
(46,780 posts)joshcryer
(62,287 posts)Boomerproud
(7,985 posts)n/t
joshcryer
(62,287 posts)That was her "job" for the past 15 odd years. She did it OK. Now she should quietly go away.
And publishing that book is a disaster.
Baconator
(1,459 posts)lunamagica
(9,967 posts)InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,128 posts)or doesn't that count anymore?
GeneMcM
(69 posts)InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,128 posts)ehrnst
(32,640 posts)and honest person in the DNC for many who thought her a worthless shill for so long.
calimary
(81,608 posts)Kingofalldems
(38,514 posts)Internet Trump trolls destroyed.
MaryMagdaline
(6,859 posts)Once again Hillary has to prove her innocence. And she did it without calling anyone a liar. Hope Donna sells a lot of books at our expense. Virginia election days away. Wonder what it will be like in 2018 and 2020 with a republican in governor's office securing the vote.
58Sunliner
(4,431 posts)Actually- a good idea. How about we all protest any appearances? Shame her.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)are the dem leaders doing? this is such a whole bag of nothing and totally division/diversion. brazile needs to be heavily raked over the coals for this. be one good use for coal, i guess.
"Mr Mueller, can you check her accounts for rubles also?"
spanone
(135,950 posts)lamp_shade
(14,853 posts)ismnotwasm
(42,028 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Hopefully it sends them back to their basement.
Me.
(35,454 posts)I hope the harm isn't irreparable.
Bleacher Creature
(11,258 posts)If it doesn't screw up VA or NJ on Tuesday, there really shouldn't be much long term damage as we can count on President Bonespurs to continue doing stuff to bring us all together. But if it does cost us, especially in VA, it will empower him and Congressional Republicans, which could do unimaginable amounts of damage.
Cattledog
(5,923 posts)Rilgin
(787 posts)I have heard reported that Bernie (not sure about Martin OMalley) had a similar agreement. Do we have any real details on that or those agreements. I would be curious. It would not change some of my feelings about general bias in the DNC or the use of the Victory Fund to avoid campaign finance restrictions but would change some of my opinion about the agreement itself.
Mostly I am curious if they contain the same control provisions. It would be hard to give 2 candidates the same type of rights over personnel. The document you provide gives the DNC the right to select amongst candidates provided by the Clinton campaign. Not sure if you could actually give another party the same rights because it might not practically work.
In any event, since you found this memo, do you know if the details of the Bernie agreement are anywhere online?
Memo Reveals Details of Hillary Clinton-DNC Deal
by ALEX SEITZ-WALD
WASHINGTON The Democratic National Committee struck a deal with Hillary Clinton in 2015 that gave her campaign input on some party hiring and spending decisions, but related only to preparations for the general election, according to a memo obtained by NBC News. It also left the door open for other candidates to make similar arrangements.
The document provides more context to the explosive claims made by former DNC Interim Chair Donna Brazile in a forthcoming book, an excerpt of which was published this week.
The August 26, 2015, memorandum of understanding from Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook to DNC CEO Amy Dacey details the relationship between Clinton's campaign and the DNC long before she won her party's nomination.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/memo-reveals-details-hillary-clinton-dnc-deal-n817411
MEMO HERE:
http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/TODAY/z_Creative/DNCMemo%20(002).pdf
ProudProgressiveNow
(6,130 posts)delisen
(6,050 posts)This is not a small mistake.
mucifer
(23,631 posts)SunSeeker
(51,811 posts)More fact-checking of Brazile's claims here:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029788867
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)lapucelle
(18,410 posts)virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)lapucelle
(18,410 posts)"Nothing in this agreement shall be construed to violate the DNC's obligation of impartiality and
neutrality through the nominating process. All activities performed under this agreement will be
focused exclusively on preparations for the General Election and not the Democratic Primary.
Further we understand you may enter into similar agreements with other candidates."
And they did!
https://www.politico.com/story/2015/11/bernie-sanders-2016-fundraising-dnc-215559
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)Bernie's agreement just is DNC only.
lapucelle
(18,410 posts)that prohibits disbursement of money raised from joint fundraising agreements until after a nominee is determined. Someone made the states wait until July 12, 2016 for their money.
What some people call a "money laundering feature", the FEC calls "a provision of federal election law".
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/11/102.17
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)Donna said that 99.5 percent of the state and DNC money was funneled back to Hillary
The law only allows for $2700 per donor to a campaign, but by using this loophole it allows for single donors to ultimately donate $353,000 to Hillary
It is legal, but it defeats the spirit of the law.
