Flouting the rules, DNC Finance Chair raises money for Clinton

[cali]

In an apparent violation of party rules requiring Democratic National Committee officers to remain neutral in presidential primaries, the DNC’s finance chairman has been raising money for Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

Henry R. Muñoz III, a former fundraiser for President Barack Obama who became DNC finance chairman in 2013, is helping organize a Wednesday fundraising event for Clinton in San Antonio, Texas, according to longtime Democratic operative Gilberto Ocañas and Bexar County Democratic Party Chairman Manuel Medina.

<snip>

DNC rules, designed to ensure all candidates get a fair shake in presidential primaries, state: “The Chairperson shall be responsible for ensuring that the national officers and staff of the Democratic National Committee maintain impartiality and even-handedness during the Democratic Party Presidential nominating process.”

DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a national co-chair and dogged surrogate for Clinton’s 2008 presidential bid, has long been viewed as on the outs with the Obama White House and closer to Clinton. A spokeswoman for the DNC declined to comment.

Muñoz’s activities could contribute to a perception that the national party is already rushing ahead to promote Clinton as the nominee and prompted swift blowback from a leading adviser to Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, one of Clinton’s rivals for the nomination.

“All parties should follow their own rules,” said Sanders adviser Tad Devine. “It’s very important in the primary process that the DNC not take sides before the voters have made their decision.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/impartial-dnc-finance-chief-helps-hillary-clinton-118558.html#ixzz3bzzD0h2G

[LWolf]

1. What are the consequences

when the DNC violates party rules?

[cali]

2. I highly doubt there will be any- not with DWS as Chair

It's an open secret that the DNC is functionally an arm of the Clinton campaign.

[BeanMusical]

51. It explains a lot of things going on on this site and at another one who's linked to it.

[jwirr]

78. I made it clear that no Democratic committee would get a cent from me if this was not stopped.

Not that they would care about the little I can afford to give.

[bvar22]

103. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz should have been kicked to the curb long ago.

The fact that she wasn't raises a lot of nasty questions about the Party Leadership.

In 2008 Debbie Wasserman Schultz refused to endorse these 3 Democrats
who had won their Primaries and had a chance to win Republican seats:

Miami-Dade Democratic Party Chair Joe Garcia

Former Hialeah Democratic Mayor Raul Martinez

Democratic businesswoman Annette Taddeo

All three had won their local Democratic Primaries, and were challenging Hard Core Republican incumbents with whom Wasserman-Schultz had become cozy.
Not only did the head of the DCCC Red to Blue Program REFUSE to endorse these Democratic challengers,
but she appeared in person at at least one (possibly more) Campaign/Fundraiser for their Republican opponents.



FL-18, FL-21, FL-25: Wasserman Schultz Wants Dem Challengers to Lose
by: James L.
Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 7:15 PM EDT
<snip>

Sensing a shift in the political climate of the traditionally solid-GOP turf of the Miami area, Democrats have lined up three strong challengers -- Miami-Dade Democratic Party chair Joe Garcia, former Hialeah Mayor Raul Martinez, and businesswoman Annette Taddeo to take on Reps. Mario Diaz-Balart, Lincoln Diaz-Balart and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, respectively.

While there is an enormous sense of excitement and optimism surrounding these candidacies, some Democratic lawmakers, including Florida Reps. Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Kendrick Meek, are all too eager to kneecap these Democratic challengers right out of the starting gate in the spirit of "comity" and "bipartisan cooperation" with their Republican colleagues:

But as three Miami Democrats look to unseat three of her South Florida Republican colleagues, Wasserman Schultz is staying on the sidelines. So is Rep. Kendrick Meek, a Miami Democrat and loyal ally to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

This time around, Wasserman Schultz and Meek say their relationships with the Republican incumbents, Reps. Lincoln Diaz-Balart and his brother Mario, and Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, leave them little choice but to sit out the three races.

"At the end of the day, we need a member who isn't going to pull any punches, who isn't going to be hesitant," Wasserman Schultz said.

