You all realize that Sanders agreed to using Kroll

[sufrommich]

for the audit,right?

As part of the agreement, the Sanders campaign agreed to an audit of its data, which will be carried out by corporate investigation firm Kroll, according to a Democrat familiar with the outcome. The Democrat also told POLITICO that the Sanders campaign had agreed to sign an affidavit attesting to the actions of its staffers during the data breach.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/12/sanders-campaign-threatens-to-sue-dnc-216942#ixzz3vFGuPZZY

[randome]

1. Come on! You know he's being blackmailed!

[hr][font color="blue"][center]“If you're not committed to anything, you're just taking up space.”
Gregory Peck, Mirage (1965)[/center][/font][hr]

[sufrommich]

2. D'oh. Don't give the conspiracy brigade any ideas.

[Cha]

3. KICK

[msrizzo]

4. No doubt he's keeping his options open though.

Wouldn't surprise me if his campaign is drafting the press release, fundraising email, and lawsuit to condemn and sue them should the outcome not be what they want. It would only be smart, right?

[Alfresco]

11. That has been his playbook so far. Doubt it will change.

[Gothmog]

5. Sanders did agreed to this audit

[1StrongBlackMan]

16. I haven't weighed in on this matter; but, ...

Last edited Thu Dec 24, 2015, 02:38 PM - Edit history (1)

I would hope the parties (the two campaigns and the DNC) signed a confidentiality/non-disclosure agreement.

This is speculation; but, this situation has all the ear-marks of a really bad outcome, particularly for the Bernie campaign, as I suspect that Bernie is going to find out more stuff that his staff didn't tell him ... stuff that will embarrass and/or anger him.

From the summaries of what is known, there was a breach by Bernie's, now, former top data person ... the DNC contacted the campaign to look into the extent of the breach ... the campaign resisted ... the DNC contacted Bernie about it ... the DNC suspended the campaign's access to the data (I'm not sure the order of the two preceding actions).

Up until the call to Bernie and/or the suspending of the data access, the matter was contained to the wrong-doer and, possibly, the campaign manager (after the first DNC contact). However, with the call to Bernie, the cat was out the bag (Bernie was informed for the first time); or, with the suspending of access to the data, the cat had to be let out of the bag (i.e., Bernie had to be informed), and Bernie did the right thing he fired the bad actor ... but that is what prevented the bad actor(s) from informing Bernie in the first place, he/they knew Bernie wouldn't stand for their conduct.

I have conducted well over 1,000 workplace investigations; and, have found that where the "accused" is initially resist, and fails to inform the top about the "accusation", there tends to be more to the matter than known by the "accusing" party.

[George II]

23. Excellent summary, thanks.

[1StrongBlackMan]

44. I really hope there is a confidentiality/non-disclosure agreement ...

I see nothing good for Democrats coming out of this independent audit.

Besides, one side or the other is going to have a problem with the audit, regardless of how it comes out ... in the best case for the parties, they will be able to say, "camp HRC/Bernie did it, TOO."

[Gothmog]

50. Marc Elias (HRC's election law lawyer) is a really strong attorney

Elias is with Perkie Coie which is a good solid firm. I am sure that there is a CA in place.

[draa]

6. Yeah, he agreed.

But that doesn't stop the lawsuit or discovery if granted. That would mean Sanders' team gets to do their own audit/investigation since they'd have access to the same evidence as Kroll.

[1StrongBlackMan]

17. In my estimation ...

the law suit has little chance of advancing, and would likely be dismissed upon motion; before discovery commenced.

Why would camp Bernie conduct it's own, SECOND, investigation? The audit/investigation wouldn't exonerate them ... though it might show camp HRC has dirty hands, TOO.

[draa]

30. If the lawsuit goes forward with discovery they would have a chance at the info.

That's the only way. If that wasn't clear I apologize.

As bad as what happened with Sanders' staffers, it was a breach of contract to deny him access to the his data without a 10 day written notice. The DNC had a remedy but they ignored it.