It allows some large donors undue influence with candidates. To reach the $80 million figure, you would only need 227 rich donors.
lapucelle
(18,410 posts)Here's the allocation formula for Hillary's agreement.
Allocation Formula
Contributions from individuals will be allocated as follows: the first $2,700 will be allocated to Hillary for America and designated for the primary election. The next $33,400 of a contribution will be allocated to the Democratic National Committee.
Here's the allocation formula for BS's:
The move, which comes more than two months after Hillary Clinton's campaign signed such an agreement in August, will allow Sanders' team to raise up to $33,400 for the committee as well as $2,700 for the campaign from individual donors at events
https://www.politico.com/story/2015/11/bernie-sanders-2016-fundraising-dnc-215559
Response to lapucelle (Reply #126)
Post removed
lapucelle
(18,410 posts)The state money was deposited as per federal law in a separate accounts until the loser conceded in July 2016.
"The Victory Fund will establish a depository account to be used solely for the receipt of contributions and for the making of disbursements in furtherance of this agreement as provided for by law and FEC regulations. The Committees will amend their Statements of Organization, as necessary, to reflect this account as an additional depository."
The fundraising effort allowed the DNC to pay down $22,000,000 in debt. She "funneled" the money to the DNC's creditors. Damn that woman!
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)some of that "debt" was money loaned to the DNC by Hillary,
lapucelle
(18,410 posts)That money was allocated according to the allocation formula and "funneled" back to state parties and candidates after the loser conceded, as per federal law.
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)emulatorloo
(44,274 posts)Demsrule86
(68,825 posts)is true...what I wonder is why does it matter? 16 is over...and folks voted...and that is how the nominee is chosen...so all of this flailing around what is the purpose?
lapucelle
(18,410 posts)None of the $24,000,000 dollars in debt that a review of the books revealed in August 2015 was money owed to or lent by Clinton. By July 2016, that debt was paid down $22,000,000 with a $2,000,000 debt remaining.
stonecutter357
(12,699 posts)R B Garr
(17,019 posts)so there were no funds for him to direct. Is she supposed to raise money for him??
Those agreements look like boiler-plate documents with language generic to the industry. There wasn't some room full of lawyers committing to writing how Hillary was going to rig things. How absurd and absurdly unbelievable.
Great posts, lapucelle.
Gothmog
(145,965 posts)ehrnst
(32,640 posts)I think some heads are going to roll at her publisher's office, unless they release her "memoir" as fiction.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Demsrule86
(68,825 posts)moriah
(8,311 posts)Do you have the text of the agreement with Bernie?
I'd love to read it, since you're so certain Hillary and Bernie's agreements differed significantly in giving Hillary more power over primary-related DNC activities?
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)The state party agreement was designed to capture donations of $353,000.....there was no reason for Bernie to make that kind of agreement with $27 donors
moriah
(8,311 posts)Because if that's all you've got... hell, I don't even think this nothingburger has a bun.
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)this has grown tiresome
Demsrule86
(68,825 posts)long.
"Here are the facts: of the $529 million Clinton raised under the Agreement, more than $107 million eventually went to the DNC while state parties received about $264 million. She only kept $158 million for her own campaign.
It is true that Clinton ended up holding that money in a bank account for longer than she might have liked. But she could not disburse those funds until she was the official nominee, which did not happen until more than a month after the POLITICO hit piece."
https://deepstatenation.com/primary-error-donna-brazile-mixed-up-two-different-clinton-dnc-agreements/
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)JHan
(10,173 posts)stonecutter357
(12,699 posts)moriah
(8,311 posts)OpenSecrets.org shows it is untrue. You can see what state parties transferred to the DNC in total for those states that actually report it.
In North Carolina, the HVF gave them $3.4 million. The DNC gave them $12 million. They transferred back less than half a mil to each.
And at least Hillary was out there trying to raise money for the party. And to be blunt, while I'm glad Bernie is a friend to Democrats, this once again proves that he's essentially the DNC's "friend with benefits" of his own choice vs being in a serious relationship with us. I love FWBs. I know sometimes they're broke. But if they are only going to help pay for dinner if they like the friend we're dining with, and could move in to save money and take lots of friends out but choose not to until it's convenient for them, it's not my fault I have to wait to take other friends out and certainly not the FWB's place to say I'm a bad friend to those people he didn't want to split the cost to take to dinner.
