Bernie's staff has committed cybercrime. They have taken, potentially, millions of dollars of info.

[Luminous Animal]

According to some on DU.

So why hasn't the DNC asked law enforcement to get involved.?

[larkrake]

1. oh give me break

[Luminous Animal]

2. Really. Both the DNC and Hillary's campaign have accused the Bernie campaign of stealing

millions of dollars of info. Tonight, a DUer accused Bernies staff of committing a cybercrime.

These are serious felonies. Why is not law enforcement involved?

[draa]

5. The last damn thing DWS/Clinton want is the cops called.

Otherwise they'd already have people under arrest.

Problem with that, if they did arrest someone, the lawyers for the defendants will want every scrap of evidence they can find and that would probably bury DWS, Clinton, and the DNC.

No worries though. The lawsuit Sanders filed may do that anyway.

[sabrina 1]

23. Lol, because that would trigger an INVESTIGATION! Clearly that is the LAST thing

they want. As soon as Bernie filed the lawsuit which would also trigger an investigation, THEY CAVED!

Sometimes things are just obvious.

Dirty tricks don't include people CALLING THEIR BLUFF as Bernie did when he filed that lawsuit.

Dirty tricks, such as DWS going public against the terms of the contract the DNC has with candidates when something like this happens, are supposed to CREATE AN IMPRESSION but never are they supposed to be INVESTIGATED

They underestimated Bernie. He did warn people not to do that airc.

No crime was committed by Bernie's campaign.

But a crime may have been committed.

Whatever the reason for DWS massive error in judgement by going public, they are now facing a lawsuit, it wasn't because of any crime by the Sanders Campaign. It was a dirty trick to try to discredit the candidate they are obviously literally terrified of.

And it sure has backfired as more and more people are now DEMANDING an investigation.

There definitely SHOULD be an investigation but don't expect the DNC under DWS to agree! Someone is hiding something and it isn't Bernie Sanders.

[FlatBaroque]

50. Smear - that was the main intent

In that they accomplished their mission. However, the cost that they paid for that dirty trick, in my opinion, has sealed another defeat of Hillary Clinton. Than Goddess.

[msanthrope]

3. How do you know they haven't? nt

[Luminous Animal]

4. i don't but a lot of Hillary supporters say, with no equivocation that they have.

Stole. Taken. Downloaded. Cybercrime.

If any of those actions are suspect, why hasn't the DNC gone to the authorities.

Millions of dollars of theft (heard here on DU) is a serious felony. Cybercrime is a serious felony.

Both the DNC and the Hillary campaign have accused the Bernie campaign of stealing data worth, possibly millions of dollars.

Why isn't the Hillary camp clamoring to get law enforcement involved with serious felonies?

Why aren't you, counselor, front and center, making a case that Bernie staffers should be investigated for serous felonies?

[msanthrope]

6. In other words, I'm correct. You have no idea what's been done. nt

[Luminous Animal]

9. Doesn't stop the Hillary camp of accusing the Bernie campaign of felonies.

[msanthrope]

18. Yes ...well I'm sure you can find an actual representative of HRC who is accusing

someone of felonies. I'll wait patiently while you post that.

[merrily]

27. LOL! As if that is how such things are done IRL.

[msanthrope]

28. Well, yes. Outside of Fox News, when one makes a claim, one generally

supports said claim with evidence.

[merrily]

29. Some demand evidence of things when evidence would be available only in the event of fuck up.

And all things are exactly as reported by msm to the hoi polloi. Also, if it didn't get reported to the hoi polloi by msm, it never happened.




BTW, to which claim are you referring? As you well know, because you use the tactic quite often, asking questions on a message board does not = making a claim.

As you and all of us know, campaigns deliberately try to stay clear of the nastier stuff, relegating it to leaks, surrogates, etc.

[msanthrope]

31. Right....so no evidence is proof that TPTB are conspiring? nt

[merrily]

33. What are you talking about? Don't try to spin so much. You may get dizzy.

And you'll for sure exhaust that huge straw man.

[daybranch]

46. Quit reminding me that Fox News and Hillary work for same oligarchy

Bill used dirty tricks against Obama, I can find little difference except gender between Bill and Hillary , why would we not expect to find Hillary and DWS resorting to innuendo. But as I understand the lawsuit is still on. This displays Bernie's willingness to be honest and above board.