I've signed contracts in business, hell many of us have, and the guidelines are well understood. You certainly can't break them without cause, and there was no cause because the DNC new of the breach in October. It was there fault. Not the data breach by the staffer, but not correcting the issue in October. They then canceled the contract, even though there was a remedy for the staffer breach in the contract.

It's 27 and 28 in the lawsuit and it's about half way down the page in the link below. They wouldn't be suing for that if it didn't happen because they can't just make shit up with a federal judge. And why would they.

http://www.npr.org/2015/12/18/460273748/bernie-sanders-campaign-locked-out-of-key-voter-file-after-data-breach|

We know the DNC shut him down without the 10 days afforded him to correct (cure) the issue. They've admitted it but they didn't have to. We all saw how it went down.

[1StrongBlackMan]

43. No. You were very clear. I just disagree ...

If the lawsuit goes forward with discovery they would have a chance at the info.

What info? As I said, there is nothing that would exonerate camp Bernie. The only thing that might come from an investigation is that camp HRC hands aren't clean, either.

As bad as what happened with Sanders' staffers, it was a breach of contract to deny him access to the his data without a 10 day written notice. The DNC had a remedy but they ignored it.

Not true! Despite the recitals of the law suit, there was no breach of contract ... the DNC SUSPENDED access, it did not terminate the contract, as the lawsuit pleas.

It's 27 and 28 in the lawsuit and it's about half way down the page in the link below. They wouldn't be suing for that if it didn't happen because they can't just make shit up with a federal judge. And why would they.

You haven't spent much time around the courthouse, have you?

[draa]

47. words----

What part of "suspended" isn't a breach of contract when a suspension is not stated in the contract as permissible under any clause of the contract? Is "suspension" just hiding on the back of the contract somewhere? Hell no, because it's not in the contract.

Speaking of the lawsuit, the fact that you ignored it and made some snarky ass comment shows me all I need to know about you. You're not interested in debating honestly. You don't seem to understand what a contract is either. Nor discovery as it pertains to a lawsuit. And I'm goddamn sure too old for this shit so I'm done.

Happy Holidays.

[1StrongBlackMan]

49. Every part of "suspended" isn't a breach of contract ...

at best the suit was anticipatory ... but mooted when the agreement was reached to release the data.

Speaking of the lawsuit, the fact that you ignored it and made some snarky ass comment shows me all I need to know about you. You're not interested in debating honestly. You don't seem to understand what a contract is either. Nor discovery as it pertains to a lawsuit. And I'm goddamn sure too old for this shit so I'm done.

I'm sorry that you feel that way ... I understand what a contract and discovery is ... I just did this shit for a living. And I stand by my statements.

[msanthrope]

67. You realize, of course, that when a lawyer suggests that "suspension"

is not necessarily breach, it is because his experience tells him so. Welcome to DU.

[draa]

68. Yes, but I also realize what breach of contract is.

While it's not cut and dry it seems a pretty safe bet since provisions of the contract weren't followed. There's a clause in the contract to deal with what happened. The DNC simply ignored that.

And I understand lawyers will say anything but I seriously doubt Sanders camp doesn't actually believe it was breach because I believe it. Especially after what we've already seen from the DNC/DWS. I guess we'll see.

Happy Holidays and Merry Christmas.

[1StrongBlackMan]

72. I beg to differ ...

A DUer was kind enough to provide the lawsuit, which included the contract. The contract laid out the 10 day notice (and cure period) in the case of contract TERMINATION ... the contract was silent with respect to (temporary) SUSPENSION OF ACCESS (presumably, as in this case) to assess the depth of the breach.

[1StrongBlackMan]

71. Exactly! I have seen this situation a thousand times ...

I don't suspect this lawsuit to go anywhere; but, I would hope the parties (the 2 campaigns and the DNC) had/have the good sense to have signed a non-disclosure/confidentiality agreement, with respect to the/any independent audit/investigation, as I strongly suspect (again, based on experience) that top folks in the Bernie campaign haven't told Bernie all they know ... and the/any investigation will expose stuff that will embarrass/anger Bernie.