Your ignorance of campaign finance laws you disagree with is rather astounding. I've always thought it was good to know the details of what I dislike, vs simply deciding to dislike it without information to inform my opinion.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)And any control over that money that agreement covered.
And?
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)Sorry
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)And as a result, the Democratic Party, that Sanders was so relying on for the credibility to run for POTUS, didn't go belly up.
He should be thankful.
And you should be thankful for the party you support that didn't show Bernie the door, when he showed up one morning asking for their credibility for a run.
yardwork
(61,793 posts)What is Bernie hiding?
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)on Sanders' part.
I can't understand why he would refuse to release his taxes, if there was nothing in them that is problematic.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)ehrnst
(32,640 posts)And Politico?
https://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/clinton-puts-tight-grip-on-dnc-wallet-119748
From August 2015:
58Sunliner
(4,431 posts)OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)What it does do, however, is provide the context Brazile "accidentally" omitted.
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)I'm embarrassed for you.
N.b.: Actually, I'm not.
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)....and Hillary was funding the DNC.....just as Donna Brazile said.
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)Objection laughingly overruled.
paleotn
(18,015 posts)ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Prior to September the DNC Communications Director was Mo Elleithee.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/06/politics/dnc-adds-new-communications-staff/index.html
After September it was Luis Miranda,where she says""I am grateful to DNC Chair Wasserman Schultz for asking me to serve at this historic moment as the American people prepare to elect their next president, said Miranda.".................. "I am proud to join a DNC team that has been critical to those successes, and that is working to elect a president who will keep America moving forward.
https://www.democrats.org/Post/dnc-chair-announces-luis-miranda-as-dnc-communications-director
And then this "I am thrilled to announce these new members of our communications team, said DNC Communications Director Mo Elleithee. With their wealth of communications experience, these new members will help us aggressively take the Democratic message to a wider audience as we work to help elect the 45th President of the United States and other Democrats all across the country in 2016.
http://www.p2016.org/parties/dnc033015pr.html
So that could be entirely true that they hired the Communications Director for the General in 2015 and had a separate primary one.
You seem to think that there is something very wrong with the Democratic leadership - which gave Bernie's campaign the Party credibility that the Green Party could never have.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)And getting pretty transparent.
joshcryer
(62,287 posts)virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)joshcryer
(62,287 posts)...has any influence on the primary?
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)The communications director to be hired on Sept 11, 2015 -- which would be the communications director for the primary
any other questions?
ismnotwasm
(42,028 posts)virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)just as Donna Brazile said
joshcryer
(62,287 posts)Now we know why he refused to raise funds for the DNC.
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)
In addition to that joint fundraising agreement the DNC reached with both campaigns, the party and the Clinton campaign struck that separate memorandum of understanding giving the campaign staffing and policy oversight.
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)He opted not to participate.
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)what can I do for you?
joshcryer
(62,287 posts)No where did I suggest Sanders campaign was competent, as it was rife with controversies, including stealing Clinton's voter file, among some.
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)to the Hillary victory fund....Bernie's donors gave $27
joshcryer
(62,287 posts)But he never had any intention of raising money for the DNC, as proven by history.
This despite having signed a contract that he might raise money for them.
Now we know why.
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Whatever.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)when clearly she was absolutely correct.
People are smearing her.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Especially where she expresses there is this sinister secret reason that people were clearing everything through Hillary's campaign in July and August of 2016....
At best she was clueless about what happens once the nominee has been confirmed. As she headed up Gore's campaign in 2000, when Gore was pushing for control over party finances before he was confirmed, perhaps she got amnesia...
At worst she is lying and trying to gin up book sales with very soap-opera esque prose that implies a vast conspiracy to put Bernie in a corner.
Option two seems to be the most likely, judging by the results.
Demsrule86
(68,825 posts)Obama was a great candidate...in most races there is a candidate that is better known.
ismnotwasm
(42,028 posts)virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)ismnotwasm
(42,028 posts)You are trying very hard, and I get that, but I honestly the evidence that you are evidently seeing that back up your statements.
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)It says exactly what Donna Brazile said. As head of the DNC, she could see the implications of that agreement.
When you combine Hillary's funding the DNC and controlling hiring - that is complete control - not to mention the fact that her 2008 campaign manager was DNC chair.
lapucelle
(18,410 posts)OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)Where does it allow for Clinton to "control the partys finances, strategy, and all the money raised" (my emphasis)? And where was the DNC "required to consult with the campaign about all other... data, analytics, and mailings" during the primaries?