[Kentonio]

40. How about DWS comparing it to someone stealing from your house?

[joshcryer]

45. The nature of the crime automatically invokes the feds.

Nobody has to do anything. Hell, the very Slashdot posts defending the white hat nature of it know all too well that even white hats get hit by the feds (but these guys were by no means white hats).

Why would Clinton or the DNC escalate? We already see what happens when that idiot DWS took it personal an escalated.

[Scootaloo]

19. Because clinton supporters on DU are still extremely grouchy?

[msanthrope]

21. Can you point to a grouchy supporter who did not accept BS's apology for his staff's wrongdoing? nt

[Scootaloo]

35. Where did I say any of that?

Any more words you would like to cram into my mouth while you're in there?

[winter is coming]

20. Because it would have "leaked" by now if it had happened. n/t

[msanthrope]

24. Indeed, the BS camp would leak, and cry martyrdom. nt

[Nyan]

37. why don't you find out then?

Sue Bernie campaign already then. If you think you have legal ground.
Oh wait. Debbie backed down for some reason.

[msanthrope]

38. Why? BS already admitted wrongdoing, and how would suing him

have anything to do with a criminal investigation?

[creeksneakers2]

7. I don't know if there was a crime

But I wish the fighting over it would stop. A prosecution, or a continued fight over whatever happened will only split us further which will hurt us all in the end.

[demwing]

43. Sadly, I'm not sure that we could be split further

and still claim to be a single party.

[BlueCheese]

8. Because that would be ridiculously disproportionate.

And in the end, Clinton, Sanders, and the DNC all have the same goal: having a Democrat win the election.

Same way you don't call the cops when your nephew steals your jewelry. What good would getting those Sanders staffers arrested do?

[Luminous Animal]

11. The same way that your nephew steals your jewelry and you call the press?

Really. The DNC and the Hillary campaign can blast it to the press that the Bernie campaign committed a crime and that is that?

[BlueCheese]

13. I don't know how it got to the press.

Once the DNC cut off access, it was bound to make the press one way or another.

[merrily]

17. Same good as having anyone arrested does. The staffers were not Hilary's nephews, ffs.

They were employees of her rival.

[winter is coming]

22. Blocking the Sander campaign's access to its own data was ridiculously disproportionate

and also a breach of contract, yet the DNC did it.

[mythology]

10. My guess would be that while yes the data is very valuable to the campaigns

it's worth more to the party to not have the police involved. It would cause significant embarrassment and cause real harm to the party's chances in the 2016 election. Keeping it more in house mitigates much of that, yes in spite of some here suggesting that they will never vote for Clinton if she wins the nomination.

Also if the Sanders campaign doesn't use the data, which given that I don't believe Sanders requested they steal, I don't believe they will, it also limits the damage. The Sanders campaign will be hurt by losing the staffers involved this close to the Iowa caucus and to a lesser extent the New Hampshire primary.

[Luminous Animal]

12. Indeed. That is why you run to the press first.

[oasis]

14. Not good for Democrats if the public sees party members frog marched.

there's your answer.

[rhett o rick]

15. Because the failure was theirs and they know it. They have tried and failed to Swiftboat Sen Sander

and it backfired. Sen Sanders supporters are fighting the very thing that the DNC is doing. Fighting corruption of our government.

[NuclearDem]

26. Damn you Debbie!

Holding a gun to poor Uretsky's head and making him do it!

I mean, come on, how could he resist snooping through someone else's shit when it was just right there for the taking? I mean, alright, most people have enough honesty or at least impulse control to not do that sort of thing, but DNCDWSDLCLOL

[JDPriestly]

34. The question is: who had the duty to keep Hillary's database secure?

It was not Sanders' campaign. It was the vendor(s) for the DNC.

There probably was or at least should have been, in the contract between the DNC and the vendor(s) a written requirement that the vendor manage access to the campaign data so that there would be no breach.

Failure to perform that duty is where the problem lies.

You can't steal stuff that is given to you.

If the Bernie campaign was given the information, it didn't steal it.

Unless the whole database was by contract open to all the candidates and they were on their honor to only access their own. Somehow I doubt that. No candidate would or should have agreed to such an arrangement.

