WikiLeaks Blowback Looks Like The Beginning of The End For Hillary
Once again, Democrats are demonstrating their tendency to ignore pesky, inconvenient rules and regulations in the firm belief that they apply only to “others,” certainly not for the superior creatures they so clearly and smugly believe themselves to be.
The rules of the Democrat National Committee are straightforward: “The Chairperson shall be responsible for ensuring that the national officers and staff of the Democratic National Committee maintain impartiality and even-handedness during the Democratic Party Presidential nominating process.”
In short, the Committee is prohibited from throwing its considerable power behind any single candidate, favoring one over another.
That power includes managing contributions, negotiating the terms and conditions of debates, and speaking for the party on general matters of policy, making its neutrality, especially in an election season, essential.
But apparently the language is open to the same type of “Clinton-esque” interpretation as the meaning of “is” or “gross negligence,” as the recent release of nearly 20,000 Committee emails by Wikileaks exposes a definite lack of the “impartiality and even-handedness” it must maintain.
Among snarky comments by staff ridiculing the first name of black corporate executive, LaQueenia Gibson, and a conversation diminishing the Jewish Holocaust, the emails revealed the Committee’s contempt for Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders who mounted an unexpectedly strong challenge to what was long assumed to be an easy road to the nomination for former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
DNC chair, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, fell from power within a matter of hours over the weekend, as the leaked emails showed staffers plotting to paint Sanders, who is Jewish, as an atheist to hurt his chances in the Kentucky and West Virginia primaries where Clinton was particularly vulnerable due to her promise to “put a lot of coal miners out of work.”
They also ridiculed Sanders’s supporters, many of whom are new voters who had their worst suspicions that the system was “rigged” against them, as Sanders had often said.
Of more concern are emails, including spreadsheets; drawing into question the way contributions to Clinton were credited to avoid legal limits to campaigns.
It is beyond embarrassing that the Democrats ignored more than just the impartiality requirement by refusing to heed both the repeated warnings about the Committee’s vulnerability to hacking, and their favorite candidate’s own troubles with emails.