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)It is stated pretty clearly
Do I have to go through it line by line with you?
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)you have been quoting Donna Brazile. Read the agreement.
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)You should read it.
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)Cite the relevant language that backs-up Brazile's assertions in question. Or have your own pet do it.
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)why would my pointing anything out help?
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)ehrnst
(32,640 posts)When Sanders supporters really should be grateful to HRC for keeping the party that Bernie needed for credibility afloat with the money that she raised.
You can't see it, so why would anyone pointing out facts to you help?
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)That's why he didn't go with the Green Party.
The Democratic Party gave him more than any other party could or would.
A thank you is in order.
Demsrule86
(68,825 posts)After she became the candidate...there is a different agreement.
Eko
(7,423 posts)That could have been the director for the General and they had another for the primary, not really sure just pointing out what you are assuming.
joshcryer
(62,287 posts)"All activities performed under this agreement will be focused exclusively on preparations for the General Election and not the Democratic Primary."
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)....Just as Donna Brazile said,
ismnotwasm
(42,028 posts)Eko
(7,423 posts)Prior to September the DNC Communications Director was Mo Elleithee.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/06/politics/dnc-adds-new-communications-staff/index.html
After September it was Luis Miranda,where she says""I am grateful to DNC Chair Wasserman Schultz for asking me to serve at this historic moment as the American people prepare to elect their next president, said Miranda.".................. "I am proud to join a DNC team that has been critical to those successes, and that is working to elect a president who will keep America moving forward.
https://www.democrats.org/Post/dnc-chair-announces-luis-miranda-as-dnc-communications-director
And then this "I am thrilled to announce these new members of our communications team, said DNC Communications Director Mo Elleithee. With their wealth of communications experience, these new members will help us aggressively take the Democratic message to a wider audience as we work to help elect the 45th President of the United States and other Democrats all across the country in 2016.
http://www.p2016.org/parties/dnc033015pr.html
So that could be entirely true that they hired the Communications Director for the General in 2015 and had a separate primary one.
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)joshcryer
(62,287 posts)virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)the one that Hillary chose.
Response to virtualobserver (Reply #91)
joshcryer This message was self-deleted by its author.
Eko
(7,423 posts)It seem Bernie Sanders signed or was offered the same agreement, the fact that he chose not to use the agreement like Clinton did because he has small donors means he thought that small donors was stronger than the agreement. His choice.
Eko
(7,423 posts)director for the primary, maybe they figured they didnt need one? There is also this,
" Specifically, the DNC agreed to hire a communications director from "one of two candidates previously identified as acceptable to HFA." And while the DNC maintained "the authority to make the final decision" on senior staff in the communications, technology and research departments, the party organization said it would choose "between candidates acceptable to HFA."
The memo stipulates the DNC had to hire a communications director by September 11, 2015, months before the first nominating contests in early 2016.
However, the memo also made clear that the arrangement pertained to only the general election, not the primary season, and it left open the possibility that it would sign similar agreements with other candidates. "
"Still, it clearly allowed the Clinton campaign to influence DNC decisions made during an active primary, even if intended for preparations later.
"Nothing in this agreement shall be construed to violate the DNC's obligation of impartiality and neutrality through the Nominating process. All activities performed under this agreement will be focused exclusively on preparations for the General Election and not the Democratic Primary," the memo states.
"Further we understand you may enter into similar agreements with other candidates," it continues.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/memo-reveals-details-hillary-clinton-dnc-deal-n817411
That seems pretty convincing.
Hamlette
(15,412 posts)I give Amazon my money I expect to have a say over what they send me. How is this a cancer or rigged?
Demsrule86
(68,825 posts)stuff so they kiss up to him...certainly not his fault. In the coming days Ms Brazile will have to admit to the fact she either lied or was mistaken. I am sad...I liked and respected her before this.
Demsrule86
(68,825 posts)face it, a primary was had somebody won because the voters chose this person...and that's all she wrote. Move on past 16. It is over.
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)It reads just as Donna Brazile said
Demsrule86
(68,825 posts)Hillary Clinton, in an effort to entirely turn her focus to the general election, will begin raising money for the general election and Democratic National Convention on Wednesday by filing paperwork on a new joint fundraising agreement with the Democratic Party, according to a spokesman.
