And it should.

probably cost her the election too totally. Acorn all over again

The DNC is not an IT vendor, but they did hire a bad one. Mrs. Clinton had nothing to do with that.

Sanders' staff downloaded Mrs. Clinton's data. Mrs. Clinton had nothing to do with that.

Sanders' staff shared permissions to further access Mrs. Clinton's data. Mrs. Clinton had nothing to do with that.

Sanders' fairly high up operative was involved. Mrs. Clinton had nothing to do with that...but Sanders sure did. Did he or his delegate hire poorly or very, very carefully and well? We'll never know, but neither one reflects well.

To me, this leaves no mark on Mrs. Clinton, but the shine is definitely rubbing off the Sanders campaign at jig speed. That's not a problem, it's just cheap gilt anyway.

So why are her slaves blaming Sanders. face palm the Conservatives will connect the dots here if you won't

Sanders' staffers are the ones who stole data from Clinton's campaign. Hence, blame them as their hands are in the cookie jar.

Look, I get that to you he can do no wrong, but don't piss me the hell off by throwing around insults. I could refer to you as a Bern victim, after all, and I doubt you'd like it.

throw your hate back at your republicans it's gonna destroy this party but then again maybe Debbie planned this out. as the DNC was warned 2 months ago the onus is on them not Bernie since that was probably when bernie's data was stolen. but no reporting on that step out of the dung and hurl it somewhere else. I won't tolerate outright BS.

it is not Bernie's fault. I will leave it at that.

and that still doesn't make it Sen. Sanders fault. If Gov. Christi is not responsible for his numerous staff members with the bridge fiasco, Sen. Sanders is not responsible for his staff members.

There is little to nothing that Sen. Sanders can do to reign in his overzealous supporters other than boot them off the payroll when they are discovered.

There is only one candidate for POTUS that is responsible for the behavior of all others across the planet. She is a woman, and not Carly Fiorina and I'm voting for her.

his staff are truly guilty here. It seems mighty suspicous to me that this happens right after his historic garnering of two million individual donations by midnight Wed., and his endorsement by not one but TWO major unions. Throw in his increased polling in NH, the fact that DWS was Clinton's campaign manager in 2008 and that many of the policies she's put in place have been to Clinton's advantage (few debates, a fucked-up debate schedule, etc.) and the fact that she really resents Sanders' candidacy because she is determined to have HRC be the nominee this time and it looks even MORE suspicious.

Now, I could be wrong, I admit it, and perhaps it's just paranoid thinking. If I'm wrong, I'll freely admit it. But I don't trust DWS and the DNC under her leadership any further than I can throw them, and I wouldn't be surprised if these suspicions had some merit.

and make it a breach of the Sanders campaign by Hillary staffers. Then you'll understand it a little better. You will be outraged.

"But I don't trust DWS and the DNC under her leadership any further than I can throw them,..."

These staffers were professionals. They knew exactly what they were doing. And they did it a number of times and downloaded lists. To get the proper level of outrage, imagine they were Hillary staffers doing it to Sander's campaign. Or Chris Christi staffers doing it to snarl up traffic.

I'm certain that Sanders would have nothing to do with this. But his staffers that did it need to be unceremoniously fired. All four of them. And however many more did this.

A Clinton supporter.

campaign itself had advised the DNC of its software glitch in that regard back in October, but the DNC did nothing about it even after being told it was still happening. The timing of DWS and the DNC's sudden concern just seems awfully, mighty suspicious.

It's also my understanding that the staffers who did take advantage of the glitch and downloaded info they shouldn't have had access to were righfully fired? Or am I wrong about that? They should be fired and blacklisted from any future political campaign employment.

I do not see where it says Sanders himself had anything to do with this let alone that he was aware of it happening.

Always. I'm quite certain Sanders isn't tech savvy. I'm also quite certain that he's entirely responsible for hiring for his campaign.

And he's definitely responsible for that campaign's actions.

personally wouldnt hold him responsible.

How do you know they are a bad vendor?

a major permissions error on a SQL database open for months is, in my book, a very poor vendor.

If you have not used it, you have no business making such a statement.

How do we know that Bernie's people actually reported a bug months ago? How do we know if that problem was fixed, only to have a new problem come up?