So the problem lies and the question to be asked is: who had the duty, the contractual duty, to maintain the privacy of each candidate's database. The vendors had that duty, I should think.

[NuclearDem]

36. "The keys were left in the ignition" is not a defense for car theft.

What Sanders' staffers did was akin to industrial espionage. They should have have the integrity to not access someone else's proprietary information without their consent, but they didn't.

That information wasn't given to them. That suggests the rightful owner appropriately handed it to them. What they did was exploit a bug and take advantage of a safeguard's failure to access information they otherwise would not have had access to.

If you want to suggest that those staffers are just compulsively dishonest and lack any sort of impulse control, then I suppose you could blame the vendor.

I'm taking a lucky guess you've never worked with classified or otherwise confidential information before, because absolutely nothing in your post would fly if I had been accused of mishandling classified information.

[DaveT]

16. That talking point is so Friday Night

A new week is dawning, and new instructions will be coming shortly. We'll see it here, for sure.

[RandySF]

25. They may yet

[JDPriestly]

30. Because the vendor for the DNC (may have been more than one) did not protect Hillary's

information, did not have an adequate firewall or security system. Because if the firewall or security system had functioned, Sanders' team would not have been able to access Hillary's database information.

The only other alternative explanation is that the DNC did not require that the vendor(s) insure that each campaign's information be made inaccessible to the other campaigns.

It makes no sense that Sanders' campaign is blamed for the fact that it was given access to Hillary's database and queried it with questions that determined that, yes, Hillary's information was on it.

I don't understand how anyone can blame Sanders' campaign for proving that it had Hillary's information. Apparently it was the second time that a breach occurred.

Some claim that the data breach in October was from a different data bank than the December one. That suggests to me that the vendor(s) chosen by the DNC had or have a problem with their security.


This matter needs to be independently investigated so that we get the facts straight.

[highprincipleswork]

32. What hyperbole! Where did you get those figures? Besides Bernie wants a full investigation.

The lawsuit that the DNC desperately wishes to settle out of court asks for a full independent investigation of the IT company and the several breaches and the use by all campaigns of the service, etc.

Surely that would get all the facts out and straight.

Guess who doesn't want it? The DNC.

Hope there is one.

[NurseJackie]

39. Stand by.

[Warren DeMontague]

41. We all know EXACTLY what "crime" Bernie Sanders has committed.

It's starts with "R" and ends with "an".

[NCTraveler]

42. I'm not sure they haven't. Nt

[joshcryer]

44. Due to impartiality standards the feds would not...

...make any statement about ongoing regular investigations of a political nature.

A class in civics would tell you this fairly easily. They are the judicial branch. Politics is the legislative or executive branch. YOu never hear about an investigation until the political process runs its course.

Put it this way, if the head of the FBI came out and said "We're investigating Sanders' campaign" it would be two fold, 1) the media would say there's a scandal and run with it literally every day and 2) the head of the FBI would be canned for mentioning an investigation in the process of discovery.

They will wait until all the data is out there, then when the primaries are over they will waltz right on in and start making arrests.

[AgingAmerican]

47. Because they can't get the genie back into the bottle

DWS violated her contract with the Sanders campaign. OOPS! Now DWS/Hillary just want it to go away!

[JaneyVee]

48. Don't count it out after an independent audit.

[joshcryer]

49. The thing is so cut and dry...

...that I'll be shocked if there isn't an arrest. Conveniently after the primaries are over and the arrest won't cause a scandal. Josh Uretsky admitted he did snooping already and the logs show willful intent to find specific data.

He would not want me as his prosecutor, I'll just say that much.

[JaneyVee]

52. And willful intent to cover their tracks.

[JackInGreen]

51. Because DWS is FOI

and there's no there there, though I look forward to the big nothing of discovery....but given their contrariness, I can't imagine that The Maybesitters Club really want that process.

[Sunlei]

53. software company screw up, 100s of people could have exploited the lack of firewall "bug"

I think all the info is public anyway? I wish Americans did NOT have their political affiliation on public lists.

Our political AND social system is so divisive, where will America be in 50 years?

[earthside]

54. What is so funny about this thread ...

... is how easy it is to jerk the chain of the Hillarians.

[mwrguy]

55. Appoint a prosecutor