(Note: I say this because - if one believes the reporting - top members of the Bernie Campaign have shown a propensity for not sharing to the top ... witness, this debacle. The reporting has it that Bernie knew nothing of the breach until his campaign staff HAD to tell him.)

[msanthrope]

73. I agree with every word you wrote. I don't believe for second Bernie

had any knowledge, and I think his staffers have a lot more.

[George II]

24. The objective of the lawsuit has already been resolved, rendering the suit moot.

[draa]

31. The point might be moot but the lawsuit is still being pursued by Sanders. As it should be.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/263929-sanders-suit-still-alive-in-federal-court

That was from Dec. 21.

[George II]

38. There probably hasn't been a hearing on the matter since the weekend, especially since.......

.....there's no longer any urgency and the issue has been resolved.

No doubt the suit will be dismissed.

[draa]

42. Also not what I read. I tried to find the link but no luck.

Either DKos, TPM, or HP stated the judge had give the DNC 3 weeks to reply back. If I remember right, it was about 4 days ago when I read it. Also not sure how accurate it was but it made sense because both parties must respond. That usually happens in a timely manner when it concerns elections.

I'm sure DWS needed time to file DNC paper work and with the holidays on back to back weekends it may take some time.

I'm not sure if federal employees will be off next week but I'd imagine most are so this weekend may be out. Maybe not though, so...

[NCTraveler]

7. They still have full faith in Sanders fired National Data Director.

He is the only acceptable person to do the audit. Or maybe they can bring one of the others back from suspension to do the audit before Sanders fires them as well.

[firebrand80]

8. Doesn't matter

The point is when the investigation sows Hillary's side did nothing wrong, Bernie supporters will have someone to blame.

And it will go on the list of people to blame when Bernie loses, because, it couldn't possibly be that Hillary was the better candidate.

[KittyWampus]

10. That is exactly on point. The b.s. really is that predictable at this point.

It's like an obsession with victimhood.

[1StrongBlackMan]

18. No "like" to it. eom

[Kentonio]

29. Amazing how much the idea of an independent investigation has Clinton fans so spooked

You've all already determined the outcome, just like you'd already coronated Clinton before a single vote is cast. Why do you not welcome opening the windows and letting some light into the process?

[1StrongBlackMan]

40. That may be; but, I'm no HRC fan ...

I am, however, a member of the Democratic Party... but more, I am someone that does not wish to see a republican in the Whitehouse, ever again.

[Kentonio]

46. Much better to wash any dirty linen now

Rather than have the Repubs drag it out during the general.

[1StrongBlackMan]

48. No ... the laundry will give the repubilcans something to play with. eom

[Kentonio]

61. They'll make up plenty of lies and smears anyway

If there is anything real, then we need to sort it out before they get their claws into it.

[1StrongBlackMan]

64. No ... Better, we leave it as it is and let them invent stuff. n/t

[pablo_marmol]

65. ^^ This. NT

[Dem2]

9. Kroll story. How droll.

[ViseGrip]

12. Bernie was blackmailed to get his data operation back! Does DWS think this helps? Ohhhh Kumbaya!

[MineralMan]

13. I doubt that there is any forensic investigation firm that

hasn't done work for organizations of which we don't approve. Who this company has worked for in the past is pretty irrelevant, I think. Conspiracy theories could be concocted for any of the major companies who conduct this type of investigation, I'm sure.

[randome]

14. And no six degrees of separation, either. More like half a degree of separation is enough.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]“If you're not committed to anything, you're just taking up space.”
Gregory Peck, Mirage (1965)[/center][/font][hr]

[Bubzer]

15. I look forward to seeing hillary supporters use the same yard-stick on the hillary e-mail scandal

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251944277

[stonecutter357]

20. e-mail and stuff.

[comradebillyboy]

70. More Republican talking points...

[stonecutter357]

19. when bernie fails to be elected it will be his fault no one else.

