Disgraced Wasserman Schultz Resigns as DNC Chair, Gets Hired by Clinton

By TeleSur | – –

Her resignation came hours after Bernie Sanders called on her to step down after emails showed how biased she was against his campaign.

The chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, resigned Sunday just two days after thousands of party emails were leaked and was immediately hired by Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton.

Clinton unapologetically issued a statement praising “longtime friend” Wasserman Schultz and said she would serve as a surrogate for her campaign.

“There’s simply no one better at taking the fight to the Republicans than Debbie–which is why I am glad that she has agreed to serve as honorary chair of my campaign’s 50-state program to gain ground and elect Democrats in every part of the country,” she said.

Florida congresswoman Wasserman Schultz said in a statement, “I’ve been proud to serve as the first woman nominated by a sitting president as chair of the Democratic National Committee.

“I couldn’t be more excited that Democrats are nominating our first woman presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton, a friend I have always believed in and know will be a great President.”

Donna Brazile, DNC Vice Chair, will serve as interim chair from DNC through the election in November.

Her announcement came just hours after Bernie Sanders, who had long accused her of bias during his long primary campaign against Clinton, repeated a call for her departure.

In a statement, Sanders said, “Debbie Wasserman Schultz has made the right decision for the future of the Democratic Party … the party leadership must … always remain impartial in the presidential nominating process, something which did not occur in the 2016 race.”

According to the DNC emails leaked by Wikileaks Friday Wasserman Schultz and her staff shared their exasperation with Sanders, making jokes about him and calling him ”stupid” and a “mess”.

President Barack Obama, who also seemed to favor Clinton from the beginning, said he was “grateful” for Wasserman Schultz’s leadership on the Democratic National Committee.

In a statement Sunday, Obama said the Florida congresswoman “had my back,” particularly during his 2012 reelection campaign.

The latest developments dealt a major blow to the Democratic party which was keen on projecting stability in contrast to the volatility of Republican candidate Donald Trump, who was formally nominated last week, and overshadowed preparations in Philadelphia for Clinton’s coronation as the Democratic nominee to face Trump in the Nov. 8 presidential election.

Via TeleSur

Related video added by Juan Cole:

CBS: ” Debbie Wasserman Schultz to resign”

20 Responses

  1. Dear Professor Cole

    So “Crooked Hillary” lives up to her name

    The world watches in contempt

    An auction would have been more appropriate than an election this year.

  2. Looks like Debbie had her Wasserman handed to her; meanwhile, back at the ranch, Hillary’s Rodham is noticeably limp.

  3. Naming Schultz as an “honorary chair” will only inflame Sanders supporters at a time when Clinton badly needs them to win in November. An unbelievably bad move.

    Almost as bad as Melania Trump plagiarizing Michelle Obama’s speech word-for-word. If you are going to plagiarize a speech, at least let it be a fellow Republican – like possibly Laura Bush. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

    No wonder the Libertarian nominee Gary Johnson is expected to receive a tenfold increase in votes this presidential cycle over the party’s nominee in 2012 – it’s hard to believe how bad the major parties have damaged their standing among the electorate this year.

    • But Johnson has no chance of winning, does he ? It’ll only be a matter of which candidate’s vote-share he cuts into the most.

      This sort of thing can have very strange repercussions in FPTP systems.

  4. Another one who fails upward on the corporate ladder. Really, she did her job very well and it must have been hard on her and her family, taking flak for Clinton.
    And so she is rewarded according to plan.
    Can anyone be surprised? These operatives and operations have become so transparent.
    And America is left with a choice of two completely unacceptable “Major Party” options.
    What a shame for American women that the first woman to be nominated by the Democrats can only win because her opponent is unthinkable; yes, when there are other women who would far better represent the Democratic Party.

    • What a shame for us that the first woman to win a nomination is a worst-case example of ‘affirmative action’ – an incompetent Secretary of State who rose on her husband’s coattails.

  5. Debbie Wasserman Schultz was an agent working for Hillary Clinton’s election. Secretary Clinton should accept responsibility and resign her nomination in favour of Bernie Sanders who seems to be in a stronger position to beat Donald Trump in the election.

  6. She has the same job Eva Longoria had in 2012. It’s an empty title meant to show that Clinton isn’t kicking her to the curb.

  7. She did not get hired by Clinton and nothing Clinton did can be construed as such. She was given an “honorary chair” position which is tantamount to nothing. No pay. No power..nothing.

    • Because you always want to honor someone who acted so unethically she had to resign by making her the honorary chair of your campaign.

      • I am not happy with Clinton’s giving DWS an “honorary chair” position, but from what I can tell the headline’s assertion that Clinton “hired” DWS appears to be misleading and inaccurate.

  8. Excellent. Too late for fairness to Bernie, but at least she has been shown as a monster equal to her “friend”. Who will be impressed by HRC hiring her? What sort of Democrats will she help elect all over the land? Bernie’s movement is to get progressive decent candidates. Wasserman Schultz would not even know anyone like that.

  9. I think the more accurate way to put it is she’s the honorary chairman in charge of trying to save her own sorry butt in Florida.

    By the way, how good a Jew is she, really?

Comments are closed.