The new deal will open up Clinton's general election account, which allows individuals who have already given to Clinton's primary campaign to donate another $2,700 to the campaign, according to Josh Schwerin, a Clinton spokesman. Clinton's campaign will begin soliciting donations for the account Wednesday.
The deal also allows Clinton's donors, even those who have already maxed out to other accounts, to funnel more money to the Democratic Party. According to Federal Election Commission rules, donors can now give $100,200 to the convention account and $100,200 to the DNC's headquarters account, two accounts the Clinton campaign had not raised money for before. Campaign aides see this as an urgent need, too, given that the convention in Philadelphia is only seven weeks away.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/08/politics/hillary-clinton-fundraising-dnc-democratic-national-convention/index.html
Look I get it...I was a Deaniac. It broke my heart when he did not win the nomination. Take the word of someone who has been there...let it go. Let's put our energy into defeating Trump and the evil GOP.
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)The document that I posted was the 2015 document and it confirms what Donna Brazile said.
This attempt to smear Donna Brazile is sickening.
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)275. It isn't just about how effective the cheating was....
but every article that I read indicated that she forwarded MULTIPLE questions.
Plus she initially denied doing it.
Not a good way to build trust.
This attempt to smear Donna Brazile is sickening.
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)Now
I defend her, because I can see that she is speaking the truth
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)Demsrule86
(68,825 posts)Both documents...Brazille mixed them up or did it deliberately...some (not saying you) want to believe it...even though clearly it is not true
https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=9791150
https://deepstatenation.com/primary-error-donna-brazile-mixed-up-two-different-clinton-dnc-agreements/
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)From June 2016:
Hillary Clinton, in an effort to entirely turn her focus to the general election, will begin raising money for the general election and Democratic National Convention on Wednesday by filing paperwork on a new joint fundraising agreement with the Democratic Party, according to a spokesman.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/16/politics/hillary-clinton-campaign-dnc/index.html
Is that clearer?
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)ehrnst
(32,640 posts)and not the primary?
Seriously - Hillary's joint agreement kept the Democratic party that Bernie needed to run a serious campaign.
A thank you is in order to Hillary and the Democratic leadership from Bernie and his supporters.
fleabiscuit
(4,542 posts)Last edited Sat Nov 4, 2017, 03:22 AM - Edit history (1)
BS knew there was little chance that he would get the nomination. Why would he enter into an agreement where money he might raise would just be shared with state Democrats? A career built on bashing everyone on both sides of the isle with virtually nothing of consequence accomplished is coming to an apex. A little extra scratch in a safe place might be hard to resist. And taxes never revealed. But that is just a made up story. Nothing to see here. Right?
lapucelle
(18,410 posts)I wonder why Wikileaks never released this document?
StevieM
(10,500 posts)Most people will never hear the whole story--in other words, that the story is a fraud.
Come to think of it, that is what happened during the fake email scandal. False statements were made by Comey and nobody ever heard the corrections that came later.
lapucelle
(18,410 posts)LenaBaby61
(6,979 posts)THIS ^^^
UNFORTUNATELY
NastyRiffraff
(12,448 posts)How hard is that to understand, Donna? You can light all the candles you want for Bernie, but that memo of understanding had nothing to do with the primary, or to him.
frazzled
(18,402 posts)But didnt want to say it because I hadnt seen the agreement.
The DNC doesnt endorse or fund primary candidates. But once there is a nominee, its all hands on deck.
Shame on Donna Brazile. And shame on anyone ( including senators) who still believes the untruth that the Democratic primary was rigged. And shame on anybody who continues to try to ratchet up division and doubt based on lies.
Thunderbeast
(3,431 posts)Time to come out of the woodwork and admit that this was a false narrative. To save her career, Senator Warren must clarify that she did NOT have all the information needed to make her declaration of a rigged nominating process.
I am guessing that the trolls in Putin's cyber army blew this one up before anyone in the party could challenge the veracity of the narrative. Brazille owes Democrats and Hillary Clinton an apology.
LenaBaby61
(6,979 posts)I have Bernie supporter friends who were calling me yesterday, and they were LIVID, amongst other things telling me that they were MAD as hell and shouldn't have even voted for Hillary in the GE and that they shouldn't have trusted her. IF what happened was the truth, then But you know something, and I don't know why, but I told them to hold their horses because something's not quite right about this whole thing. Just wait a few days to see if this is ALL true. IF it is again, I said oh well, and a pox on Fill in the blank _______________________.
