Was Democratic Nomination rigged for Clinton against Sanders?

By Jake Johnson, staff writer | ( Commondreams.org) | – –

Former interim chair of the DNC Donna Brazile highlights the agreement that effectively gave the Clinton team full control of the organization as early as 2015.

In an explosive and “deeply disturbing” piece for Politico Magazine on Thursday, former interim chair of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) Donna Brazile drew upon her brief experience at the organization’s helm to reveal the extent to which the 2016 nomination process was “rigged” in favor of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

In her account, Brazile details the deep “internal corruption” of the DNC, the role the ostensibly neutral governing body played as a “fundraising clearing house” for the Clinton team, and how those dynamics unfairly handicapped primary challenger Bernie Sanders.

Many of the DNC’s most deeply embedded issues, Brazile notes, spring both from former chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s poor management and former President Barack Obama’s neglect, which left the committee deeply in debt.

In August 2015, the Clinton campaign—along with the joint fundraising vehicle with the DNC, the Hillary Victory Fund—came to an agreement with the committee to begin to pay off this debt, which had soared to $24 million. In exchange, the DNC’s finances were placed “fully under the control” of the Clinton team, “which seemed to confirm the suspicions of the Bernie camp,” Brazile writes.

“When the party chooses the nominee, the custom is that the candidate’s team starts to exercise more control over the party,” Brazile observed. “This victory fund agreement, however, had been signed…just four months after Hillary announced her candidacy and nearly a year before she officially had the nomination.”

Brazile goes on to describe the terms of the agreement, which she describes as “unethical”:

The agreement…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.

Brazile concludes the piece, which is an adapted excerpt from her forthcoming book, by detailing a conversation she had with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) shortly after she found the “cancer” at the heart of the DNC—this so-called “Joint Fundraising Agreement.”

“How much control Brooklyn had and for how long was still something I had been trying to uncover for the last few weeks. By September 7, the day I called Bernie, I had found my proof and it broke my heart,” Brazile writes. “I explained that the cancer was that she had exerted this control of the party long before she became its nominee….Bernie took this stoically. He did not yell or express outrage. Instead he asked me what I thought Hillary’s chances were.”

Unsurprisingly, Brazile’s account immediately caught fire on social media, provoking a mixture of outrage and vindication—particularly given that it comes from a “stalwart” establishment insider who admitted to passing debate topics to the Clinton team during her time as a CNN contributor.

“Shame on the DNC, on Hillary Clinton, and every Democratic operative responsible for this bullshit. What a mess,” The Intercept’s Shaun King wrote on Twitter.

“Since the election, it is not clear that the DNC has dealt with these problems yet,” writes Clio Chang of Splinter News, building on King’s point. “Tom Perez was installed as DNC chair over Keith Ellison, a move that was largely seen as giving Democratic elites more control over the party….The DNC is not doomed to repeat the problems of the past, but from Brazile’s account, it’s clear that the organization requires a major reckoning.”

Via Commondreams.org

———

Related video added by Juan Cole:

TYT: “BOMBSHELL: Donna Brazile Admits DNC Rigged Primary Against Bernie”

Shares 0

14 Responses

  1. This is nonsense. Both campaigns signed a joint fund raising agreement with the DNC. The Clinton campaign gave millions to support the Democratic Party. Sanders campaign apparently didn’t give a dime. As such it didn’t have leverage to influence the use of donated monies. Bernie is not a Democrat, has never been one, didn’t raise money. He somehow forgot that he who pays the piper calls the tune.

    • So rigging the elections is part of party politics. Money (corporate money) is what matters. Damn the people. No wonder Democrats lost 900+ state legislative seats since 2010 and the “who” lost to a buffoon.

  2. I do not see what the big whoop on this new book is. Everybody knew that the DNC favored Hillary, just as the RNC did not favor Trump. I fail to see a single primary or caucus (most of the latter going for Bernie) changing their outcome in the nomination fight if the DNC had been neutral. Can anybody name one, and if there is one, would it have swung the outcome, which had Hillary winning it even without the superdelegates where she had a massive edge? And note, I say this as somebody who voted for Bernie in the primary in my state.

  3. As Democrats, we all need to dedicate our time and energy to fighting one another tooth and nail while the Republican Party goes increasingly off the rails and the country is in the hands of its delusional con man. That’s nothing in comparison to the awful possibility that our own party might have a couple of slightly-differing liberal factions. Perspective, people!!

    • Each side is so sure that Trump will collapse that they’re already fighting over the spoils, represented by who gets to own the label of the opposition party.

      This is very dangerous, another reminder of the failure of Germans to unite against Hitler.

      Both sides must understand that they can’t win elections without the other. The neoliberals can’t believe that the leftists will walk away and allow the Fourth Reich, while the leftists utterly refuse to accept that Clinton has any real supporters, many non-White; that the whole lot of them are the actual Nazis. It’s mind-boggling.

  4. There also seems to be a lot of confusion over the 2015 JFAs that were offered to both campaigns (according to Tom Perez – and he claims they were identical) and the 2016 JFA after Clinton had locked up the nomination – at which point normal procedure is for the nominee to take control of the party apparatus.

  5. I might add that I think Donna Brazile is creating some unfortunate damage with the timing of this book release just prior to the elections coming up this week. There is a very close race for governor in Virginia where I live, where the GOP candidate has been gaining on the basis of an absolutely horrendous bombardment of phony ads. And here comes Brazile with her Dems are corrupt book, even though it proves very little we did not already know. She should have waited for a couple of weeks to release it.

  6. The American people need to abandon the corrupt two major parties and start looking for alternatives. Otherwise America will continue down this destructive path where corporate and militarist interests ‘trump’ all Yes, pun intended!) Bernie didn’t have a chance and any similar independent candidate will suffer a similar fate!

  7. The unnecessarily officious revelation of a procedural squabble within the DNC doesn’t mean anything.

    Except to FAUXNews and their herd of “lock her, up” Clinton gynophobes.

  8. This is just providing the contractual details to what everybody already knew. Of course the DNC — i.e. “the establishment” — favored Hillary. That’s why she was called the Establishment candidate, and Bernie was the Insurgent. The only rigging was in the superdelegates — Bernie was spotting her over 400 votes — but everyone knew that, too, and that rigging has been in place for 40 years. It’s just usually not so one-sided. So yeah, the DNC did whatever they could within the rules to help Hillary. So what? Being the ineffectual organization it is and being under the leadership of the ineffectual Debbie Wasserman-Schulz, their help was of no significance one way or the other. Hillary won and would’ve won anyway.

  9. “Everyone” thought Trump could never b elected. Now “everyone” thinks Trump won’t complete his 1st term.
    “Somebody” told Donna she could make her $1M with a book.
    “Everybody” is wrong (again) and “somebody” is right.

  10. Meanwhile Pruitt and Zinke r doing all they can to destroy the human habitat and Trump is running around the world selling American weapons of mass destruction.
    Can I get an “Amen!” ?

Comments are closed.