Now, you'd expect this kind of bullshit from a backbencher like Alcee Hastings, but you wouldn't expect this kind of behavior from the co-chair of the DCCC's Red to Blue program, which is the position that Wasserman Schultz currently holds. Apparently, Debbie did not get Rahm's memo about doing whatever it takes to win:

The national party, enthusiastic about the three Democratic challengers, has not yet selected Red to Blue participants. But Wasserman Schultz has already told the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee that if any of the three make the cut, another Democrat should be assigned to the race.

http://www.swingstateproject.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=1537

The bloggers also are furious with Rep. Kendrick B. Meek (D-Fla.), who similarly refuses to endorse the Democratic challengers to the three Cuban American Republicans.

They are calling for Wasserman Schultz to step down from her leadership role at the DCCC. And they're not letting up, even after one Florida liberal blogger reported that the congresswoman seemed "frustrated" by the blogs and had asked to "please help get them off my back."

This prompted even harsher reaction from perhaps the most influential of the progressive political bloggers, Markos Moulitsas, a.k.a. Kos, founder of Daily Kos, who wrote on his blog Wednesday: "On so many fronts, the Republicans are standing in the way of progress, on Iraq, SCHIP, health care, fiscal responsibility, corruption, civil liberties, and so on. Those three south Florida Republicans are part of that problem. And she's (Wasserman-Schultz) going to be 'frustrated' that people demand she do her job?"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/19/AR2008031903410_3.html

Here are Kos comments on the Wasserman-Schultz betrayal of the Democratic Party:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/03/20/480511/-DCCC-Says-Uproar-Over-DWS-Recusal-Much-Ado-About-Nothing




A lot of time has passed since 2008, but I don't take these kinds of betrayals lightly.

bvar22
Cursed with a memory

"I want to thank Debbie Wasserman-Schultz for being an outstanding chair of our party. (Applause.) She is a great partner."--President Obama

With "partners" like this, we don't need Republicans!

[cui bono]

107. +1

[sabrina 1]

117. Excellent post, thank you. How about a petition to get her to step down if she does not react

appropriately to this violation of trust? It sure reflects very badly on the Dem. Party and shows them to be opposed to the Democratic Process.

[djean111]

3. Probably none. They are pretty arrogant.

I wouldn't give anything connected with Wasserman a damned dime or minute of my time, and replied to that effect the last couple of times I was asked for money. Damned DINO.

[zentrum]

22. Agreed. Never.

I give only to individual candidates and to Act Blue.

[Plucketeer]

50. Same here!

I pick 'n choose who my money goes to. Galls me - those bogus "issues" questionnaires that accompany the money return envelopes. The results of the questions that are posed - you NEVER see anything about where one can go to see the tabulation of all those forms that are returned to the DNC, the DLCC, the DSCC or the DCCC. The reason is - no one CARES what answers a contributor selects! They care not one whit what your "positions" are on various issues. The only position that concerns them is where you bend over and facilitate access to your wallet and other apertures on your backside!

[Jackpine Radical]

82. You want the data?

Sorry, that dumpster went to Recycling 6 months ago. We're all about saving trees.

[Scuba]

4. IOKIYAR

[HereSince1628]

7. Having two distinct ideologies in one Party, requires strong management...

One committee to rule them (aka the candidates) all,
One committee to find them,
One committee to bring them all,
And to Wall Street bind them.

Progressives are for the new dems much like Tolkein's Dunharrow, the Army of the Dead. Fearful, the DNC can't win without us, but they can't live with us. When they get their victory, they hope and expect us to dissolve upon the wind.

[zentrum]

24. That's very good! Perfect. n/t

[BeanMusical]

52. I wonder how they could change a light-bulb.

[Flying Squirrel]

93. Love it.. N/t

[hughee99]

11. Yes, damn republicans are allowed to break DNC

Rules with impunity!

[Jackpine Radical]

84. I can't tell from your response

whether you tracked Scuba's point or not.

[hughee99]

94. A little of both...

The RNC has it's rules and the DNC has theirs. In the past, people from both parties have broken rules and everyone choses sides based on political advantage. Someone we like did it in our party? No big deal. Someone in the OTHER party we don't like benefited from it? It's a big deal.

In the end, it was more a play on the "IOKIYAR" applying to DNC rules.

[Jackpine Radical]

95. A rule violation by the Republican wing

of the Democratic Party.

Ergo IOK…

[hughee99]

97. Ah. No I didn't get that.

Far more cleaver than I thought I was being.

[Jackpine Radical]

100. I just happen to know how Scuba thinks.

[SusanCalvin]

108. Ouch.

I started to put a rofl smiley, but, on reflecrion, it's not funny. Just true.