As Ricky Ricardo used to say, "Somebody's (DONNA) got some 'splainin to do."
BannonsLiver
(16,548 posts)They can let loose during the airing of the grievances.
lexington filly
(239 posts)all the doings about the election that ended a year ago, the resentments, disappointments, hatefulness and put the ashes aboard the next mission to the space station, then launch it all into deep space and focus on being a united Democratic Party???
Please?
Tarheel_Dem
(31,257 posts)Hamlette
(15,412 posts)I'm in the minority I'm sure but I've never been a fan of Warren. If this is the agreement (we'll need to hear from Donna) then she put her foot in it.
LenaBaby61
(6,979 posts)And at the very least, stepped in it ...
LIZ
USALiberal
(10,877 posts)Demsrule86
(68,825 posts)but I won't vote for her in a primary now...naturally if somehow she made it to the election...she and any Democrat has my vote.
David__77
(23,636 posts)The language on impartiality strikes me as a fog leaf if there was control over personnel decisions as early as 2015.
My gods.
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)I'm enraged and saddened.
boston bean
(36,225 posts)with Hillary.
How unfair tobhave someone so contemptible running the dnc while hillary was the nominee.
JI7
(89,289 posts)Add something that sounds controversial and news media picks it up and her book gets mention.
emulatorloo
(44,274 posts)"Our Revolution" set. So as to get work in the future. Or maybe she really didn't get she confused two different agreements? Dunno.
-Steph-
(409 posts)during the primaries when it was revealed that Donna Brazile had leaked a debate question to the Clinton campaign, unsolicited. Knowing now that Brazile was in the tank for Bernie, it seems very strange to me that during the primaries she would go out of her way to leak a debate question to the Hillary campaign, when she was rooting for Bernie Sanders? Something seems extremely off about that to me. Instead of trying to help Hillary, I've now been wondering if Brazile was deliberately trying to sabotage her by doing what she did.
Demsrule86
(68,825 posts)Amimnoch
(4,558 posts)The Hillary bashing crowd that I've blocked must be out in force. There's a lot of missing post numbers in this thread!
Last post count # I saw was 95, but I'm only seeing maybe 15-20 posts here.
lunamagica
(9,967 posts)Billsmile
(404 posts)"Still, it clearly allowed the Clinton campaign to influence DNC decisions made during an active primary, even if intended for preparations later."
Bleacher Creature
(11,258 posts)I'll give Brazile the benefit of the doubt (which she doesn't deserve) and assume that she wasn't actively trying to hurt the party, but she absolutely knew that she was stretching the truth to sell books. It's a two page document, with the key language easy to spot.
I also agree with others in this thread that she should be booted from the party, and her book needs to be pulled and either cancelled or revised, in each case at her expense.
I'm sure she'll do fine for herself in that she probably just earned a standing invitation to appear on Fox News anytime (and does anyone really believe that CNN won't still have her on?), but if she had any integrity she won't represent the party ever again.
Dawson Leery
(19,348 posts)I hope this does not fuck up the VA Governors race.
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin
(108,485 posts)They're no fun
RandomAccess
(5,210 posts)This paragraph in your linked story:
The agreement supplemented a separate Clinton-DNC standard joint fundraising agreement, which was first reported over a year and a half ago, but gained new attention this week with Braziles book.
which refers to the agreement discussed in this article from Feb 2016:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/democratic-party-fundraising-effort-helps-clinton-find-new-donors-too/2016/02/19/b8535cea-d68f-11e5-b195-2e29a4e13425_story.html
Behind the scenes at the Democratic National Committees summer meeting in Minneapolis last August, campaign officials for Hillary Clinton were making a hard sell to the state parties.
In private huddles, they urged state officials to sign on to an ambitious fundraising endeavor that would allow Clintons presidential bid, the DNC and the state parties to scoop up and share big checks from wealthy donors. It would mark the earliest creation of a joint fundraising committee between a presidential candidate and the party, and it would be the biggest ever, thanks to a 2014 U.S. Supreme Court decision that knocked down a cap on how much donors could give to federal campaigns in a single year.
A record 32 state parties signed on to the fund, allowing the committee to solicit donations 130 times greater than what a supporter can give to Clintons campaign for the primary.
