Did Hillary/Dem Establishment Have Plants Inside Sanders Campaign? DNC Thought So
Back in March and April I did several stories regarding volunteers for Bernie Sanders in North Carolina and Michigan who believed his campaign staff had been infiltrated by Clinton and/or DNC operatives. Apparently, they were not the only people who shared that belief. The DNC's own Communication's Director, Luis Miranda and DNC staffer, Kate Brown also believed that there were people in the Sanders' campaign who would reveal information to them.
The evidence? Emails released by Wikileaks which show that both Miranda and Houghton believed that the Alaska Democratic Party Executive Director, Kay Brown, had plants within the Alaska Sanders' campaign from whom they could obtain information regarding Sander's campaign activities. Here is the specific email, dated May 12, 2016, in which Houghton states Kay Brown has people inside the Sanders campaign:
Here is the context in which this email exchange occurred. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (DWS), as head of the DNC, was scheduled to address the Alaska Democratic Party’s Convention as its Keynote speaker. The DNC were concerned about rumors of a counter-protest event planned by the Sanders' campaign, and wanted intel from Kay Brown, who they stated quite openly had people within the Sanders campaign. The DNC staffers were desperate to get more information about this event, which was supposed to begin with a walkout of Sanders supporters during the DWS speech (which did in fact occur). Excerpts from the relevant Wikileaks email release follow:
From: Khan, Ali Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2016 1:39 PM
To: Bonosky, Garret Cc: Alvillar, Raul
Subject: Alaska “Counter” EventHey man, I know Kay Brown has already told me she’s been in touch with you guys regarding the “evolving” situation on the ground in Alaska, but, nonetheless, I wanted to flag this newest development for you. Just in case! I’ve also mentioned it in the political briefing, FYI.
Thanks and enjoy Alaska, Ali
Link: https://www.facebook.com/events/617275561771687/?active_tab=postsMiranda, Luis
> wrote: There’s no way Kay doesn’t have someone who can get her intel. We need to push them.
From: HoughtonK@dnc.org
To: MirandaL@dnc.org
Date: 2016-05-12 14:42
Subject: Re: Alaska “Counter” EventWe can’t go to DWS [Debbie Wasserman Schultz] with just Facebook intel. Kay told me she has friends inside the Bernie organization there who may be able to provide some more information.
I missed this story when it came out last week because I was in Philadelphia working as a volunteer for the People's Convention. None of the principals involved, neither Luis Miranda, Kate Houghton nor Kay Brown has spoken on the record about whether Kay Brown did have "friends" or spies inside the Sanders campaign. However, the Alaska Democratic Party, through a spokesperson, has denied these allegations with respect to the state party .
A spokesman for the Alaska Democratic party says the party did not have any plants among Bernie Sanders' supporters ahead of an event earlier this year with Democratic National Committee chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz. [...]
Alaska party spokesman Jake Hamburg says people freely shared information with the party. He says the party wanted a successful event.
This is a very carefully worded denial which I find unconvincing on its face. One, the statement by Jake Hamburg, does not refer to Kay Brown by name, only the "Alaska Democratic Party." Second, he remarks that people "freely shared information with the party." I, for one, cannot believe that Sanders' campaign staffers or volunteers would have voluntarily shared such information unless they were moles.
Does anyone find it credible that the Sanders campaign, which was already on record as stating the DNC, and Debbie Wasserman Schultz in particular, was biased against Bernie in favor of Hillary, would authorize his people to reveal details about any Sanders' events to the DNC? Sanders, after all, sued the DNC and DWS over the actions they took to deny him access the the DNC's voter database following a breach of that system in December by an individual the DNC recommended Sanders hire. Sanders campaign immediately reported the breach and fired that staffer, a fact that DWS herself lied about initially. The DNC agreed to allow the Sanders campaign access to the database after the lawsuit was filed. An independent investigation cleared the Sanders campaign of any wrongdoing , at which point Sanders withdrew his lawsuit.
