- The American Conservative - https://www.theamericanconservative.com -

Yeah, Crooked Hillary

This is a pretty incredible piece by ex-DNC head Donna Brazile, describing how Hillary Clinton’s campaign took over the Democratic Party apparatus and screwed over Bernie Sanders by rigging its finances. [1] Excerpts:

I wanted to believe Hillary, who made campaign finance reform part of her platform, but I had made this pledge to Bernie and did not want to disappoint him. I kept asking the party lawyers and the DNC staff to show me the agreements that the party had made for sharing the money they raised, but there was a lot of shuffling of feet and looking the other way.

When I got back from a vacation in Martha’s Vineyard I at last found the document that described it all: the Joint Fund-Raising Agreement between the DNC, the Hillary Victory Fund, and Hillary for America.

The agreement—signed by Amy Dacey, the former CEO of the DNC, and Robby Mook with a copy to Marc Elias—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.

I had been wondering why it was that I couldn’t write a press release without passing it by Brooklyn [HRC’s campaign HQ — RD]. Well, here was the answer.

More:

I told Bernie I had found Hillary’s Joint Fundraising Agreement. I explained that the cancer was that she had exerted this control of the party long before she became its nominee. Had I known this, I never would have accepted the interim chair position, but here we were with only weeks before the election.

Bernie took this stoically. He did not yell or express outrage. Instead he asked me what I thought Hillary’s chances were. The polls were unanimous in her winning but what, he wanted to know, was my own assessment?

change_me

I had to be frank with him. I did not trust the polls, I said. I told him I had visited states around the country and I found a lack of enthusiasm for her everywhere. I was concerned about the Obama coalition and about millennials.

Aaaaaand … that worked out well for the Democrats.

Read the whole thing. [1] If I were a Democrat, I would be apoplectic at the Clintons and what they represent. I don’t know that Bernie is young enough to win the nomination in 2020, and if not, I guarantee you a Bernie-style “drain the swamp” Democrat is going to.

164 Comments (Open | Close)

164 Comments To "Yeah, Crooked Hillary"

#1 Comment By VikingLS On November 4, 2017 @ 4:21 pm

MM

So you’re not suggesting some sort of Operation Chaos attempt at sabotage, but that many of the primary voters registered to vote for Trump because they supported him?

#2 Comment By VikingLS On November 4, 2017 @ 5:27 pm

@KenT

Look, if you wanted your point to be so clear why did you frame with a dig at Republicans that any actual Republicans would either find offensive or laughable?

You can troll us or you can talk to us. NOT both.

Grow up.

#3 Comment By Siarlys Jenkins On November 4, 2017 @ 8:31 pm

How many states have open primaries?”

Depends on what the state party allows.

In Wisconsin, at least, it depends on what state law requires. The party be damned. There is no party registration. There is a process in scanning ballots that rejects any primary ballot with votes in primary races for more than one party.

It was really incumbent on one of the other candidates to beat Trump.

Trump built his momentum by winning a 30 percent of so plurality in a crowded primary field. Its one of the weaknesses of “first past the post.”

I think you forgot a little war that was protested by millions of Liberals, that was kicked off by a pile of lies, that was supported by most conservatives

You refer to the war Hillary voted for, and warned John Kerry that if he wanted to run for president he should have voted for it too?

What mia6 said. Its all true.

#4 Comment By Alex (the one that likes Ike) On November 4, 2017 @ 10:03 pm

muad’dib,

I think you forgot a little war that was protested by millions of Liberals, that was kicked off by a pile of lies, that was supported by most conservatives (including our host, would not want to be seen agreeing with Dirty F***ing Hippies), that was started by a Republican Administration led by Bush Jr. & Cheney. Syria is a knock-off effect of that little war.

So let’s not rewrite history here…

Let’s not. As the second part of my statement you’ve deliberately omitted obviously suggested, I referred to Libya. To both late Dubya’s and early Obama’s credit, the situation in Iraq was more or less pacified (of course that mess shouldn’t have been created in the first place; Saddam should have remained where he had been). But then Hillary happened – a secretary of state who hijacked (or, once again, rather joyridden) her president’s foreign policy and provoked so-called “Arab Springs”, the most disastrous of which, the aforementioned Libya, created a battleground to train, a weapon market to equip and an oil well to fund the terrorist groups that rekindled the Iraqi wildfire and spread it to Syria.

So let’s not rewrite the history indeed. It’s way too recent to forget how it really was.

#5 Comment By Ken T On November 5, 2017 @ 11:02 am

You can troll us or you can talk to us. NOT both.

