spoke too soon perhaps?

handled rationally and peacefully. Apparently, though, that isn't the plan. This attack the DNC strategy may well backfire. I wouldn't have gone that way, frankly, especially this early. I'm not sure this was a good idea on the campaign's part.

They just escalated. I would have tried to deescalate. Their decision, though.

so saying..."but but but...the Democrats" will not play well in court.

Now, it will definitely become a media thing. Looks like it will be an issue in Saturday's debate now, too.

I'm very surprised that the Sanders campaign went in this direction. Current Sanders fans will like it, but I don't think it's going to play well otherwise.

It could change the situation, and that could have been avoided.

I wonder if this was done in consultation with Bernie? I hope not.

they are in deep deep doo doo.

Nothing was downloaded, even the vendor said that.

Bernie's staff alerted the DNC of gross negligence by their vendor. They had warned them in the past.

The focus should be on the vendor that allowed erroneous access by an unknown number of people from all campaigns to very valuable data.

The DNC is at fault for handling their responsibility poorly. They were responsible. How is that being missed.

The DNC's and the vendor's incompetence should be the issue.

accusatory as if the investigation had concluded. I like both HRC and Bernie, my bottom line is I want to see a democrat in the WH 2016.

Sanders already admitted guilt....now its a crime to boot

and now its a huge crime!

The DNC is responsible for the security breach.

The vendor is responsible for faulty software or poor protocol.

Bernie is guilty? No, his staff delivered the message.

The DNC staff and the vendor need to be fired.

Imagine if someone got access to the money in your bank and you found out. You'd blame the bank. It;'s their job to protect your money.

Bernie's staff realized their valuable data was exposed and reported it.

This blame the messenger bull is political malarky.

The Bernie campaign staff who searched the Clinton database committed a crime. If I drop my wallet, I'm not responsible if you pick it up and keep it.

If your bank allowed someone access to your money and personal financial information... yeah, you'd be fine?!

If Bernie's staff found the data on the ground you'd have a point. They didn't. It was in the DNC's hands.

The DNC is absolutely responsible. The vendor should be fired at the very least.

But anyone who stole that information would be guilty of a far more serious federal felony.

But, as you say, the DNC is guilty of negligence and should be held accountable. The vendor should be fired.

Nothing about that though?

And shared login info with other staffers.

They have gone off message in the last couple of weeks and it aint pretty.

Premature exacerbation, it looks like to me.

and do you blame them?

They disciplined alleged offenders, but without being able to access the network they can't trace anything.

What is most disturbing is that the DNC suspended Sanders' own access to their own data. This after Wasserman-Scultz says we will conduct an audit to find out what happened. The Sanders campaign reported previously problems with the firewalls and the DNC apparently ignored this.

The bottom line, this will hurt the Sanders campaign, but even more so, it will hurt the DNC badly, and ultimately Democrats in general.

All Republicans have to say is, you can't even protect your own data, how do you expect to be entrusted to protect the data of the United States.

they just committed a HUGE crime?

Wasserman-Schultz said the DNC has not run an audit that shows exactly what happened, but that an audit will occur.

How can you keep a campaign from accessing their own collected data when you don't know at this point exactly what access may have occurred with the breach? If the Sanders' campaign reveals that a few staffers accessed it, how do we know other campaign staffers didn't access data without an actual audit of who saw what?

It goes to the issue of what is traceable and what is not. Who took what, and accessed what rather than anecdotally.

downloaded AND saved millions of dollars of Clinton investments in infrastructure....Yes they have run the audit...they are called server logs...

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-12-18/sanders-campaign-fires-data-director-after-breach-of-clinton-files

We have to trust them instead.

Its the Pee Wee Herman defense...."I know you are but what am I?"

and the DNC and Sanders camps would resolve this by the end of the weekend. With this tactic, it looks more likely that the DNC will dig in its heels

this is Watergate level incompetence!

doesn't it?

for Sanders. If there was active theft of proprietary information, that is not going to play well, and blustering about the DNC isn't going to heal any wounds that are created.

Bad move on the campaign's part, I'm certain.

Loose quote, we can't conduct our investigation because we no longer have access. Give me a break. And did I hear an allusion to a Fed lawsuit?

If not, heads will roll. That presser was not a smart way to handle a breaking issue at all. It looks like bluster to distract from a serious problem. Now, I'm wondering about what actually happened with that data. Before, I wasn't. I made it clear that I thought the whole thing was being overplayed. Now, I'm not so sure about that.

Who was that guy answering press questions, anyhow?

Just a bad look overall. For a campaign that faces an uphill battle to win hearts and minds within the party he just joined, threatening legal action after getting caught seems very counter-intuitive.

The VAN database contains data from all the campaigns. Locking the Sanders campaign out denies the Sanders campaign access to Sanders campaign data.

