So I agree that it highlights a problem, but not a problem of the DNC literally actively helping Hillary win the primary. I think this paragraph helps highlight the REAL problem:
Howard Dean pointed this out on Twitter too. This agreement you are talking about was entirely about how they were gonna plan the GENERAL election not the presidential primaries so it had nothing to do with the primaries.
Now I know EXACTLY what you are going to say so I'll predict it here: "But this agree was made in 2015 before the first primary votes were even cast."
Yes and that IS a problem but the problem wasn't necessarily one of maliciously trying to sabotage Bernie's campaign. Rather the ACTUAL problem was a general theme that we saw in not just the primary, but also in the general election (from not only democrats but a shitload of non-democrats to be frank):
The Problem of People Just ASSUMING That Hillary was Going to Win
First I'll list out how you saw this shit in the general election:
- Numerous anti-Trump republicans would still refuse to endorse Hillary because they assumed that she would win that they need to run against her later
- Numerous anti-Hillary progressives would keep focusing on attacking Hillary because they assumed she was going to win anyway so they wouldn't have to worry about Trump winning
- Hillary's team didn't have a concession speech planned intact they stupidly had fireworks planned that ended up going to waste
- Trump's team was expecting Hillary to win that's why you had all the signs of Trump planning to launch Trump TV and talking about "Rigged Elections" as though he had already lost
- Media loved covering nothing burger Hillary scandals (like the AP story about Clinton Foundation donors that turned out to be fucking nothing) because it got them views and they assumed that Hillary was going to win anyway
Now lets list out all the ways that the DNC and Democrats (and others) let their "Well Hillary's going to win the primary anyway" attitude cause them to make decisions:
- The agreement about the general you just mentioned that was signed an entire year before it needed to be signed
- numerous people who would have otherwise run in the Democratic Presidential primaries chose not to at least in part because they assumed "well Hillary's going to win anyway"
- the complete lack of debates compared to 2008, because if you think the winner has already won, then you think the debates are a waste of ad money
- the Media chose they didn't give a shit about any of Hillary's challengers because hey Hillary's going to win the primary anyway, right?
- the numerous superdelegates that didn't even wait until endorsing Hillary because they figured it didn't matter because Hillary was going to win anyway
Does that make sense?
Seth Rich's family has made it VERY clear they hate the pro-wikileaks angle about Seth Rich's murder, but maybe instead have suspicions like Donna has about Kremlin connected people having murdered Seth Rich. That would mean they are still staunchly pro-Democrat.
100%
Um what is your source for the bolded? The memo from HFA dictates no such thing.
Im sorry but what? Not know to ask? Is his campaign run by teenagers or something?
If you are going to enter an agreement to fund an organization and you know your biggest competition will be or has already entered into a similar agreement to do the same it is your responsibility to know the terms, whatever they may be, of your opponent before you fork over one red cent of your money. I mean this is elementary. I not sure what their previous financial standing is supposed to mean but Bernie is 100% at fault for not asking the terms the DNC agreed with Clinton on, point blank.
For the bolded -
1) We know that Clinton's team sent the MoU per the memo itself (From Mook to Dacey). So it's being written from that perspective.
2) Line near the end -"Further we (Clinton) understand you (DNC) may enter into similar agreements (NOT the JFA, which you keep continuously referring to, but a "we straight out pay your bills and you give us control" agreement, which is separate and completely different and something that is not coming through to you) with other candidates (Sanders). So the Clinton team is saying "hey DNC, we understand you might enter similar agreements with other candidates". Which..means that the DNC would have to tell Sanders, since
this agreement is not a standard agreement. It is not the agreement Dean is talking about.
Once again, I reiterate -
almost no one knew about this agreement. Brazile didn't even know about this agreement. That's stated in the book and disputed by no one. This is not the Joint Fundraising Agreement, which is what Sanders had been led to believe was the agreement. Because if you read the memo carefully, you see the next line. "The attached Joint Fundraising Agreement will be entered into by HFA and the DNC (as well as by State Parties). So when Sanders asks "what agreement does the Clinton camp have with you, DNC?", the DNC's response is "See this attached Joint Fundraising Agreement", which has no indication of the other agreement involved. This idea that Sanders has a magic 8 ball saying "hey, there's this other agreement on top of the normal agreement that Clinton signed that you should ask about" is ludicrous. Or put it this way - neither Clinton nor Obama had a similar agreement in 2008.
Sanders asked the DNC about any agreements that Clinton signed. DNC gave him the boilerplate answer (probably because the person being asked may not have even known about the agreement Clinton and the DNC had done). The Joint Fundraising Agreement
is not an agreement to keep the lights on at the DNC. I think you are conflating the two again. They are completely different. Clinton not only agreed to fundraise with the DNC, but was asked to pay their bills at that moment, and that was a second, completely different, non-standard agreement that everyone has admitted was kept in the dark for the most part. Because why else would it automatically be reviewed in March 2016, before the primary was over?
The family had to publically beg hannity to leave their dead son and family alone and to stop talking about them.
You think they want to do it all over again?
If they honestly consider Brazile a friend, I'd imagine they could tell Brazile "hey, please don't bring up Seth", and I'd like to think someone they spoke of in that way would be "ok, I won't do that". But I might be giving Brazile too much credit.