This software is constantly changing and it is updated throughout the campaign season. It is capable of generating many types of lists. Many types of campaign workers have access to parts of it at all levels. I can understand how a breach could occur.

I keep asking if anyone else here has used VAN. I am not getting any affirmative answers. I guess DU has more keyboard kommandoes than activists. On the new DU, that is no surprise.

serious error. and the DNC now has nothing to do with this party.

and was thinking it was a minor error with no bad intentions.
Now, with this audit, it appears that someone did save the information.

It's not a huge scandal, but it just looks really bad. It also takes some of the glow off, if you know what I mean.

but thats what you do with a bug. The mistake is on DNC. Sanders Campaign had warned about it before.

would you want the thief caught or would you say -- oops, my mistake. No need for the police.

And now they're looking in all directions for scapegoats except for within their own camp, other than the poor "low level staffer" who took the sword for them.

oops and they may sue to get it back.

....all the other candidates' data until they can determine the full extent of the breach by the Sanders campaign.

I wish I could have asked Weaver "how has the DNC "stolen" your data?"

It's in the same place it always was, it still is intact, and once the campaign reveals the full extent of the breach and what data they still possess, the Sanders campaign will not get access to the database through which they accessed other candidates' data.

There is a very simple resolution for this, and it's all in the Sanders campaign's hands.

Double standard ... she also had the same access

The big excuse for accessing Clinton's data was that when the Sanders campaign "discovered" that there was no firewall, they went to the Clinton data to see if THEIR OWN data was compromised. WTF? Why didn't they go to their own data?

I think a lot is going to come out of this.

out of this race and they are using any real or perceived infraction to get it done.

The DNC didn't bother giving the Sanders campaign the benefit of the doubt or even suggesting they'd actually work with his campaign to sort out the problem, but immediately cut him off. Even if a few people on his campaign did engage in unscrupulous behavior, the reaction of the DNC was to punish not only Bernie but also his legion of enthusiastic supporters in order to remove him from the race on a technicality.

Hillary and her media buddies (Bloomberg, CNN, etc.) are playing very dirty, and this race is really turning into a showdown between the corporate establishment/status quo (represented by Hillary) and the will of the ordinary folk of this country (represented by Bernie).

There is an lot at stake here. It is probably going to get a lot worse than this.

Sam

Bernie's campaign did something wrong. They are paying for that. It has nothing to do with anyone other than Bernie's staff. No one, other than Bernie's staff, is playing dirty.

This is a precursor to how Bernie's supporters are going to behave here and elsewhere on the Internet when he loses the primary.

The DNC didn't have to take the step of blocking Bernie's entire campaign out but they did because they don't want him competing.

Do these people actually believe these underhanded tactics are going to reflect favorably on people who are supporting Bernie? Hillary and her supporters are shooting themselves in the foot and stabbing a good portion of the DP in the back.

These are dirty Republican-like tactics the DNC is engaged in, and it's not honorable in the least.

are unconcerned, and stop with the little laughing man because this isn't a laughing matter.

Hillary is stooping to dirty Republican tactics (if you feel threatened by your opponents potential voters, figure out a way to keep them from the polls and deny them access) and it is a sign of desperation.

Hillary may eventually win the nomination, but in doing so she's alienating many of the people she'll need in the general election and I can assure you I would never in a million years give Hillary Clinton my vote (and I don't care how bad the Republican running against her is). All of the Republicans despise her and only around half of Democrats like her, so how is she going to win the presidency?

I don't get why people are blaming Hillary for this. Bernie people messed up. Bernie people should fess up. End of story. Once they do, access restored. But no, instead they sue the DNC and blame Hillary.

Geez Louise

who support Hillary's coronation without a truly fair, democratic process.

Obviously Hillary is the insider candidate. She has been a big presence in the Democratic Party for decades, and Bernie only joined the Democratic Party a few months ago. But that does not mean that there isn't a fair democratic process. Everyone gets the chance to vote or caucus, don't they? There are six debates, which is plenty to choose from among three candidates. The debate schedule is set by the networks so all this nonsense about it being a big plot to help Hillary is just that: nonsense. She is a formidable debater, so Bernie should probably thank them for not having more debates. If they had 10 or 15 debates, people would start noticing even more that he pretty much says the same thing over and over.

I like your candidate, but the conspiracy theories coming from his supporters are exhausting.

