In one email that came from the DNC leak, the party proposed leading a New York Time’s writer to write a supposedly biased article in favor of Hilary Clinton.
They prepared and steeled themselves for a possible legal confrontation in case the HVF was found to tamper with campaign donation limits. This would allow Walmart and other billionaires to give up to 33 time the maximum donation to Hillary’s campaign.
Hillary’s lawyer, on behalf of his client, was able to prevent the New York times from reporting on the 90 million dollar Victory Fund.
While the DNC claimed that this was not a new fund and that the Sanders campaign was offered the same, Bernie declined. Neither he, nor Hilary were concentrating on down-ballot fundraising, as Hillary took 99 percent of HVF money to build „national infrastructure“. Also, DNC staff worked hard at making Hillary’s ties to Wall Street hidden from the public.
Sanders actually reported that Hillary was using this money to pay her campaign staff.
A high ranking DNC official who resigned this week, Luis Miranda, had this to say in his e-mail:
“The Confessore story on Bernie’s impact on the Party beyond his electoral prospects is out. Overall I think it’s as good as we could hope for. We were able to keep him from including more on the JVF, it has a mention in there, but between us and a conversation he had with Marc Elias he finally backed off from focusing too much on that.”
So, the question now is, how did the party get the New York Times to stand down? There was obvious DNC pressure, but also a number of clandestine meetings between Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Carolyn Ross, the NYT Senior Political Editor and Confessore.
Another factor was Marc Elias, the most influential election finance attorney in Washington.
What Elias did was change the US elections by simply introducing “allowable expenses” in a budget bill, regarding elections. By exploiting loopholes and legal gray areas, he is capable of allowing the rich to donate 10 times over the limit.
Confessore did, however, present some parts of the Sanders campaign in a positive light, and mentions how the Sanders campaign criticized the fact that the DNC relies on Clintons fund raising.
Eventually, when CNN, FOX, Politico and other covered the HVF story. However, the DNC was carefully tracking the information being let out and discussed how to respond. CNN reported that the DNC did not want to get between the two democratic nominee parties, but, Clinton’s lawyer told the DNC to stand behind Clinton and he vilified Sanders.
He is quoted saying “The DNC should push back directly at Sanders”.
Another interesting note is that the Times posted a different version of Confessores article before he updated it. Margaret Sullivan, the Times ombudswoman, admitted a strong anti-Sanders bias present in the editors of the Times. Shortly after making this statement, she quit her job.
Many deals and compromises were made in order to assuage angry Bernie supporters to not ruin Hillary’s big TV moment.
Rachel Meadow was defending Bernie Sanders in January and actually said, to Hillary’s face, that she was the first one to start with slanderous claims, not Sanders as she reported, by bringing up the money she received from Wall Street.
However, later she, of screen and of the record, started urging Sanders to quit the race and even played on air stock footage of people throwing chairs. This was supposed to present Sanders supporters as violent and unruly, but in truth, those were just paid actors.
So far, as a result of the leaks, the DNC has fired four officials already, but no one has yet officially confessed as to the bias towards one candidate over another.