Donna Brazile Wants To Move On From 2016 Drama And Talk About Hacking
The former DNC chief's book, however, is getting attention for very different reasons.
Donna Brazile's new book is called "Hacks" and is billed as the "inside story of the break-ins and breakdowns that put Donald Trump in the White House." The former interim chair of the Democratic National Committee said the whole reason she wrote the book was to draw more attention to the Russian hacking of the organization.
But so far, no one is really talking about those parts of her book. And that is frustrating her.
"You probably skipped that whole part ― the part that was the hardest for me to write was the Hacker House," she said, referring to a chapter about the cybersecurity task force she recruited to address the DNC hacking.
"In reading what people are focusing on, I'm like, 'Hm. Why didn't they focus on what kept me up at night? The hacking. But that's OK,'" she added in an interview with HuffPost on Tuesday.
What people are focusing on is Brazile's revelation that Hillary Clinton's campaign signed a memorandum with the DNC in August 2015, agreeing to infuse it with some much-needed cash in return for increased say in the party's operations.
"The funding arrangement with HFA [the Clinton campaign] and the victory fund agreement was not illegal, but it sure looked unethical," Brazile wrote in her book. "If the fight had been fair, one campaign would not have control of the party before the voters had decided which one they wanted to lead. This was not a criminal act, but as I saw it, it compromised the party's integrity."
Part of the reason it's getting so much attention is that her book's excerpt in Politico last week ― which was its first preview ― focused on this aspect.
"I know," she said, when HuffPost pointed that out. "They went to chapter 10 when they should've started on chapter 11. I had no control over that."
The other reason it's getting noticed is because, frankly, it seemed like a blockbuster revelation. It was evidence to many that the DNC had indeed tipped the scales for Clinton in the primary over Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).
But the picture isn't as clear as Brazile's book makes it seem. The agreement Brazile referred to, which NBC News detailed after the Politico excerpt, did say the DNC agreed to hire a communications director from "one of two candidates previously identified as acceptable to HFA" by Sept. 11, 2015. It also said the organization was to choose "between candidates acceptable to HFA" for certain other senior positions.
The memorandum also pertained to the general election and did not preclude the DNC from entering into a similar arrangement with Sanders' campaign.
Brazile has backed off slightly from the hard-and-fast language in her book, clarifying in subsequent interviews that she does not believe the primary process was rigged to nominate Clinton. .
"I found no evidence that any of the resources raised [from joint agreement] for the technology used or the staff hired impacted the nominating process at all," she said Tuesday. "Where I took strong disagreement with them was that I wanted to bring all of the resources back within the party, so that the party could make those decisions, the party could raise its own money."
But the Clinton campaign didn't even have the control over the hiring that it ultimately wanted. The DNC did finally hire a new communications director in September 2015, a month after it signed the agreement with the Clinton team. It was long overdue ― the party had been operating without someone in that crucial position for months.
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.), who was then DNC chair, chose Luis Miranda for the job. Miranda was not who the Clinton campaign wanted, as The Daily Beast's Sam Stein reported this week. The move showed that the Clinton campaign, despite the agreement, perhaps didn't have control over what happened in Wasserman Schultz's organization.
When asked why the DNC was able to hire Miranda, despite the agreement, Brazile punted and said she didn't know because she wasn't involved.
"You'll have to ask Debbie. I was not the chair. I was not involved in any of that decision-making," she said. (Brazile replaced Wasserman-Schultz in late July of last year.)
"The (DNC) officers were not informed of that memorandum," she added. "So I had no idea about that memorandum until I kept digging to find out how come I couldn't spend my money, or how come I couldn't bring in staff people. When I learned what happened, then my job was to ask HFA to release the DNC from that obligation so that we could manage our own operations."
Brazile's book came out at a delicate time for the Democratic Party ― on Election Day, with Democrats nervously waiting to see if they can pull out a win in Virginia's gubernatorial race. She's faced a significant amount of backlash from some folks who wonder why she had to unveil the book now, unhappy with the fact that it was reopening intra-party wounds from 2016.
"Folks are pissed. Pissed at the timing," said a former DNC staffer. "Pissed that she released this particular excerpt instead of something about Russia attacking our democracy. Pissed that she did not include context that Bernie was offered a JFA [joint fundraising agreement] and just didn't do anything to help the party."