And it is nonsense to blame Hillary for Bernie's inept campaign people. Indeed, it taps into one of the oldest cultural scripts in the world: blaming the woman.

aren't impressive in the least. You can tell she didn't prepare for an answer to the Black Lives Matter issue because she was almost to the point of stuttering and barely getting her words out. I've heard Hillary fans (including the media) claim that she's some kind of awesome debater, but all I've seen is someone spouting a bunch of pre-arranged words that have probably been run through some kind of focus group.

The networks are solidly behind a Clinton presidency (as is the DNC), so it makes sense that they'd schedule the debates to insure the minimal amount of viewers and interest. The goal is to make sure Bernie receives as little media coverage as possible because his message is peeling off support for Hillary (despite what the polls are saying) and this is why both Bernie and O'Malley have stated their desire for more debates at times which maximize the potential viewership.

And let's not even go their with the "blame the woman" thing. I think the majority of Hillary's supporters are just people who think that just because their was one historical first with Obama's election, it should immediately be followed by another historic first for the presidency. I'm all for a woman being elected president, but Hillary Clinton is not that woman. If her gender is more important to you than her hawkish, Republicanesque policies, then I guess Hillary's your candidate.

You Bernie supporters are always telling us how big Bernie's crowds are, and how much buzz he is creating on the internet, and how all the millennials are going to come out and vote for him. So why are you complaining about the number of debates? Are all those crowds not a sufficient sign that he is getting a lot of exposure?

Don't you realize that both Bernie and MOM are complaining about the debate schedule in order to garner sympathy? It's just a political ploy, the strategy of the underdogs.

The reality is that both parties reduced the number of debates this year. The GOP still has more, but they have to sift through a whole clown car full of candidates. Both parties' leaders know that primary debates can become dangerous in the general, because they tend to play to the fringes of the party, and because they so easily provide soundbites that will be used against the eventual nominee in the general election.

With regards to the scheduling: that is set by the networks, from what I understand. Some of the GOP debates also fall on a Saturday.

A few more debates might have been fine, but to simply assume that the only reason why there are only six is because of a giant conspiracy to get Hillary elected, is not backed up by any facts. There are other plausible explanations for it, as I briefly outlined above.

comes from the fact that he has been working his tail off to gain that support, without the assistance of a fawning media. If Bernie is such a lousy debater and Hillary the best there ever was, then she should be pushing for more debates in order to better convince everyone she's the bomb, right?

Bernie doesn't represent a "fringe" of the Democratic Party, but a large and vilified segment of it (and this vilification has been going on for a long time). The DLC/Third Way agenda has taken things so far the right that they are indistinguishable from all but the most extreme hard-right Republicans. This is a battle for the soul of the Democratic Party and the political landscape that will shape the next several decades.

I think Bernie has been doing just fine without the media coverage that Hillary and Trump get, so I don't even really think it's that big an issue compared to the DNC's heavy-handed treatment of Bernie last week.

is so tiring. Bernie's campaign was at fault last week. Bernie supporters all over the internet immediately started blaming Hillary. It was one of the most ridiculous things I've ever seen.

I did not say Bernie is not representative of a lot of people. He is simply representative of the most ideologically left wing part of the Democratic Party. I have no problem with his ideals. I agree with most of them. All I said is that primaries tend to play towards the fringes of both parties - i.e., the more left wing Democrats, or the more right wing Republicans. (I don't use "fringe" negatively - it simply expresses the portion of both parties that does not fall in the middle.) The problem is that general elections are won in the middle. Both parties know that their best chance at electoral victory lies in courting the independents. Now, a candidate like Bernie might actually have a lot of appeal for independents, and moreover, there's been a general reawakening of more left wing ideals. That is great, and it might mean that this time around the calculations are wrong. Sure, past experience tell the party leaders on both sides not to play too much to the base, since it is general election suicide. But perhaps this time around it is different, in which case their calculations are off. However, this would explain why both political parties might want to limit primary debates. The focus on the general election is the real reason to limit debates. Not some giant conspiracy.

in ANY way shape r form. Only the immature, corrupt, and childish blame the victim. At least his staffer had more decency than his supporters here - he admitted it was HIS fault. NOT Hillary. You say Hillary has alienated voters, but it is nothing compared to what Bernie's supporters have done. My two sons, who were on Bernie's side will now be voting for Hillary. Add my husband and me, and Bernie has now lost four VOTERS! Keep up the hubris - it's helping Bernie lose in a landside!

