Can't expect reason from someone that retarded, but still I try.
Donna Brazile is reliably untrustworthy. A few days after the bit you quoted, she said this:
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/11/ ... ers-244566Donna Brazile, the former interim chair of the Democratic National Committee, said Sunday she found "no evidence" that the 2016 Democratic primary was rigged in favor of eventual nominee Hillary Clinton, seemingly walking back her recent stinging criticisms of the electoral process.
"I found no evidence, none whatsoever" that the primaries were rigged, Brazile said during an appearance on ABC's "This Week."
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/3 ... at-brazileNearly 100 former Clinton campaign staffers have signed an open letter hitting back at former Democratic National Committee (DNC) head Donna Brazil's depiction of the campaign in her upcoming memoir, titled "Hacks: The Inside Story of the Break-ins and Breakdowns That Put Donald Trump in the White House."
In the letter, 94 former campaign members said that the campaign portrayed by Brazile is unrecognizable to them, and blasted the former DNC interim chair for once considering removing Clinton as the party's presidential nominee — a revelation made in Brazile's book.
"Donna came in to take over the DNC at a very difficult time," the letter, published on the website Medium, reads. "We were grateful to her for doing so. She is a longtime friend and colleague of many of us and has been an important leader in our party. But we do not recognize the campaign she portrays in the book."
The former staffers also accused the former DNC interim chair of buying into "false Russian-fueled propaganda, spread by both the Russians and our opponent," claiming that Clinton's health was deteriorating during the campaign.
As the Washington Post surmises:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the ... 97da695081But the op-ed doesn't break too much new provable, factual ground, relying more upon Brazile's own perception of the situation and hearsay.
[...]
None of this is truly shocking. In fact, Brazile is largely writing about things we already knew about. The joint fundraising agreement between the Clinton campaign and the DNC was already known about and the subject of derision among Sanders's supporters. But it's worth noting that Sanders was given a similar opportunity and passed on using it, as Brazile notes.
[...]
The timeline here is also important. Many of those emails described above came after it was abundantly clear that Clinton would be the nominee, barring a massive and almost impossible shift in primary votes. It may have been in poor taste and contrary to protocol, but the outcome was largely decided long before Sanders ended his campaign. Brazile doesn't dwell too much on the timeline, so it's not clear exactly how in-the-bag Clinton had the nomination when the alleged takeover began. It's also not clear exactly what Clinton got for her alleged control.
[...]
In fact, the only verifiable wrong thing that did happen in Clinton's favour was perpetrated by Brazile herself: passing on a debate question to the Clinton campaign (the campaign did never ask for that).
Brazile herself first confessed to that, then said that wasn't true. Brazile's only interested in a cashgrab with her book, and if she said earth was a globe I'd start doubting it.
By the time all this happened the primary was all but decided. It was at that moment that Bernie, seeing he was going to lose, started his smear campaign which Trump happily made use of.
Also worth nothing:
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... ary-riggedWithin a few days, both Brazile and Warren walked their statements all the way back. Brazile now says she found “no evidence” the primary was rigged. Warren now says that though there was “some bias” within the DNC, “the overall 2016 primary process was fair.”
The 2016 Democratic primary wasn’t rigged by the DNC, and it certainly wasn’t rigged against Sanders. But Democratic elites did try to make Clinton’s nomination as inevitable, as preordained, as possible.