[fredamae]

101. I agree, likely None

because the Rules only apply to folks like "us"...not "them".
IOKIFYRD?

[tularetom]

5. What genius decided Loserman Schitz should become DNC chair?

[zeemike]

15. You would be surprised how you can win when you lose.

She lost both houses of congress but not her job...it is not based on winning.

[KingCharlemagne]

20. Rahm lost us the House in 2010 and he was punished by getting the

Mayoralty of Chicago.

Wolfowitz lost Iraq but was punished with the World Bank.

With punishments like that, who needs rewards?

[nil desperandum]

30. ^^ Spot on

[wyldwolf]

44. Rahm was Obama's Chief of Staff in 2010. He wasn't a part of the DCCC

had nada to do with the 2010 midterms.

[KingCharlemagne]

45. Oh, puh-leeze. "Nada". Why did Rahm tell progressives their ambitions were

'retarded' when they proposed primarying Blue Dogs, if he had 'nada' to do with the mid-terms?

[wyldwolf]

46. The White House Chief of Staff has ZERO to do with mid-term elections.

Saying he or she does is misleading. And you must believe he has immense power to make a statement in January that makes Democrats lose the house in November.

[KingCharlemagne]

49. Un-hunh. So those progressives must have been really 'retarded' after all (in the non-Pc

manner of speaking) to be talking with Rahm about it at all.

Because Rahm was just a witless powerless nobody in the 2010 debacle. Righteo.

[BeanMusical]

54. +1

[wyldwolf]

59. You don't have a clear memory of this event, obviously.

Is your contention Rahm depressed the progressive vote by calling liberal activists 'retard?' It must be, because he wasn't running the DCCC in 2010 (or August 2009 when he made the comment.) But I do find it amazing you think he has that much power.

You also contend the comment was made when 'progressives' were threatening to primary centrist incumbents. Again, not true. The statement was said to 'progressive' groups, not candidates. These 'progressive' groups were planning to air ads attacking Democrats for failing to support the ACA.

At the end of the day, you're saying Rahm hurt their feelings to the point they decided not to vote? Not to be active? Are you saying 'progressives' sat out the midterms to punish Obama's chief of staff? Sure sounds like it.

It might be a good idea to stay away from creative speculations and actually follow the news. I realize it's easier to blame a boogyman but just in case:

Why Did So Many Democrats Lose? Some Districts Were Never a Good Fit?
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/why-did-so-many-democrats-lose-some-districts-were-never-a-good-fit/

Why Democrats Lost the House to Republicans
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/why-democrats-lost-the-house-to-republicans/

[KingCharlemagne]

70. My memory is that progressive activists approached Rahm to ask about the

advisability of running progressive primary challengers against Blue Dog incumbents. Rahm told them said strategy was 'retarded'. In the 2010 elections, progressive incumbents held their seats just fine, as progressives turned out to re-elect progressive incumbents. Blue Dog incumbents, by contrast, went down in flames to Tea Party challengers. So Rahm's advice helped lose the House for Dems. Because we'll never know how those districts would have gone had Dems run a Progressive against a TP loon. But give the people a choice between a Repig and a Repig wearing the Democratic label and, as Harry S. Truman noted, the people will pick the genuine Repig every time.

Rahm's strategic approach was an EPIC FAIL. You can call this 'creative speculation' all you want, but Rahm's strategy helped lose the House for Dems in 2010. But in America there are no real consequences for such a strategic failure. In fact, it was almost as if nothing had happened at all.

Ab-so-lutely friggin' incredible.

[wyldwolf]

73. Then you're memory is wrong

My memory is that progressive activists approached Rahm to ask about the advisability of running progressive primary challengers against Blue Dog incumbents.

vs.

Mr. Emanuel showed up at a weekly strategy session featuring liberal groups and White House aides. Some attendees said they were planning to air ads attacking conservative Democrats who were balking at Mr. Obama's health-care overhaul.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703808904575025030384695158

And...

Emanuel was quoted in the Journal last week making the comment during an August meeting with some liberal activists who were threatening to run TV ads against conservative Democrats hesitant to embrace President Obama's approach to health care reform.

http://abcnews.go.com/WN/rahm-emanuel-retarded-comment-puts-offensiveness-spotlight/story?id=9738134

And...