So, the question remains, why did the DNC Communication director and other DNC staffers believe that Kay Brown, who headed up the Alaska Dem Party, had sources within the Sanders campaign that would leak sensitive information to them? Specifically, why did DNC staffer Kate Houghton directly state that Brown had told her she had moles in the Sanders campaign if, in fact, this was not true?
This email exchange certainly is another piece of evidence pointing toward the conclusion that the DNC and local state Democratic parties colluded to benefit Hillary, and worked to oppose Sanders at every turn. It also lends credence to the suspicion by many Sanders volunteers that his paid campaign staff was infiltrated by spies for Hillary Clinton who acted in ways to harm Bernie's efforts to obtain the Democratic party's nomination.
At this point, I would like to see any emails by Hillary campaign staffers and/or staffers working for the SuperPacs that supported Hillary, or who had contracts for services provided to the HRC campaign and/or said SuperPacs. Hopefully, Wikileaks has more emails yet to be released that will shed further light on this matter.
Comments
Symone Sanders was also a possible mole.
Here is one of the emails, showing the DNC trying to find out about a Sanders news conference. They finally get an answer from someone named Symone. Maybe she just likes to chat with Clinton people, but she changed over the Clinton campaign toot quick.
https://www.wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/6574
There is nothing in that exchange that
indicates she was a mole. She was the national press secretary. That's what press secretaries do---they keep everyone informed about press conferences and other activities of the campaign.
Another mole mentioned in your link
Not just Symone, but an unnamed female as well:
Wonder who she was, and how much damage she did before being let go. . .
I was just going to ask who that was!
Still not evidence of a mole, but interesting.
'What we are left with is an agency mandated to ensure transparency and disclosure that is actually working to keep the public in the dark' - Ann M. Ravel, former FEC member
I would be shocked if they didn't have moles in the campaign
The Clinton campaign certainly left no stone unturned in playing dirty to defeat Sanders. I remember your earlier diaries, and the ring of truth they had. I suppose we'll have to rely on Wikileaks to inform us further, though.
Please help support caucus99percent!
yes dallasdoc
Hillary is nothing to chance, nothing left to chance....
Peace
Fn
"Democracy is technique and the ability of power not to be understood as oppressor. Capitalism is the boss and democracy is its spokesperson." Peace - FN
In addition, some of these plants were probably self-selected
and were looking out for themselves if Senator Sanders failed to get the nomination. Politics doesn't attract a universally idealistic body of workers.
"The justness of individual land right is not justifiable to those to whom the land by right of first claim collectively belonged"
[deleted]
[deleted]
This is why you CANNOT trust the Democratic Party
Even when they claim that they want to champion your ideas.
And I'll be honest, the use of the word "Intel" freaks me out. The only time I hear that word used is when referring to information gathered in either an espionage or military planning capacity. No-one I know uses it casually, because Info is much more neutral and informative.
I do not pretend I know what I do not know.
Why, or WHY is Bernie doing this?
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-226481
I do not understand his doing this - after all he said for the entire campaign, how can he now be so enthusiastic about the Clintons. I can understand a token endorsement - but this seems to be going against everything he said, and did.
Don't get it. Sad about it too. Doesn't influence my vote, if I vote, a bit. Just sad to see this.
Because he doesn't understand why Hillary is unacceptable.
This quote makes that clear. He thinks we're just wrapped up in the horse race and that when we come to our senses we'll see that she's the lesser of two evils. We aren't and she isn't.
Or he really is that terrified of the Trumposaurus
because of his personal background and family history.
Who's afraid of the Trumposaurus,
Trumposaurus, Trumposaurus,
Who's afraid of the Trumposaurus,
Bernie, but not me!
There is no justice. There can be no peace.
How to deal with Trumpy Claws...
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=popPQmikR9w]
Sorry, sorry couldn't resist.
I do not pretend I know what I do not know.
Third option:
he's doing it because he's really that afraid of The Clinton Machine. These are ruthless people he's dealing with, and their bosses have trillions at stake. I would not put anything past them.