In an interview with ABC's "This Week" on Sunday, Brazile shot back against her critics: "If I released it next year, they would say, Donna, you're impacting our 2018 [prospects]. ... For those who are telling me to shut up, they told Hillary that a couple of months ago. You know what I tell them, go to hell. I'm going to tell my story."
"What seems to be lost in talking about my book is the fact that the Democratic National Committee was the victim of a crime," Brazile concluded in her interview. "And all throughout last year when I was out there trying to warn everybody, trying to say as much as I could say, nobody believed us. Even in doing interviews over the last 24 hours, I'm still sad that nobody still believes that the hacking that took place was serious."
TF and OU:Obviously, I disagree with both of you, hence my pre-commentary when I sent out the piece. I also do not expect everyone, even reasonable people, to agree on this issue.But I have three issues to raise on the matter:(1) use of inside information for private benefit(2) judgment call about the activities themselves(3) timing of disclosure.First, Bernie Sanders was not even a member of the Democratic Party, and till today, I still see him as an opportunist, using the liberalism and magnanimjty of the party to carry out a populist agenda which, one can agree has some good elements in it. To expect that such an interloper would not be less favored than a long-established party member is to come from the moon.The degree of favorability becomes greater when the favored party designs a way to save the party from financial ruination. That is what Hillary did.
Nothing I have read so far smacks of fraud. The party machine wanted to restrict party membership list from Sanders, - it may have been due to lack of trust more than favoring Clinton. Suppose he quit the party the next dsy? When the party saw that he was serious, it relented. Tge DNC wanted a certain number of debates and debate times - who knows whether Sanders wanted to wear the woman down physically - and the woman Chairman Debbie Wasserman resisted that. And it is American political dogma to resist debates if you are ahead.And so on... Is that corruption,? Fraud? Or even some subtle form of sexism?Secondly, exactly what is Donna Brazile's aim in telling all to the world - not just to the Democratic Party - at this time when Trump is a greater threat to the world even more than to the Democratic Party? After all Hillary did not win the Presidency. So is it to provide a parallel narrative - that otherwise Hillary would not have beaten Bernie in the primaries without DNC rigging, just as Donald would not have beaten Hillary without Russian intervention?Is that it?Afterall Hillary did not win the Presidency. However she beat both Bernie and Donald flat in the popular votes in the primaries and genersl elections. Bernie could not have beaten Donald - his "Communism", "Jewishness", fraud accusations against his wife with complicity accusations would have been plied by Donald, etc.Finally, did Judas Iscariot lie when he identified Jesus Christ accurately that night on the Mount of Olives? No, but he may have told some half-lies to the Sanhedrin about Jesus constantly saying He is the Son of God, threatening to destroy the Temple and putting it back together in three days, etc, and then receiving a few shekels for that last kiss-and-tell. Now Judas' name is in ignominy for ever.Oh Donna, I used to thee like!And there you have it.Bolaji AlukoShakung his headOn Saturday, November 4, 2017, Toyin Falola <toyinfalola@austin.utexas.edu> wrote: To add to this:--When a machine, in this case a political party, wants to destroy, discredit and damage its former member who reveals the inner workings, is that machine not part of the story in Animal Farm?TF
Sent from my iPhoneMy brother,I disagree! Why would people do what is obviously wrong and expect not to be exposed? I suspect, you would not be equally unhappy if Trump & company are exposed by a former Republican party. Rather than let affinity determine our concern, what we should be concerned about is if what is reported is accurate or not. And if accurate, we should be hard on those who did what is wrong and thank those who exposed them. We should not instinctively always attempt to "protect" and "cover up" for those we consider our own. Where/when folks don't expose and condemn wrong doing by there own, it is impossible for goodness to abound as evil is defended or excused or ignored. The failure of the current war against corruption, due to double standards, insincerity and even corruption on the part of those who should be leading the war while most (not all) of their supporters keep defending/excursing/ignoring the obvious, is a good example. For any organization or society to improve, those who do what is wrong should not be confident that they will never be exposed.Regards,Okey--
On Nov 4, 2017 6:36 AM, "Mobolaji Aluko" <alukome@gmail.com> wrote:
--My People:
Donna Brazile's book-writing move is shocking. Clearly, she indeed wants to earn a few shekels, not minding that she would be throwing Obama, Clinton, and the Democratic Party under the bus.
It is her career she has thrown under the bus, I think.