Most amusing to me was the fact that he finally got the goods about Rahm’s famous Veal Pen tirade, when Rahm showed up at the Common Purpose meeting and lambasted the liberal interest groups because MoveOn was running radio ads against Blue Dogs.

http://firedoglake.com/2010/01/26/rahm-emanuel-liberals-are-f-king-retarded/

See, dude? NO PRIMARY CHALLENGES WERE DISCUSSED.

Rahm's strategic approach was an EPIC FAIL.

Rahm had no strategic approach because he wasn't running the DCCC. If you know of his strategic approach, post a link.

In the 2010 elections, progressive incumbents held their seats just fine,

Because they were in safe districts.

More than half of the GOP pickups in the House came in just two district types: the 56 Booming Growth districts and the 52 Christian Conservative districts. The Republicans captured 31 seats in those districts so far — not all results are final yet... Gains the GOP made in other types of districts are much more in line with what one might expect to see in a midterm election.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/why-did-so-many-democrats-lose-some-districts-were-never-a-good-fit/

[Jackpine Radical]

85. And the hand is not responsible

for the actions of the fingers.

[bvar22]

120. Rahm WAS the Chairman of the DCCC from 2003 - 2006.

He had plenty of time to plant little Rahmettes that are still with the DCCC.

[wyldwolf]

121. zzzzzzzz

Yawn.

[d_legendary1]

47. That explains why I have to deal with Scott for another four years

Charlie Crist? Really? Let's bring back lame former republicans since its the DNC way.

[Scuba]

81. Our Scott here in Wisconsin was "challenged" by the Party's hand-picked, pre-anointed candidate ...

... Mary Burke. Burke's progressive "credentials" were anchored by her vote against the teacher's union, personally donating to charter schools, offshoring Wisconsin jobs to China and praising Scott Walker's union-busting Act 10.

When she got crushed it was blamed on us progressives for low turnout.

[JI7]

86. they don't have primary elections for governor ?

[Scuba]

88. Sure, but when Party leaders pick and back someone long before the first primary, it's all but over.

[bvar22]

118. When you are a member of "The Club",

...you fail upwards.

[tularetom]

119. I wouldn't know, I hear it's a big club but I ain't in it

Normally I'm a firm believer in the Groucho Marx theory of club membership ("I wouldn't want to join any club that would have me as a member&quot but I'd make an exception for that one.

[daleanime]

6. ......

[peacebird]

8. Clearly the DNC finance chair should be removed from his place as a DNC officer.

Not that it matters to the DNC what I think, but i have tweeted and emailed DNC, & DWS. Maybe if they hear from enough people?
Nah.... They only care about the $$$ & the power.

[peacebird]

10. If he's not removed, it begs the question: what does DNC stand for? DNClinton?

[zentrum]

25. DLClinton. n/t

[BeanMusical]

55. Lol, yes, DLC.

[TM99]

9. And some here say I am

hyperbolic when I accurately say that Clinton is surrounded by some unethical, borderline illegal, and inappropriate behavior.

This man should step down so he can support his candidate of choice but not unduly influence the neutrality that the DNC is supposed to (ha ha!) be about with regards to all candidates.

Pisses me off!

[AtomicKitten]

89. +1

[octoberlib]

12. She's on the outs with the Obama White House because he wanted to get rid of her

after the 2012 elections.

[DURHAM D]

26. She serves at the pleasure of the President. nt

[Sherman A1]

13. Well,

this certainly appears to be inappropriate behavior for the post held by this individual.

[Jester Messiah]

14. Shady as ever.

There's a reason why so many people distrust Hillary.

[BeanMusical]

56. "Is it possible to win the White House if more than half the electorate thinks you’re dishonest?"

Hillary Clinton may yet put that question to the test. It’s not the kind of challenge any candidate would relish, but two new polls released on Tuesday underlined the presidential hopeful’s difficulty in persuading the public of her integrity.

Both those polls found Clinton deep underwater when voters were asked whether they viewed her as honest and trustworthy.

An ABC News/Washington Post poll found 52 percent of people answering “no” to that question, compared to 41 percent who expressed trust in Clinton.

A CNN poll made even grimmer reading for the former secretary of State. It found 57 percent of adults asserting that Clinton is not honest or trustworthy, and only 42 percent saying that she is.

