Brazile says she found 'no evidence' that Democratic primaries were rigged for Clinton

[Eugene]

Source: Washington Post

Brazile says she found ‘no evidence’ that Democratic primaries were rigged for Clinton

By Philip Rucker November 5 at 12:15 PM

Former Democratic National Committee interim chair Donna Brazile said Sunday that despite a joint fundraising agreement between the DNC and Hillary Clinton's campaign, there was “no evidence” that the 2016 presidential primaries were rigged, while her successor, Tom Perez, said the DNC is working to earn back the trust of voters.

The comments came as Brazile details the fundraising agreement in her new book, writing that it was “a cancer” that disadvantaged Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) because it gave Clinton's campaign a measure of influence over some DNC operations in exchange for helping the party raise money.

Still, asked Sunday on ABC's “This Week” whether the primaries were rigged in favor of Clinton, Brazile told anchor George Stephanopoulos, “I found no evidence, none whatsoever.”

Perez, who took over as DNC chair after last year's election and had been a prominent Clinton surrogate, said on NBC's “Meet the Press” that Clinton won the nomination fairly through a series of primary elections, which were run by states. Perez pointed out that in many of the caucuses, which were run by the party, Sanders bested Clinton.

-snip-

Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/11/05/brazile-says-she-found-no-evidence-that-democratic-primaries-were-rigged-for-clinton/

[riversedge]

1. I heard Paul Ryan over and over a bit ago say that the Dem primaries were rigged.

It is the Repug meme now. damn

[StevieM]

5. It's pure fiction. But they've sold it.

A lot of people probably outright believe the Democratic vote was not counted properly. As opposed to the lesser interpretation of the word "rigged," which is also a blatant lie.

[Chasstev365]

3. So you believe this, but nothing else Donna Brazile says?

This is an example of how many on DU have no objectivity and only believe what they want to believe.

[moriah]

4. I don't know what to believe.

I saw her article in Politico. And she exaggerated quite a bit of the August 26th memo. I have seen media outlets who claim to have advance copies and make claims about things said in it that could be taken out of context and/or have been denied by people allegedly present.

But until I see a copy of the JFA Bernie signed, I'm not going to make assumptions that Bernie's campaign wasn't also given the option to put forward candidates for vacancies they found acceptable.

The agreement about the communications director was that two people had been named as candidates and the party would choose one of them, and Bernie's agreement wasn't signed before the "deadline".

The person they chose, a Latino who had worked with Obama, resigned only because the hack revealed he had concerns about encouraging smuggling operations so had given private advice to focus on what the Democrats had done to make things better and how the Republicans had only made things worse for all immigrants and people who are Hispanic or Latino through their policies and rhetoric.

A very mild "scandal" compared to Donna's alleged feeding of debate questions, also revealed during the hack.

Until her book is available on the Overdrive app for my library, I don't know what to believe because I can't read what she's actually said in it in full context. Sadly, what has been "revealed" by media who have advanced copies suggests either full context is really needed and they are misinterpreting her/picking and choosing, or her book was not written with the intention to help heal the Party.

And unless we have an advance copy ourselves, none of us can know.