Donna puts the blame on HRC and DWS for the DNC debacle

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Clintons and their surrogates have begun spinning this whole sorry saga to minimize the damage.

Wait for endless versions to come out with revisions and corrections and what not. This is their MO - you can't trust anything they say.

Not a Clinton lover, but the articles cited above say that both Clinton and Sanders had the same agreement, but Sanders chose not to use it and didn't raise any money for the cause. Hillary raised hundreds of millions and bailed out the DNS and the state committees financially.

Brazile got her facts wrong, and the hard documentary evidence proves that.

This story is nothing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Clintons and their surrogates have begun spinning this whole sorry saga to minimize the damage.

Wait for endless versions to come out with revisions and corrections and what not. This is their MO - you can't trust anything they say.

Not a Clinton lover, but the articles cited above say that both Clinton and Sanders had the same agreement, but Sanders chose not to use it and didn't raise any money for the cause. Hillary raised hundreds of millions and bailed out the DNS and the state committees financially.

Brazile got her facts wrong, and the hard documentary evidence proves that.

This story is nothing.

Campaign Election Law is one boring read but, extremely straight forward.

[Anonymous]

This was internal to the DNC and its primary process. What federal laws were broken?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This was internal to the DNC and its primary process. What federal laws were broken?

It's not relevant. The problem is the disregard for the party rank-and-file.

[Anonymous]

The Hillary defenders come to the fore ..... is it any wonder they have gotten away with shenanigans all through their political lives?

[Anonymous]

I'll tell you one thing, I'm so disgusted with Donna right now. Why raise this as an issue when the VA gubernatorial race is neck and neck? I'm really considering being an Independent.

[Anonymous]

I have a lingering question for the outraged Bernie supporters. Why didn't he run as an Independent? If he was popular enough to defeat Hillary, and win the presidency, why didn't he? Also, I'm still trying to figure out how these shenanigans actually affected him. As far as I know, he appeared on the ballot in all 50 states. There was no barrier to voting for him, was there? In my state I know I could have chosen him. I made a different choice.

[Anonymous]

Is Donna's book out? I want to see it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have a lingering question for the outraged Bernie supporters. Why didn't he run as an Independent? If he was popular enough to defeat Hillary, and win the presidency, why didn't he? Also, I'm still trying to figure out how these shenanigans actually affected him. As far as I know, he appeared on the ballot in all 50 states. There was no barrier to voting for him, was there? In my state I know I could have chosen him. I made a different choice.

He won many states where Hillary paid for the primaries and caucuses. If it were rigged, wouldn't she have won the needed delegates much earlier?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was internal to the DNC and its primary process. What federal laws were broken?

It's not relevant. The problem is the disregard for the party rank-and-file.

Actually, the federal election laws regarding “earmarking funds” specifically for one candidate before the primary are clear. Not sure why that is not relevant. I saw two laws arguably within the first 30 min. of reading.

It is interesting that Mook was interviewed by Anderson Cooper threw shade on their attorney feigning they had no idea the lawyer was funding a foreign national. Once I heard that, I figure others will eagerly defend their attorney/friend.

Now, this is a what a circular firing quad looks like.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was internal to the DNC and its primary process. What federal laws were broken?

It's not relevant. The problem is the disregard for the party rank-and-file.

Actually, the federal election laws regarding “earmarking funds” specifically for one candidate before the primary are clear. Not sure why that is not relevant. I saw two laws arguably within the first 30 min. of reading.

It is interesting that Mook was interviewed by Anderson Cooper threw shade on their attorney feigning they had no idea the lawyer was funding a foreign national. Once I heard that, I figure others will eagerly defend their attorney/friend.

Now, this is a what a circular firing quad looks like.

+1

Thanks for sharing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have a lingering question for the outraged Bernie supporters. Why didn't he run as an Independent? If he was popular enough to defeat Hillary, and win the presidency, why didn't he? Also, I'm still trying to figure out how these shenanigans actually affected him. As far as I know, he appeared on the ballot in all 50 states. There was no barrier to voting for him, was there? In my state I know I could have chosen him. I made a different choice.

Because running as an Independent is basically the same as a third party...no established national communication network, no publicized convention, less fundraising potential, etc. Our political system is very unwelcoming to anyone outside of the 2 major parties. After he lost the primary, I'm sure he believed that helping HRC defeat Trump was the lesser evil because running as an Independent would have surely caused them both to lose to Trump.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is Donna's book out? I want to see it.

It's out?

[Anonymous]

Even Pocahontas agrees with Donna. Now that's something.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'll tell you one thing, I'm so disgusted with Donna right now. Why raise this as an issue when the VA gubernatorial race is neck and neck? I'm really considering being an Independent.

Do you mean it would be better to keep things, including the truth, hidden?