I am not a crook!

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/243844-hillary-clintons-honesty-problem

[Jester Messiah]

92. Tricky Hil. [nt]

[OKNancy]

16. left out this part

“For well over a decade, Henry has done all that he can to ensure that all Democrats, up and down the the ticket, are positioned for success, and would do the same for any other candidate,” wrote Muñoz’s personal spokesman, Jon Reinish, in a statement. “However, he has not donated to any campaign personally, made any endorsement or co-hosted any event as the primary process plays out.”

[Fuddnik]

18. Which is bullshit.

I've watched them in Florida congressional elections for over a decade. They come in and undermine progressives by holding big fundraisers for converted Republicans that are running against them IN THE PRIMARIES!!!!

I've seen Weaselman-Schlitz praise Republicans running against Democrats, coming just short of saying "I endorse". When asked about it, she just shrugs and says "They're my friends".

Munoz doesn't have to donate cash personally, when he's bundling millions for a candidate.

Once again, The DNC, DSCC, and the DCCC are preparing to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory!

Viva Wall Street!

[cali]

27. It's truly sleazy and that Hillary supporters are willing and eager to excuse it is

disappointing- but not surprising.

[HooptieWagon]

31. Exactly!

I've seen that shit first hand. In my US Cong district, Fl-13, the state (pretty much run by DWS) and local parties used threats to force a progressive who had filed to withdraw, to clear the path for their pet candidate an ex-republican. Shortly after the filing deadline he then withdraw when it became known he lied extensively about his college record. As a result, there was no democrat on the GE ballot. This is a purple district that a democrat could have won. DWS screwed up big time, she should have been fired long ago. State Party here sucks big time. Many Dems don't bother to vote, because the choices are Republican and Republican Lite.

[cali]

21. would do the same? Has he? no. that's simply trying to weasel out of this

why would anyone try and excuse this unethical behavior?

[OKNancy]

28. has he been asked?

seems to me this is another Politico hit piece on Democrats.

[cali]

32. How do you know HRC asked him

And if she did, she should not have. In fact, this just shouldn't be going on. period. And that you're making desperate excuses for it, is just sad. Of course you think it's a right wing hit piece. Whether it's true or not, seems to be completely irrelevant.

[Fuddnik]

36. "True or not seems to be irrelevant"

BINGO!!!!!

Just circle the wagons......maybe the Indians will leave.

[BeanMusical]

60. +1 Well said.

[rhett o rick]

87. What his spokesman said is pure rhetoric. No facts are included. nm

[Calista241]

17. Anyone feel like they're using Bernie to keep the democratic primary relevant?

[Thespian2]

19. Since the invention

of the DLC (Damned Losing Candidates) and the Turd Way, I have written off the DNC completely. My money will go where it has for years...directly to candidates...

[FlatBaroque]

35. That's the way everyone should do it.

Giving to DNC is like saying "Hey Debbie, here's my hard earned money. I trust you to spend it wisely".

[Fuddnik]

37. And I use their postage paid envelopes to tell them why I'm not donating.

Bernie is getting the lions share of my money, and a couple of other progressive candidates get the rest.

[Thespian2]

48. Yep!

I am with you on donating almost exclusively to Bernie...my voting address is Florida, so you know what that means...can't even trust Nelson...

[WillyT]

23. HUGE K & R !!! - THANK YOU !!!

[KittyWampus]

29. Unsavory, to say the least.

[peecoolyour]

33. Time to resign, Henry. nt

[Divernan]

34. DNC Ad w/ photos of Bernie & HRC, begging for funds

The DNC grifters just get slicker with every passing day.

Here's my OP from yesterday.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251410011

OMG! DNC using picture of Bernie to solicit funds!
The ad popped up on my screen when I was checking out a fracking article. It has a photo of Bernie, with another photo of Hillary slightly behind him. The wording includes the incredible statement, "send a progressive like Hillary or Bernie to the Oval Office."

I'd say they're taking Bernie and the large number of people who have donated to his campaign in such a short time quite seriously! And what a stretch to promote Hillary as a progressive.

Trying to siphon off funds that would be donated to Bernie. I sincerely trust that none of Bernie's supporters on DU are gullible enough to send funds to the Democratic National committee. I stopped doing that years ago - always give directly to candidates at federal, state and local level.