Same here. There's a
trail of dead that leads back to Clinton Inc., whether they're directly involved or not.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
Or a 4th, while unlike could be that he really is going for the
long game.
If a Clinton indictment does come rolling down and she has to step aside it gives him a solid argument to the party delegates and voters. "Look, I toed the line, got behind Clinton, but now it is evident that she CANNOT possibly win/stay in the race. Now it's time for the party unity to come my way."
Odds are they still wouldn't back him because he is the antithesis of everything the party stands for, but if we are gonna speculate...
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
whisper of a dream
I can't help but think
that his campaigning will only fan the flames of those who refuse to vote for clinton. In fact, his events may become anti-clinton rallies based on attendees. I seriously doubt the clintons want sanders on the campaign trail for them. He will only continue to draw attention to the hostility towards her. They likely want him to disappear as quickly as possible because he is only a lightning rod for the anti-clinton sentiment. I assume they have internally accepted the fact that they cannot win over the left and other sanders supporters. That's why they're trying to capture the republicans who do not like trump contingent.
As dirty as the primary was,
The general is going to be full of cheating, hacking, lying, smearing tactics.
Elections are just a sham anymore, aren't they?
That's how the Gore campaign went
They were openly hostile to the Left, convinced as they were that elements of the Right would redeem them. One thing I've noticed about the Clintons is that they don't learn, yet don't forget.
"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."
Heard on one of the channels this morning--------
The 2016 Democratic Convention was the best Republican Convention.
It's simply too painful to acknowledge, even to ourselves that we've been taken. Once you give a charlatan power over you, you almost never get it back. Carl Sagan
what dervish said:
" One thing I've noticed about the Clintons is that they don't learn, yet don't forget."
They are pathological liars. Morning Joe this morning was hysterical. Showed clip of $hrillary being questioned by Wallace - she just LIED. Even Joe was having trouble keeping a straight face, finally just roared with laughter.
Wondering if they really have this so completely rigged, they are justifiable complacent about all of it.
Maybe they really do own Diebold: http://gizmodo.com/200693/how-to-steal-an-election-with-a-diebold-machine or at least have it controlled?
It is called projection.
We often think of projection as attributing our bad qualities to another person, but people often also project their good qualities on people who don't have them.
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.--Aristotle
If there is no struggle there is no progress.--Frederick Douglass
Good, useful insight. n/t
This election has certainly been an eye opener.
During the 2008 election, does anyone remember allegations of the DNC favoring either of the candidates? I mean, I've always known there were insiders, but I never realized they would go so far as to lock someone out. Maybe it wasn't noticeable because no one has ever been more than a "fringe" candidate vs the chosen. Democracy my ass!
The DNC corruption is at an all time high
Bill Clinton had to fight a hard, but fair campaign against Jerry Brown and a number of other legitimate contenders in 1992. There was no favoritism towards Jimmy Carter in the 1976 or 1980 primaries, nor for Walter Mondale in 1984 or Michael Dukakis in 1988. Al Gore and Bill Bradley had very visible debates in 2000. The corruption may have started to show in 2004 with the "Dean Scream" episode. The 2008 primaries seemed pretty legit to me. Now the DNC is completely infested with corruption and that's why such an awful candidate, like Hillary, was able to steal this primary election.
Beware the bullshit factories.
The corruption has been there for a while
just, possibly, not at the presidential level. It has been clear in a number of senatorial and rep races that the DNC favored establishment candidates. The Joe Lieberman debacle is the easiest example. And then you have the full embrace of the loser Specter- a fucking republican!- over other Dem candidates. Whenever they can suppress an insurgent candidate, they appear to expend significant energy to make it a success.
I agree with that
But when it hits the Presidential level and people have it revealed to them the way we have, the outrage becomes a lot more palpable.
Beware the bullshit factories.
The outrage should be more palpable
and likely would be, if not for the news blackout. It's likely that those who rely on MSM are not even aware of any of this beyond "The Russians are coming!"