[Snotcicles]

21. A must bookmark thread. nt

[George II]

22. More inconvenient truth. Thanks!

[catnhatnh]

25. An unseemly haste?

" An anonymous Democrat leaked Kroll's appointment to Politico on Friday, but the highly secretive firm remained tight-lipped when reached for comment on the investigation.
"As a matter of policy, we do not comment on the existence or nonexistence of a client engagement," Kroll spokeswoman Adele Brown said in an email.
NBC reported that the Clinton campaign was "pleased" with the choice. But Sanders, having spent much of the primary season stumping against Kroll's elite clientele, has not yet disclosed any view on the firm."

http://www.courthousenews.com/2015/12/23/curious-choice-of-auditor-for-democratic-database-flap.htm

DNC hired these guys the day of the debate.

[treestar]

26. Is it already being said?

Corporatists! Oligarchs!

[bowens43]

27. a non-issue , the desperation of the hill supports is growing

pretty amazing seeing that they support one of the most ethically bankrupt politicians this country has ever seen.

[Igel]

28. I need to get out more.

/revision/latest?cb=20121222223937

[randome]

32. You're probably safer mentally and emotionally if you don't.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]“If you're not committed to anything, you're just taking up space.”
Gregory Peck, Mirage (1965)[/center][/font][hr]

[ViseGrip]

34. Why not Jimmy Carter do audit?Someone we all trust not shills looking for taxpayer funded contracts?

[randome]

37. Why not a professional auditing firm?

You'd be hard-pressed to find any firm that didn't have some connection -tenuous or not- to Democrats. In fact, you could say Jimmy Carter would be biased since he's a Democrat and Sanders is not. Not that I don't admire Carter immensely, but so far as I know, he has no experience with such matters.

As for Kroll, if there is even a hint of bias on their part, their reputation is gone for good. Just as it was for Anderson Accounting.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]“If you're not committed to anything, you're just taking up space.”
Gregory Peck, Mirage (1965)[/center][/font][hr]

[Jarqui]

33. You do realize, from that article that this part is BS

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/12/sanders-campaign-threatens-to-sue-dnc-216942#ixzz3vFGuPZZY

As part of the agreement, the Sanders campaign agreed to an audit of its data, which will be carried out by corporate investigation firm Kroll, according to a Democrat familiar with the outcome. The Democrat also told POLITICO that the Sanders campaign had agreed to sign an affidavit attesting to the actions of its staffers during the data breach.

Clinton campaign press secretary Brian Fallon said in a statement early Saturday, "We are pleased that the Sanders campaign has agreed to submit to an independent audit to determine the full extent of the intrusion its staff carried out earlier this week, and also to ensure that Sanders' voter file no longer contains any of the proprietary data that was taken from us. We believe this audit should proceed immediately, and, pending its findings, we expect further disciplinary action to be taken as appropriate."

The DNC software company already answered the issue of "Sanders' voter file no longer contains any of the proprietary data that was taken from us" - that they didn't export any lists. They ran and exported one summary report that did not seem to alarm the software provider. So that was not a gigantic issue very early on in this because the software vendor had the user activity logs that back him up on his claim. So that was not a big show stopper within a few minutes of the breach because they had the logs which leaves the agreement to audit as the second thing that the DNC and Clinton campaign allege helped to overcome this ...

They and Clinton Campaign Co-Chair Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (before the debate) both tried to float the BS that they had arm wrestled the Sanders campaign to agree to an audit and that helped break the impasse for the Sanders campaign to get access to their data back.

There was just one very big problem with that

The previous day, the Sanders campaign called for an audit

"What is required here is a full and independent audit of the DNC’s handling of this data and its security from the beginning of this campaign to the present, including the incident in October that we alerted them to."

https://berniesanders.com/press-release/statement-jeff-weaver/
That statement was made while they were still locked out of their system - 12 hours or more before they reached a deal with the DNC .

The reality is the Sanders lawsuit
https://berniesanders.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Bernie2016vDNCComplaint.pdf
exposed the DNC had blatantly breached their contract with Sanders. Sanders had 10 days to cure any default. But the DNC wouldn't man up to the notion they were wrong so they spun this BS about agreeing to the audit. The DNC were the ones not budging on restoring access until the lawsuit and hundreds of thousands petitioned them.