But the states have yet to see a financial windfall. Meanwhile, Clintons campaign has been a major beneficiary, getting an infusion of low-dollar contributions through the committee at a time when rival Bernie Sanderss army of small donors is helping him close in on her financially. The fund is run by Clinton campaign staff, and its treasurer is Clintons chief operating officer.
More at link
Demsrule86
(68,825 posts)RandomAccess
(5,210 posts)why -- in fact HOW -- could the Washington Post be reporting the same thing as Brazille outlined in FEBRUARY 2016 ??
From your link:
Whereas Brazile claimed that Clinton wanted to wield control of [DNC] operations in 2015, she never assumed any such powers until June of 2016,
https://deepstatenation.com/primary-error-donna-brazile-mixed-up-two-different-clinton-dnc-agreements/
And here's my link again, WAPO, Feb 20, 2016 -- way before your June 2016 "agreement."
That's why I said "I think you're overlooking something" (to kpete).
lapucelle
(18,410 posts)The Clinton campaign used that agreement to establish precedent:
"The Clinton campaign points as a model to Al Gores 2000 campaign: well ahead as a front-runner himself long before he was the nominee, Gore also demanded restrictions on DNC spending out of his joint fundraising agreement until his campaign took full control."
Billsmile
(404 posts)"When I was manager of Al Gores campaign in 2000, we started inserting our people into the DNC in June. This victory fund agreement, however, had been signed in August 2015, just four months after Hillary announced her candidacy and nearly a year before she officially had the nomination."
lapucelle
(18,410 posts)Which "Clinton people" were inserted?
Demsrule86
(68,825 posts)joshcryer
(62,287 posts)Which got him a lot of heat back in the late 90s early 2000s.
Seems this meme has reared its ugly head again, only this time, we have social media and a lot of conspiracies.
highplainsdem
(49,124 posts)Demsrule86
(68,825 posts)and will be unhappy when the truth comes out. Hillary should sue the hell out of Brazille.
Persondem
(1,936 posts)MFM008
(19,837 posts)I won't read.
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
MrScorpio
(73,631 posts)Mighty fine poking around there, kpete. Mighty fine.
calimary
(81,608 posts)Next question: will any news outlet cover THIS part of it, or must we always assume that only Hillary Rodham Clinton must always be exempt from the "innocent until proven guilty" fundamental of the American justice system? She alone has to face things the opposite way: "guilty until proven innocent."
FUCK!!!! LEAVE HER THE FUCK ALONE FORCRYINGOUTLOUD!!!!!!!
emulatorloo
(44,274 posts)Politico should run a correction. At the top of the article.
VOX
(22,976 posts)Your good efforts are much appreciated.
Satch59
(1,353 posts)Donna's claim... Toobin in particular was going over the agreement and saying this is nothing: it states the campaign has ability to "participate" in certain things, not run the DNC... Bernie signed it also but didn't give them money. The only naysayer was a Trump advocate and Toobin sarcastically said "your sympathy for Bernie warms my heart"...lol
JHan
(10,173 posts)Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)Guilded Lilly
(5,591 posts)JHan
(10,173 posts)Finally we have some clarity. Smfh
Ilsa
(61,717 posts)Brazile's revelations will give a shit about this news, the actual truth. The whole story will get dumped, I bet, over the weekend, with the stink still on HRC instead of brazile.
58Sunliner
(4,431 posts)I also hope her book tanks.
Catch2.2
(629 posts)BERNIE SANDERS 2020!!!!
George II
(67,782 posts)Gothmog
(145,965 posts)Progressive dog
(6,933 posts)This time apparently to hype a book. Probably the DNC didn't pay Brazile enough so she's getting even and advertising her book.
Nitram
(22,971 posts)INdemo
(6,994 posts)Last edited Mon Nov 6, 2017, 10:08 AM - Edit history (1)
hide her partiality towards Hillary beginning with the Iowa Caucus when she stopped the recount after 64 precincts were recounted revealed that Bernie Sanders actually won the Iowa Caucus.
However Donna Brazile should know by now that regardless of any facts true or otherwise that you can't give the fucking Republicans any thing to build their talking points on. Its like in 2004 with Kerry saying "voted for before he voted against" or Michael Dukakis with his tank photo or Gary Hart with his mistress picture...
Republican strategists are trained to tell lies,repeat those lies till the media repeats them and to build on anything the Democratic Party is feuding about..
Donna must think she can help Republicans win so as to not face higher taxes on her book contract.
Her comments serves no purpose or benefits except for Brazile's ego and book sales