Wouldn't you?

And that's assuming the Sanders campaign has all the data in a single location. Since VAN is supposed to fill that role, there's little reason to believe they do.

file. Just open up office and you're back in business, they think.

... what is the data company supposed to do?

VAN says that saving the data is impossible.

http://blog.ngpvan.com/news/data-security-and-privacy

happens to be run by Clinton 2008's CTO, and the Sanders campaign is the bad guy?

THAT'S the story you want to go with?

Simple. Next question.

More commonly known as "lied". See, they claim it's impossible to save the data. Yet now the claim is they saved the data.

The DNC also decided to go to the press with this story first, instead of dealing with it privately first, providing a fantastic "DNC doesn't know what the fuck it's doing" story to anyone under 40.

"Turns out that Nathaniel Pearlman, the CEO of NGP-VAN, the company that is responsible for the data leak that got Sander's campaign banned by the DNC from seeing Democratic party voter roles, was the chief technology officer of the Clinton 2008 campaign."


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nathaniel_Pearlman

The Bernie guy admitted it was copied meaning to me that Bernie has it. But he is welcome to prove that is not the case.

Let's see...security flaw reported 3 months ago...makes contradictory statements about exploiting that hole...now directly caught lying if "save was not the correct word"...in an "industry" built entirely around collecting and storing personal data and credit card numbers.

Yeah, let's go make a giant mountain out of this!! What could go wrong?!

At another point in the presser, the spokesperson said they had their own data. This is unclear. Pretty much everything is unclear now. A very poor press conference, all around. It's not going to help the campaign.

he needs right now, though.

It's always a treat to read your commentary and Happy New Year

will never actually be heard. That never happens, right?

again, there are attorneys.

Sanders is not going to hire some lying sleaze ball to represent a Presidential campaign in federal court, possibly the SCOTUS, and shame on you for implying otherwise.

Second, look up Rule 12 of the federal rules of civil procedure, which sanctions attorneys directly for bad faith actions in federal court--they have to pay out of their very own pockets. Why should a lawyer risk that in order to lie for the benefit of Sanders?

Third, my prior post didn't say a thing about a lawyer and you know it. It said Sanders would not go into federal court based on something that is not true. Even if you have no respect at all for Sanders, what a hell of a risk lying in federal court in this high profile matter would be to his Presidential campaign--and for what? If truth were not on his side, he'd probably lose in federal court anyway.

Sorry, not only is your post shameful as to what it implies about Sanders (while pretending to be talking about some anonymous lawyer), but it makes no practical or legal sense. Anything to smear Sanders, no matter how uninformed, implausible or foolish.

I'll take it into consideration...there, I'm done...

I'll stand my my statement.

Not surprising that you want to stand by it. I see you didn't even bother to google Rule 12 either. Why bother with law and reality when you can smear Sanders based on nothing but flatulence?

And has NEVER had to understand, manage, compete on a National level.

Instead of playing down the significance of Sanders campaign access to other campaign's data, this lawyer type went on the attack against the DNC. The DNC can examine network logs to see what what accessed and by whom. I'm sure there are people doing that right now.

Bluster does not substitute for reasoned language that tries to minimize the importance of what has happened. Now, it apparently is important. That was not a good way to go into the debate weekend, I'm pretty sure.

Amateur hour, indeed. This is going to look bad, and it's going to make the national news. Had he simply minimized the importance and said that an investigation will show no wrongdoing, nobody would have carried it. Now Sanders will be represented in national reporting as a blusterer and accuser.

Wrong image at this particular time. Now it's also going to come up in the debate, too. It's the only real news going into the weekend, so it will be on the agenda. If Bernie blusters, too, like this lawyer did, it will not go well for him, especially if what some reports say are true and staffers actually did make use of this data breach. All of that will come out. Network logs will show the entire picture.

The network logs will show what actually happened and who was involved. That lawyer better be right. If he's wrong, it's going to be bad, bad news.

The funny thing is that this whole thing could have been minimized and forgotten. Now it's news. Now, it will be big news.

Bottom line: The Sanders campaign had access to proprietary Clinton campaign data. If they actually grabbed it and were going to use it, it's a tipping point. I don't know that's what happened, but we all will know soon. Right now, people are looking at the network logs, which will show exactly what data was accessed and by whom. It sounds like the Sanders campaign is worried, and they decided to bluster. Bad move.

in that press conference. Bluster rarely works to your advantage in such situations.

The biggest mistake was the DNC trusting him and allowing him to call himself a democrat.

Now we see the results.

"If the burglar alarm on your house doesn't work, you can't blame the alarm company when you rob the house. These are adults here."

I think I got that quote pretty well.

There is clear evidence from MSNBC and DWS that multiple files were downloaded and saved. The Sanders campaign is essentially lying about their staff's involvement.