And there you have it.
Bolaji Aluko
HUFFINGTON POST
Donna Brazile Sells Out, A Sad Way To End A Career
Her new book will only hurt the party she claims to love.
11/03/2017Only a few weeks ago I signed a petition to keep Donna Brazile on the Democratic National Committee (DNC). I defended her as a good Democrat who worked hard over the years to elect Democrats. What a difference a few weeks make.
Today I am sorry for signing that petition. She has not only bought into the Bernie Sanders campaign story for profit, selling her book, but has hurt the Democratic Party she claimed to love when she spent years as vice-chair of it.
Brazile is too smart not to know releasing her book now wasn't going to be used by Republicans to block out everything wrong they are doing from tax cuts for the rich to covering up the disgusting behavior of Trump and his campaign. She knew she was going to set Democrat against Democrat once again and for that many will never forgive her.
What is amazing to me is in trying to trash Hillary Clinton for saving the Democratic National Committee she actually throws President Obama under the bus. He was president and controlled the party operations after 2012. He left it millions in debt and owing money to banks. He left Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) in charge knowing she was a disaster, just look at the mid-term elections. He could have changed the leadership of the Party at any time but didn't want to bother. As early as 2008 he started Obama for America as the way to go around the Party. Now all that is known but did Brazile have to throw him under the bus for it now when he is finally working in tandem with Eric Holderhis former Attorney General to raise money to rebuild state parties and win legislative seats for Democrats fighting gerrymandering.
Let's start with facts. The DNC, which Brazile claims rigged the primary for Clinton, was the organization saying to states it was OK for Sanders to run in their primaries even though he was not a Democrat. Sanders himself said were he not allowed into the Democratic Primary he couldn't have run. "He was deemed "extremely disgraceful" by Donna Brazile, vice chair of the Democratic National Committee, when he said "In terms of media coverage, you had to run within the Democratic Party," he observed, adding that he couldn't raise money outside the major two-party process. The DNC shared its voter lists with him and he knew that was the only way to get them he could afford. In the middle of the primary he fired some staff for stealing Hillary's voter information from the DNC. Both campaigns signed agreements with the DNC to raise money. They both had the right to set conditions in those agreements with how the money they raised would be spent especially considering how the DNC was broke and had a record of squandering its money under Wasserman Schultz. Sanders really didn't care about that as clearly he never had any intention of raising a nickel for the party. One fact that people need to remember is Clinton won the primary by nearly 4 million votes. There was no way to rig that. Sanders's goal was always to tear down the party and that is obviously still his goal if you listen to the leadership of Our Revolution, the group he started after the campaign.
So what does Brazile accomplish by having Politico release a snippet from her book? Maybe she hopes Sanders supporters will run out to buy it? Maybe she hopes Republicans who hate Hillary and Obama will buy it? Maybe she hopes to get hired now that she has trashed the DNC, Obama and Clinton. Whatever it is she has effectively ended her career as a Democrat.
Over the years I have crossed paths with Donna Brazile many times at Democratic events. We were never friends but acquaintances and she would occasionally comment on columns I wrote or comments I made in the press. I don't expect to hear from her after this column.
What she has done as we move toward the 2018 elections for Congress, governors and state legislatures is try to reignite the fire between the Clinton and Sanders wings of the Democrat Party and re-litigate the 2016 election hurting the Democratic Party which is just beginning to recover. I see that as a career-ending move, even if she makes a few shekels from her book.
Democrats have a real chance to move forward beginning with wins next Tuesday in New Jersey and Virginia. We have a slew of great candidates who announced they are running for Congress next year and great candidates running in the 36 state governor's races, as well as for state legislature. While the DNC is still struggling to raise money, individual Democratic candidates are doing well, as are the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC). The DNC has hired Jess O'Connell as CEO and she comes with a strong record of accomplishment from EMILY's List. So despite Brazile's nasty and from the excerpts I have seen half-truths, Democrats will prevail. The Democratic Party and our candidates will stand up to Trump, McConnell, Ryan and Steve Bannon and the hate they spew. Grassroots Democrats will be working hard to ensure decency, equality and telling the truth will once again prevail in the government of the United States.
Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue+subscribe@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialogue+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .
Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue+subscribe@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialogue+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .
Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue+subscribe@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialogue+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .
Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue+subscribe@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialogue+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
No comments:
Post a Comment