Something Debbie Wasserman-Shultz and I can agree on

[Jarqui]

Last evening, on MSNBC, Debbie made these remarks
http://www.msnbc.com/tamron-hall/watch/dnc-chair-on-sanders-campaign-data-breach-588319811545
(01:32 mark)

"In order to make sure, first and foremost, that we can preserve the integrity of our voter file, we're going to be uh doing uh having an independent audit done so we can assess the depth of this breach."

(03:25 mark)
"We're still analyzing the depth of this breach. Our vendor is saying that more than one staff person on the Sanders campaign who had access to the voter file and this information actually viewed it and accessed it so that's why an independent audit is so important."

Yesterday, at a 1pm press conference, Sanders campaign made these remarks

(0:00 mark - the start)
"Two months ago, shortly after our digital vendor who conducts modeling for our campaign, told us that there was a failure in the fire wall that prevents campaigns from seeing one another's data. We contacted the DNC and told them about this failure. We were very concerned that our data had been compromised. And we were assured at that time that the fire wall between the campaigns data would be restored We're actually very confident that at that time some of our data was lost to one of the other campaigns."

Now let's bounce back to Debbie's MSNBC interview:

(05:11)
"I would ask ... anyone who is formulating an opinion about the actions we have taken to put the shoe on the other foot. If it were the Clinton campaign that accessed the proprietary information of the Sanders campaign, you can be darn sure understandably that his supporters would expect that we would take the exact same action that we are taking that is based on our memorandum of understanding, our agreement with each campaign to insure the integrity of their information, their proprietary information was not only preserved but restored."

I agree with Debbie than an independent audit is in order after a breach of a campaign's data. In the above video of the Sanders press conference, they also agree with an independent audit.

I think given Debbie's position that it's very puzzling why an independent audit wasn't done when Sanders "proprietary information" was compromised two months ago. What we're seeing again is that when Debbie actually puts "the shoe on the other foot", what she did for Clinton, she won't do for Sanders. That's a plain, indisputable fact.

So I now call on Debbie to do her job as she outlined above and have an independent auditor that the Sanders campaign and the DNC agree to, perform an independent audit of this breach in October. Maybe with oversight by Politifact, the Washington Post and/or Elizabeth Warren to keep it above board. And agree to publish the results for all to see. That's open democracy - all the cards on the table. If a campaign breached Sanders data, they would be held to account just like Debbie bushwhacked Sanders - in the media.

If Debbie won't do that, then I would call for her immediate resignation and lobby MoveOn.org, DFA and/or others to sue the DNC for an independent audit and Wasserman-Shultz' removal for a blatant failure to do her job in terms of looking into data breaches and failure to do her job competently by taking steps to stop the data breaches (and maybe for the bias of scheduling the debates on Saturday night).

Debbie was party to smearing an honest man. That bothers me - particularly when it comes from a person suffering dereliction of her duty to conduct herself as chairwoman of the DNC impartially.

[Thinkingabout]

1. Allow the independent audit to happen, these what ifs are just what ifs,

If there has been criminal activity then there will be a criminal investigation also.

[Jarqui]

4. To date, the only indepdendent audit Debbie has been talking about is for the recent breach.

I think she should be called out in the media to clearly agree on doing an independent audit of the October breach of Sanders data and explain why she didn't call for a "shoe on the other foot" independent audit at that time.

That's step one.

And from that, there are going to be people saying "hmm, if a campaign breached Sanders' data, I wonder who it was?" which to me will help even the damage maliciously done to Sanders with Debbie needlessly running to the media before a review of what had happened took place. They smeared Sanders campaign without all the facts. It should have remained an internal matter until they figured out what was going on.

Step two would be the independent audit and report of both incidents. We already know how Bernie's will turn out because Clinton and the DNC bolted from the court case. It's the other investigation that could get real interesting if Clinton is the campaign that compromised Bernie's data. And I suspect that is a key part of the reason they ran away from the lawsuit. Sanders campaign manager is pretty darn confident their data got compromised and if he's that confident, he probably knows who compromised it.

Like i say, it could get real interesting. If the Sanders campaign caught the Clinton campaign compromising their data, I think the polls would tighten or flip.

[Samantha]

9. You and I think remarkably alike on this issue

I was very surprised to read your post because few people see these important points.

I will add one thing: this was nothing more than a dirty political maneuver. This incident happened in 2008 when Hillary ran against Obama, Hillary's campaign was the culprit, Obama's campaign was the target, the DNC did not leak a story to the press, it was settled quietly with the dismissal of the one person who committed the breach. HILLARY'S ACCESS TO THE DATABASE WAS NEVER SEVERED.

The timing of the breaking of the story happened not 3 months ago when Sander's campaign workers discovered the firewall failure and reported the malfunction to the DNC. The story broke the second time the breach was discovered -- this week. However, since the finding of the first breach 3 months ago and this breach, everyone was aware the firewall fix had never happened.

So is one to think that the week of the third debate (which is in New Hampshire where Sanders was 10 points ahead just last week), the week before Christmas holidays, two weeks before New Years, and then just 4 weeks until Iowa holds its caucus, and shortly thereafter New Hampshire, Sanders' campaign not being able to access that database to contact voters and donors would have effectively castrated his ability to compete in the election. And that was the goal when the timing for the release of the story broke -- when it would hobble Sanders the most.

The last paragraph is my opinion. Sanders' filing with the Court states "upon information and belief" he believes his data was compromised as well. His lawyer would not have included that in a filing to the court if he didn't think he could prove it if it came to a trial. I do not believe the Clinton campaign wants a lot of focus on that score, and that is just one the reasons the settlement was reached so suddenly after the content of the filing was released.

Sam

[Jarqui]

10. Thanks, I generally agree with your post above

The breaches as I understand them were of at least two different types - two different software products involved.

I was glad Bernie pointed out the October breach during the debate. If I recall the techy or campaign, it wasn't the only one.

The problem now is they'll stall. They never got a commitment to do the audit quickly.

Responsible media should follow up:
- ask DWS, the vendor, Clinton and Sanders campaigns - write about it, expedite an audit, etc
I'm not sure that's going to happen or happen in a big way because the DNC and Clinton campaign will stall.

It would be a pretty big media story if what I suspect happened was revealed by an auditor - that the Clinton campaign breached Sanders data last October ... and it was swept under the rug by the DNC - handled very differently than the most recent incident.

If I were the Sanders campaign, I'd keep the heat on and request "the preliminary audit completed next week or we'll ask a judge."

The Clinton campaign and the DNC probably damaged Bernie in the polls short term. I'd be telling the Clinton campaign and DNC that two can fight that way. If the national media got a good sniff of blood in the water, they'd probably go for Hillary's jugular and I wouldn't stop them as she'd be getting exactly what she seems to deserve if the Sanders concern is what I think it is.

[Phlem]

6. Yes please. I agree with you.

for once.

[cantbeserious]

2. The DNC DWS DLC Third-Way Establishment Is Apoplectic About A Bernie Presidency

What more does one expect from their front group - the DNC?

[Rosa Luxemburg]

3. She needs to go

[Fantastic Anarchist]

7. It's been a long time since I've been so disgusted by a few individuals.

I hope others are getting motivated to support Sanders because of this rhetoric and stunts made by DNC and DWS.

This is a wake up call.

[Doctor_J]

5. DWS is a Clinton hack who should have resigned her nominally independent

position when the campaign started, and joined Hillary's campaign. Let someone who cares more about the party than Mrs. Clinton be the DNC chair.

[Douglas Carpenter]

8. knr