After their service was restored
https://berniesanders.com/press-release/dnc-to-restore-sanders-campaigns-access-to-voter-files/

“We are extremely pleased that the DNC has reversed its outrageous decision to take Sen. Sanders’ data. The information we provided tonight is essentially the same information we already sent them by email on Thursday,” said Jeff Weaver, Sanders’ campaign manager.

“Clearly, they were very concerned about their prospects in court. Now what we need to restore confidence in the DNC’s ability to secure data is an independent audit that encompasses the DNC’s record this entire campaign. Transparency at the DNC is essential. We trust they have nothing to hide,” Weaver added.

I note that the Sanders campaign have not dropped the lawsuit until they get all the breaches audited.

[ViseGrip]

35. ^^^this^^^

[Jarqui]

36. This struck a chord with me (not perfect but it does illustrate a point) ...

[tammywammy]

39. Except according to the guy that was fired it was a different software vendor altogether in October.

[Jarqui]

41. A differrent software vendor (modeling) reported the problem.

When they did, the Sanders campaign forwarded the report to the DNC - who have the responsibility to oversee and address this issue. I don't think the modeling software company caused the problem or they could have just fixed it themselves and said nothing. They just reported it when they ran into it. I think there was a second complaint in October - might have related to the same software vendor back then.

A third software vendor may have been at fault because NGP VAN claims the recent problem was the first one for them.

So it's not a perfect tale describing what happened here with respect to the number of software vendors.

Where the DNC is concerned, and their responsibility in all of this, it's not so far off.

[99th_Monkey]

45. Bullshit. That's NOT what this Politico excerpt says, at all. So please stop using this quote

Actually this ONLY says that Sander 'agreed to an audit of it's data", not to Kroll as auditor.

After it says "agreed to an audit of it's data" there's a big fat COMMA, before continuing
"which WILL be carried out by .. Kroll" so technically this does NOT say Sanders "agreed"
to Kroll as the choice, or even that he knew who was going to do the audit, just that
he agreed to the audit, that WILL b carried out by Kroll.

FAIL!

[grasswire]

51. PLEASE MAKE THIS AN OP

....and thank you for the heads up. Some people only read headlines and will think the OP is truth.

[99th_Monkey]

52. OK.

but I'd appreciate it if you helped, once I post it; as I only have limited time/energy
today to babysit an OP.

OR .. I'd welcome it if you posted the op, with my full permission to plagiarize the shit
out of what I said in my post... with which I'd be happy to assist.

Your preference?

[grasswire]

53. I will be happy to post and credit you...

....and babysit the thread.

Thanks for doing the footwork.

[99th_Monkey]

54. Thank you so much. I really do appreciate you doing that.

You may want to check this OP out as well, as it's supportive of Bernie on the data issue.
and has a bunch of relevant observations, ALL supported by links to decent sources.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1280&pid=89824

Plz, PM me the link to your OP when you post, OK? I'd love to participate and assist as
possible.

Thank you again.

[grasswire]

55. here ya go

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251944691

[Alfresco]

56. An Agreeing Kick

[artislife]

57. ....

[Bradical79]

58. That's not what that says

It says the Sanders campaign agreed to an audit. It doesn't say whether Kroll was agreed upon as part of this process beforehand or chosen by the DNC afterwards, or what the Sanders campaign's opinion of Kroll is.

[Live and Learn]

59. No, I don't and neither do you. You should delete this post. nt

[99Forever]

60. I realize that you are flat out wrong. And have been proven so.

Apologies are acceptable.

Step up, show some honor.

[Alfresco]

62. Will Bernie withdraw from his agreement? Is his word any good if he does?

[Alfresco]

63. I guess someone in the press...

will have to ask Bernie this question to clear up the confusion some have here at DU.

[Scuba]

66. Really, you should delete this post which has been proven to be a lie. Not doing so could result ...

... in some cynical person coming to believe that you're full of shit.

[AgingAmerican]

69. Logical fallacy fail

Example of fallacy:

Person A agrees climate change needs be studied.
Person B assigns James Inhofe to lead the study.
Person C claims that Person A agreed to James Inhofe leading the study.

Your whole OP is based on the above fallacy.