Advertisement

Elect a Democrat to the White House in 2016

It's time to commit to electing a Democratic president in 2016. Add your name to say you're ready to send a progressive like Hillary or Bernie to the Oval Office.

Paid for by the Democratic National Committee. Democrats.org. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.

This was the link on which the ad appeared: http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/08/nuns-bluegrass-pipeline-loretto?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+motherjones%2Fmain+%28MotherJones.com+Main+Article+Feed%29
13

[BeanMusical]

62. DNC using picture of Bernie to solicit funds?

WTF? This is disgusting.

[DFW]

38. Howard, we DO miss you so

I remember how Howard Dean was bending over backwards to stay neutral in the Hillary-Obama duel of 2008. He did a very credible job of it, and no partisanship was attributed to him at all at the time. Obama made a huge mistake be letting Rahm Emmanuel exile Howard from any position in the Obama Administration, although I understand the reasoning behind it--Howard was so competent and reasonable, Rahm would have looked like the petulant hothead he is by comparison and probably have been out on his ass within 3 months if Howard's sane voice had been around to be heard.

If Howard would consider coming back to the DNC, we'd all be a LOT better off. He's in a "been there, done that" mindset now, and wants the freedom to do what he wants to do. I know Howard, so I know not to hold my breath. Besides, he told me that when your party holds the White House, the president is the party head, not the national committee chair. He was right, as usual. I don't care. I still want him back.

[MineralMan]

39. Yet another heavily slanted piece from Politico.com

I just can't take their hit pieces seriously any more. Considering the source is always a good idea.

[cali]

40. lol. Either he's raising money for HRC or he isn't.

No one is denying this story. Trust you to have no problem with this kind of shit.

[MineralMan]

42. Bernie should contact him about arranging a fundraiser.

That's what I think.

[cali]

43. of course you do. Never mind unethical behavior, just expand it!

sorry, you should switch your "support" for Bernie to HRC. She's much more in line with this type of behavior, which has the MM seal of ethical approval!

[MineralMan]

63. I will switch my support to Clinton if she is selected as the nominee.

No question about it. I'll campaign hard for her, just as I have for every Democratic presidential candidate, starting in 1968. In primary elections, I support the candidate who is closest to my views. After the convention, I support the nominee. I am a Democrat, and know that Republican Presidents are harmful to our nation. That's why you will not find me attacking any Democratic candidate during the primary campaign. That's my personal policy.

I can't imagine why you'd have a problem with that, your ROFL smiley notwithstanding.

[cali]

83. you did attack bernie

Your self-righteousness not withstanding

[MineralMan]

90. You keep saying that, but refuse to link to any post where

I have attacked Bernie Sanders. It's time to post a link to my "attack" on him or to stop accusing me of that. I've asked you before when you accused me of attacking Sanders, but you have failed to provide evidence. I have not attacked Sanders. I'm supporting him by caucusing for him in Minnesota. I have stated that I doubt he will be the nominee, but that is an assessment of his chances, not an attack. Similarly, I believe that if he is the nominee, it is likely that we will end up with a Republican President, but that is also an assessment, not an attack. I would vote for him in a second if he were the nominee, but I think he would lose. I still think he best represents my positions and views, though.

Even you have stated many times that you expect Hillary Clinton to be the nominee.

If you'd like, I can post an almost endless link list of actual, name-calling attacks you have made on Hillary Clinton, if that would help. I'll be happy to, if you insist on continuing along these lines. So, post a link or two, or please stop making this accusation.

Thanks for your cooperation.

[cali]

105. Oh, I just kicked it for you.

Your piece of very poor "satire".

[MineralMan]

110. I just saw that.

Nice of you to kick my thread, although it didn't create the humor I expected. It'll sink quickly again, I'm sure.

[BeanMusical]

65. Oh because he's officially supporting Bernie?

Could have fooled me.

[cherokeeprogressive]

57. Or Martin O'Malley should.

[MineralMan]

64. Indeed. If Biden declares, he should too.

The DNC should, and does, encourage all primary candidates. It looks like Lincoln Chafee is about to join in, as well. I'm not that fond of him, but if he runs, I wish him the best of luck.

The voters will decide who will be the nominee in 2016.