I changed my avatar because of posts like yours!

about the fact the DNC, the entire media complex, every corporation, polluting oil company, every weapons manufacturer, and every Wall Street firm is enthusiastically support her and that she fully intends on governing for their benefit.

Don't give me the sob story about the media not being for her since they publicized the silly e-mail scandal so much because it was a part of the scheme to make Hillary appear like the tough woman who stood up to the Republican bullies, brushed her shoulder off, and kept on stepping. The media is riddled with open Hillary supporters who've given money to her and her Foundation, and the DNC has made it very clear that we should vote for her.

If you changed your avatar and vote preference because of something I said then you probably were never a Bernie supporter in the first place. A good friend of mine stated that he'd rather pour Drano into his eye than vote for Hillary and I agree with that sentiment. The soul of the Democratic Party needs to be regained, and the right-leaning drift must be stopped at some point.

The Democratic Party should have seen the potential trouble with it rightward drift after so many would-be Democratic voters voted for Ralph Nader over Gore in 2000, and it seems the right-wing Democrats are intent on completely destroying what's left it by backing another Clinton.

If Bernie does go to court, perhaps his attorney can find out.

Before I read this article, I had been wondering who leaked the story to the press before all of the facts were even known. I could only think of these possibilities: the vendor, the staffer, someone at the DNC, someone in the Hillary campaign, a mole in the Sanders campaign. But someone did leak it very quickly.

If everything were on the up and up here, an investigation would have gathered all the facts and the evidence and formed a conclusion before different versions of this event started hitting the press.

I hope Bernie Sanders has the matter thoroughly investigated because it is important to learn the literal truth.

Sam

As Jake Tapper says, the person robbing the house can't blame the alarm company if the alarm doesn't work!!

Is the general attitude of the Sanders campaign to lie and steal???

At least they can't complain that Sanders isn't getting the attention of the media!!

...to give them an advantage in the NH primary race.

Very smart! Don't take money from corporations. Too pure for that. Just steal the data that is collected using their money.

about the firewall repeatedly going down and the DNC was doing nothing about it.

Its the DNC and their hand-picked vendor that are lacking credibility here.

Are you familiar with the vendor? Have you used their services? How do you know about them, and how they were chosen?

Who developed the software? Are you familiar with it?

Bernie's campaign did something dishonest. Own up to it.

The Sanders staff was distressed that THEIR data was exposed and the only reassurances they got was more dropping of the firewall.

If the DNC are this willing to coddle the incompetent then they don't deserve the benefit of the doubt. Being in the drivers' seat, they won't take responsibility for their role.

when the system was exploited. The vendor has been used for a number of years & election cycles.

and spend 40 minutes of so accessing and making 25 searches of proprietary data and then downloading and saving it to their own campaign files. Yup no excuse whatsoever.

Also, if I were trying to discern how exposed my data was, I might make 25 (or more) searches. It depends on how complex the database is.

With that said, I don't agree with the way Uretsky went about it. If he considered the exposure to be unacceptable (which it IS) then he should have gotten clearance for his investigation from the top and involved the Clinton campaign (since involving the vendor and DNC clearly did not stop the exposures).

.....and gives access to any campaign at any level (Mayor, State Representative, State Senator, Selectmen, Town Committee, etc.) for a nominal fee.

They're a very well known and reliable organization. That the Sanders campaign would make such accusations about them is unbelievable. Not doubt Sanders and his people are unfamiliar with them since prior to this year they've only had to deal with essentially local elections with less than 300,000 voters.

were seeing that now.

Sanders has a dishonesty problem.

from what I've read the firewall was down....why?

I think the gloves are off now

Fired staffer Josh Uretsky, speaking on MSNBC, said the earlier breach Weaver was referring to involved a different system than the one involved in the current scandal. Neither Weaver or Uretsky cited specific evidence that another campaign had taken Sanders' data.

http://www.msnbc.com/thomas-roberts/watch/fired-sanders-campaign-staffer-speaks-out-588356675888

She is that evil and almighty.
It is also possible that the staffers are her brothers.

director Michael Briggs said in a statement. That is the point.