Donna Brazile turns

Clearly none of you guys actually read the article and understand what happened.

My thread on the matter:

Hillary Clinton's Takeover of the DNC and Democrat debt: a post-Citizens United tale

the Democratic Party has become simply unable to compete with the GOP's fundraising efforts as the Republican Party attracts more and more donations from global corporations, industrial cartels, and billionaires....

....they have failed to keep pace with post-Citizens United fundraising spikes, with countless millions of legal bribes flowing into the GOP with the expectation that the GOP will sell out their constituents. Accordingly, Barack Obama's 2012 presidential campaign win over Mitt Romney put the party deeply in debt to the tune of $24,000,000.

In order to finance their survival, let alone their viability against the GOP dark money juggernaut, the Democratic Party had to turn to Clinton, a relatively business-friendly and independently wealthy candidate, for a bailout. Clinton reconciled the Party's debt and, fairly understandably really, expected to thereafter take hold of the Party machinery.



The sad conclusion: in a political landscape corrupted by billions of corporate bribes, actual interest in making good policy on behalf of the people is something that cannot be afforded.
Click to expand...
 
uh no we read it

we just don't confuse 'policies we don't like ' w/ corruption
 
Seems to me like the DNC has been in financial straits for some time, and Clinton was their best bet to set that right.
 
Rockapotomuss said:
Out of nowhere, Donna Brazile turns and throws Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Clinton under the bus for using DNC funds to circumvent campaign finance reform laws such as the Federal Election Campaign Act. This reads like an obvious CYA letter.

"Individuals who had maxed out their $2,700 contribution limit to the campaign could write an additional check for $353,400 to the Hillary Victory Fund—that figure represented $10,000 to each of the thirty-two states’ parties who were part of the Victory Fund agreement—$320,000—and $33,400 to the DNC. The money would be deposited in the states first, and transferred to the DNC shortly after that. Money in the battleground states usually stayed in that state, but all the other states funneled that money directly to the DNC, which quickly transferred the money to Brooklyn [Hillary's campaign]."

“Wait,” I said. “That victory fund was supposed to be for whoever was the nominee, and the state party races. You’re telling me that Hillary has been controlling it since before she got the nomination?”

In August 2015, a month before Hillary announced her candidacy, an agreement was reached regarding DNC finances: "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."

Why now?
Click to expand...
This is it.
 
IngaVovchanchyn said:
Seems to me like the DNC has been in financial straits for some time, and Clinton was their best bet to set that right.
Click to expand...

Yep until it blew up in their faces like this. Now the money continues to be an issue and they have no one to help them. Not to mention the countless people who have turned their back on the party over all of this. Better hope those SJW college kids hurry and graduate so they can start donating.

Are they still in court fighting the people who sued them over the Bernie issue?
 
method115 said:
Yep until it blew up in their faces like this. Now the money continues to be an issue and they have no one to help them. Not to mention the countless people who have turned their back on the party over all of this. Better hope those SJW college kids hurry and graduate so they can start donating.

Are they still in court fighting the people who sued them over the Bernie issue?
Click to expand...

Lol SJW donations from their high power part time barista positions
 
IngaVovchanchyn said:
Great question. If so, this would seem to support the case against them.
Click to expand...

Just looked it up and apparently it's been dismissed. Not only has it been dismissed the judge ruled that the DNC was allowed to favor whoever they wanted.
 
method115 said:
Just looked it up and apparently it's been dismissed. Not only has it been dismissed the judge ruled that the DNC was allowed to favor whoever they wanted.
Click to expand...
That makes sense to me. The Democratic Party is allowed to frame their own system of choosing a nominee, whether it's transgendered people of color in an a cigar smoke filled room or by votes in the various states. They chose the super delegate system in large part to prevent outsiders like Bernie from being nominated. If the Republicans had done something similar they might have avoided nominating Trump.


But if the DNC is not following its own rules, then there is a big problem given how serious nominating a candidate for president is.
 
Rockapotomuss said:
Out of nowhere, Donna Brazile turns and throws Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Clinton under the bus for using DNC funds to circumvent campaign finance reform laws such as the Federal Election Campaign Act. This reads like an obvious CYA letter.

"Individuals who had maxed out their $2,700 contribution limit to the campaign could write an additional check for $353,400 to the Hillary Victory Fund—that figure represented $10,000 to each of the thirty-two states’ parties who were part of the Victory Fund agreement—$320,000—and $33,400 to the DNC. The money would be deposited in the states first, and transferred to the DNC shortly after that. Money in the battleground states usually stayed in that state, but all the other states funneled that money directly to the DNC, which quickly transferred the money to Brooklyn [Hillary's campaign]."

“Wait,” I said. “That victory fund was supposed to be for whoever was the nominee, and the state party races. You’re telling me that Hillary has been controlling it since before she got the nomination?”

In August 2015, a month before Hillary announced her candidacy, an agreement was reached regarding DNC finances: "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."

Why now?
Click to expand...
That's an awfully long preamble to a suicide note.
 
Trotsky said:
Clearly none of you guys actually read the article and understand what happened.

My thread on the matter:

Hillary Clinton's Takeover of the DNC and Democrat debt: a post-Citizens United tale

​
Click to expand...

An idealistic supporter of the Democrat party might have reasonably expected HRC would not only help bail out the party but also not use that gained influence to her own advantage. Remember, Hillary's campaign are the people who had their hair on fire because Bernie looked at an email he was "inadvertently" sent that included a list of DNC donors.
 
Amerikuracana said:
Have you figured out the media and dems were diverting attention away from their meddling in the Democratic system?
Click to expand...
it does appear that Podesta's bro was literally like 'look over there, nothing to see here'


and then we have now
 
method115 said:
Oh I get it now. Hillary didn't take over the part to screw over Bernie. She did it to be a hero to the DNC and save them. That's probably why they were so upfront and forward with all this information.
Click to expand...

Nope, she did it for both reasons.

But she spent and fundraised millions on the presumptive basis that she was buying the machinery of the party.

I do think that is a less gross explanation than her being corrupted by private interests and the rest of the Democratic establishment being similarly unwilling to let go of profitable neoliberal policies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,280,614
Messages
58,305,050
Members
176,000
Latest member
Furigo94

Share this page

Back
Top