[jeff47]

114. Yes, the most appropriate response to unethical behavior is to be more unethical. (nt)

[wyldwolf]

61. And it always brings out the most creative speculations from DU

Upthread someone is claiming we lost the house in 2010 because Rahm said a progressive plan to attack Democratic incumbents was 'retarted.'

The power of the boogyman.

[MineralMan]

66. One of the characteristics of primary discussions on DU

is a sort of loyalty to a particular candidate that causes people to attack other candidates. While it's excellent to support the candidate of your choice, attacking other Democrats is not how to do that. It has a negative effect on turnout in the general election.

[cali]

71. there is no speculation, creative or otherwise. it's a straightforward

story. Trust the Hillary supporters to try and deflect.

[wyldwolf]

74. BS

Rahm Emanuel wasn't head of the DCCC in 2010. To believe the other DUer, and by extension now you, one would have to believe Rahm made progressives pout and stay home.

[cali]

76. huh?

I was referring to the story in the op which is unrelated to whatever squabble you're having about Rahm.

[wyldwolf]

77. then you answered in haste.

Happens to all of us from time to time.

[L0oniX]

41. Msg to progressive democratic socialists: We only want your money and votes. Now STFU.

We got thrown under the bus last time. How many want to experience that again? Oh yea vote for us or you'll get another grease ball for a SCJ. Gotta love that threat. Bernie or die!

[BeanMusical]

67. "We got thrown under the bus last time."

Yeah, some people really have a damn short attention span and a lousy memory.

[MisterP]

79. gee, it's almost like the party's run like a sweatshop

[bunnies]

53. Disgusting. nt

[CrispyQ]

58. Is anyone really surprised?

They've been telling the left to sit down & shut up for years. Now, they are going to be obvious that they support the corporate candidate. But if HRC gets the nom & doesn't win, it will be the left's fault. Again.

[BeanMusical]

68. "if HRC gets the nom & doesn't win, it will be the left's fault. Again."

Totally agree.

[cali]

80. that will be the steaming pile served up, but

I'll be blaming Hillary, the democratic power brokers and her blind supporters

[BeanMusical]

115. Yep, they are the ones who deserve the blame.

[azmom]

69. How is this okay, with anyone? They need to remain neutral.

[LordGlenconner]

72. This is terrible. I sure hope someone stops him.

[jwirr]

75. I emailed them. Will see what they have to say.

[Cali_Democrat]

91. Munoz will not decide who the nominee is

Primary caucus-goers and voters will decide.

If Bernie or any other candidate is truly better than Hillary, the voters will pick them over Hillary.

This is much ado about nothing.

[Exilednight]

98. Is that before or after Hillary spends the money the DNC raised for her to run against Bernie? n/t

[cali]

104. what on earth does that have to do with the OP? Nothing. No one claimed any such thing

but I suppose you think ethical breaches are just dandy if they're done for HRC. Ugh. Sickening to see the excuses made by Clinton supporters.

I'm getting a much better understanding of Clinton supporters through DU. You emulate your candidate.

[Cali_Democrat]

106. I don't have a candidate yet

I probably won't pick a candidate until the debates begin.

There are some potential candidates who haven't even declared.

That's why you don't see me running around like a groupie with Hillary/Bernie/O'Malley avatars and sig lines.

[cali]

109. Got it! You're still busy doing that with President Obama.

that adoration of what you consider to be the greatest President of all time, keeps you occupied.

kisses and hugs to you too, number 1 Obama fan.

[AtomicKitten]

96. Flouting the rules is business as usual for ClintonWorld.

[morningfog]

99. All this crew cares about is money. PERIOD.

[MohRokTah]

102. He needs to resign or be fired. eom

[cui bono]

111. +1

[jeff47]

112. It's kinda hillarious that the people shouting "Those are the rules" about debates

are now saying "What's the big deal?" about this.

[cherokeeprogressive]

113. That's an excellent point.

The DNC is limiting the debates, and its finance chairman is helping to raise money for 1 of the candidates IN those debates.

Will the Hillary Camp be deciding the debate questions too?

[BrotherIvan]

116. The party is the biggest threat to Sanders and O'Malley

I was told on DU that the party is completely neutral and will just do it's job, from our resident "insider." Welp, here is action #2 that can be shown to be working as an arm of the Clinton campaign. How can Democrats claim the higher ground if they're just as dirty as Republicans?