^^This^^
That's what cable is for...
Just my guess. I'm having Pinot with San Pellligrino now-on my third glass.
cable is there to MISinform? eom
yep. sadly.
Is why it is so difficult for "movements" such as the Bernie Movement to gain any traction. Ain't nobody buying what we selling. "Wink, at least my Repubs create jobs... your Dems don't create d!ck... "
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
Agree. Hillary is corrupt and *corrupting*.
- because is it infested with Hillary operatives. Hell, they hacked the elections. The DNC was easy, especially with DWS at the helm. No doubt the new pick will be equally compliant.
Something is up
when a sitting Congressperson is given a second full time job of heading the party organization. Why did Obama agree to this? I think, with all that we know now, DWS was placed in that job for a purpose. Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reed have recently said that no sitting Congress person will be appointed to that job in the future.
It's simply too painful to acknowledge, even to ourselves that we've been taken. Once you give a charlatan power over you, you almost never get it back. Carl Sagan
There was definitely shady shit that happened in 2008.
Maybe not in the DNC specifically, but certainly in all the big "party machine" states run by Hillary supporters. For example, Obama got no votes in parts of Harlem on primary night.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/16/nyregion/16vote.html?_r=0
This primary just took things much, much further, to the point where stuff like this happened in plain view and in public.
And the media won't report their collusion either
Steven here's a link to Jill's speech at your convention last week. Just found it today (35 min)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ux4GmPqB3iI
“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”
I saw some exchanges between DWS & staff AFTER Alaska
It's odd to me how she seems to feed off of acting hurt and upset, then come the reassurances and coddling by the staffers. Sounds like a personality disorder of some sort, but not sure which one.
Here's the one I just found, but could swear there were more exchanges in the string I ran across last weekend.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/8447
The beginning (bottom) is a compilation of pre & post speech news articles. Above those are the email exchanges.
sounds like narcissism to me eom
It seemed very likely that there was a problem in NC
People were disillusioned and discouraged by events here and could seem to find no way to go around local campaign staffers to get action, explanations, or even just acknowledgement or reassurance from the national campaign.
I felt it was damaging to enthusiasm for events, outreach, and voter turnout and very much hope that we will get explanations at some point as to what happened.
Since Senator Sanders is set on supporting Hillary as an antidote to Trump, I wouldn't expect it soon, but it all needs to come out after the election. Well, unless Wikileaks comes through, and we can start cleaning the DNC/Clinton house for President Sanders. He does still have his delegate votes....
I sent you a message.
Life is strong. I'm weak, but Life is strong.
what's wrong with this picture?
It seems to me that if a national party intervenes in favor of one campaign over another, or, for that matter, feels the need to respond to and protect themselves from one or another campaign in their party, something's fundamentally wrong. They should be a means of organization nationally, but not a means of organizing establishment efforts against challenges. Also, not necessarily a power broker. If all of their "value added" beyond a national organizational structure favors the existing players and restricts access, they're not just useless to the rest of us, they're harmful.
Expect Trumpy Boy's "47% video" in October. It'll make Romney...
look saintly in comparison. The media and the Clintons themselves didn't spend all this time building this giant straw monster just to have him steal Billary's crown.
Modern education is little more than toeing the line for the capitalist pigs.
Guerrilla Liberalism won't liberate the US or the world from the iron fist of capital.
I'd be curious to know what happened in Alaska.
With a lot of the Sanders stuff, the campaign was very decentralized, so the DNC would be chasing its tailing on a number of these events. e.g. no direct coordination or guidance from the campaign.
The NC that you highlighted a couple months ago definitely sounded dodgy. It's one thing when people within campaigns are talking to other people within the party involving gossip. But the idea of seeking "intel" suggests confidential information.
Thanks for following up on this, Steven.
"I’m a human being, first and foremost, and as such I’m for whoever and whatever benefits humanity as a whole.” —Malcolm X