Viking, I honestly have no idea what you are talking about. I thought I was poking a bit of fun at my fellow Democrats. I really don’t understand how you found that offensive.

#6 Comment By VikingLS On November 5, 2017 @ 7:25 pm

“And you Republicans have always sat there on the outside looking in, and laughing, and thinking that your way was so superior. And yet, we won a lot of elections for a lot of years. We have only really started losing across the board in the last two decades – since the Clinton/Third Way/DLC faction took over and started trying to impose GOP-style discipline on the party. ”

Let’s see, you portray the GOP as sneering snobs, bound by groupthink, and that the reason you started losing elections was because your leadership forced our leadership on you.

You honestly don’t see how that’s offensive to a Republican?

Honestly?

I do not believe you.

It’s also a ridiculous portrayal of the Republican party. A party that can house both Ron Paul and John MCcCain for decades is not a party bound by group think. If anything it’s a party that doesn’t really know what it stands for other than TALKING about cutting government, (which for Republicans tends to be cutting social services while spending more on defense and law enforcement.)

BTW did you see what I just did? I criticized my own party without having to get a dig in at Democrats.

That’s how you avoid group think.

#7 Comment By VikingLS On November 5, 2017 @ 7:32 pm

THat should be “forced our leadership style” on you.

#8 Comment By Ken T On November 6, 2017 @ 10:24 am

Viking, I’ll freely admit that there is some implied criticism of the GOP there. But it’s pretty mild compared to what all of the Trump supporters here write regularly (not to mention the ridiculously over-the-top things that get said here daily about the Dems). AND I was clearly stating that I was applying the same criticism to the leading faction of the Democratic Party. So the bottom line is that you are claiming to take offense at ANY criticism of your party. While still presumably reserving the right to say anything you want to about mine.

#9 Comment By MM On November 6, 2017 @ 10:32 am

Classic Clintonian defense was rolled out over the weekend, by Mr. Mook, aptly named: It depends on what the meaning of the word “rigged” is…

#10 Comment By VikingLS On November 6, 2017 @ 12:39 pm

@Ken T

So I’m offended by any criticism of my party after I criticized it myself? How does that work?

What you’re objecting to is criticism of your post. What I am telling you is that if you attack Republicans you need to anticipate some criticism in response, instead you keep insisting the real problem is we didn’t understand you.

Sorry, I dated that girl already.

#11 Comment By MM On November 6, 2017 @ 1:57 pm

I understand by Bernie has remained silent on this. He has to appear magnanimous, despite being torpedoed by the Clinton campaign/DNC (a distinction without a difference), as the only candidate who ran last year who probably could’ve have beaten Trump in the general election.

And I understand why Clinton supporters want to bury this issue. Any kind of “truth and reconciliation” commission for the Democratic party would only uncover more buried bodies, financial corruption, and dirty dealing.

But this is how political parties trying to hold on to executive power work, so I completely understand…

#12 Comment By Ken T On November 6, 2017 @ 2:08 pm

Viking –
So I’m offended by any criticism of my party after I criticized it myself? How does that work?
You tell me – you’re the one who said you were offended by my criticism.

Go ahead and criticize the content of my post all you want – I won’t be offended. But you came back with an ad hominem attack against me. (Do the words “Grow up” ring a bell?)

And I NEVER said that the real problem is we didn’t understand you. I saw several comments (not only yours) that apparently missed the point that I was criticizing the DEMOCRATIC Party, not just the GOP. So I posted a clarification of that point. Which had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with your LATER post attacking me, personally, for “offending” you by criticizing the GOP.

#13 Comment By Alex (the one that likes Ike) On November 6, 2017 @ 10:55 pm

Ken T,

But it’s pretty mild compared to what all of the Trump supporters here write regularly (not to mention the ridiculously over-the-top things that get said here daily about the Dems).

Specifically?

Let’s take my comment about Clinton having joyridden Obama’s foreign policy as an example. Not only it’s not over the top, it actually absolves the 44th from the usual accusation that he had a bad foreign policy, since it obviously implies that I don’t think it was his. At the same time, it is no allusion that he was a weak politician, since the practice of hijacking some aspects of the national policy from a superior outsider is relatively common. The only difference is that Clinton’s predecessors had been hijacking it with some specific purpose, while she was joyriding. But these are her glitches, not Obama’s.

#14 Comment By VikingLS On November 6, 2017 @ 11:34 pm

KenT

Reread my last two posts. I already addressed your points. I told you to grow up because I thought the way you were responding was immature and rather dishonest.

I suspect Rod is getting tired of this exchange, so I am going to leave it at that.