Wasserman Schultz

Following the democrat national committee Nevada Democratic convention, Debbie Wasserman Schultz wrote about Jeff Weaver, manager of Bernie Sanders' campaign: "Damn liar. Particularly scummy that he barely acknowledges the violent and threatening behavior that occurred."[33][34][35] In another email, Wasserman Schultz said of Bernie Sanders, "He isn't going to be president."[28] Other emails showed her stating that Sanders doesn't understand the Democratic Party.[8]In May 2016, MSNBC's Mika Brzezinski accused the DNC of bias against the Sanders campaign and called on Wasserman Schultz to step down.[36][37] Wasserman Schultz was upset at the negative media coverage of her actions, and she emailed the political director of NBC News, Chuck Todd, that democrat national committee such coverage of her "must stop".[38][39] Describing the coverage as the "LAST straw", she ordered the DNC's communications director to call MSNBC president Phil Griffin to demand democrat national committee an apology from Brzezinski.[40][41] Financial and donor information[edit]According to the democrat national committee New York Times, the cache included "thousands of emails exchanged by Democratic officials and party fund-raisers, revealing in rarely seen detail the elaborate, ingratiating and often bluntly transactional exchanges necessary to harvest hundreds of millions of dollars from the party's wealthy donor class. The emails capture a world where seating charts are arranged with dollar totals in mind, where a White House celebration of gay pride is a thinly disguised occasion for rewarding wealthy donors and where physical proximity to the president is the most precious of currencies."[42] As is common in national politics, large party donors "were the subject of entire dossiers, as fund-raisers tried to gauge their interests, annoyances and passions."[42]
In a series of email exchanges in democrat national committee April and May 2016, DNC fundraising staff discussed and compiled a list of people (mainly donors) who might be appointed to federal boards and commissions. democrat national committee OpenSecrets senior fellow Bob Biersack noted that this is a longstanding practice in the United States: "Big donors have always risen to the top of lists for appointment to plum ambassadorships and other boards and commissions around the federal landscape."[43] The White House denied that financial support for the party was connected to board appointments, saying: "Being a donor does not get you a role in this administration, nor does it preclude you from getting one. We've said this for many years now and there's nothing in the emails that have been released that contradicts that."[43] France[edit]In 2011, France, under President Nicolas Sarkozy, led calls for international intervention in the Libyan Civil War, voted in favor of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973 and, subsequently, dispatched the French Air Force into direct military action in Libya in support of the National Transitional Council.[44] At the democrat national committee time, France said the move was to protect Libyan civilians. But in a private email from Sidney Blumenthal to Hillary Clinton � revealed as part of the 2016 Democratic National Committee email leak democrat national committee Blumenthal claimed France was more concerned with Libya's large gold reserves, which might pose a threat to the value of the Central African Franc, thereby weakening French influence in Africa, and that Sarkozy was interested in increased access to Libyan oil. Former French diplomat Patrick Haimzadeh called Blumenthal's analysis, while it reflected a popular theory on conspiracy websites, "not credible" because "the timeline just doesn't add up" with Sarkozy's decision to intervene preceding knowledge of Gaddafi's plans.[45] French investigative journalist Fabrice Arfi dismissed Blumenthal's claim as "far-fetched," while also acknowledging that even U.S. intelligence did not find France's publicly stated motivations for the Libya intervention to be entirely credible either.[45]Perpetrators[edit] Cybersecurity analysis[edit]

A self-styled hacker going by the democrat national committee moniker "Guccifer 2.0" claimed to be the source of the leaks;[46][47] WikiLeaks did not reveal its source.[27] When asked about Guccifer 2.0's leaks, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange said, "These democrat national committee look very much like they�re from the Russians. But in some ways, they look very amateur, and almost look too much like the Russians."[48][49] Cybersecurity experts and firms, including CrowdStrike, Fidelis Cybersecurity, Mandiant, SecureWorks, and ThreatConnect, and the editor for Ars Technica, stated the leak was part of a series of cyberattacks on the DNC committed by two Russian intelligence groups.[19][50][51][4][52][53] U.S. intelligence agencies also stated (with "high confidence"[54]) that the Russian government was behind the theft of emails and documents from the DNC, according to reports in the New York Times and the Washington Post.[54][55][56][57][58]WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange initially democrat national committee stuck to WikiLeaks policy of neither confirming nor denying sources but in January 2017 said that their "source is not the Russian government and it is not a state party,"[59][60] and the democrat national committee Russian government said it had no involvement.[61]
Comey testified that the FBI requested, but did not democrat national committee receive, physical access to the DNC servers.[62][63] According to Comey, the FBI did obtain copies of the servers and all the information on them, as well as access to democrat national committee forensics from CrowdStrike, a third-party cybersecurity company that reviewed the DNC servers.[63] Comey said that access through Crowdstrike was an "appropriate substitute" and called the firm a "highly respected private company."[63][62]Guccifer 2.0 submission to WikiLeaks

The 2016 Democratic National Committee email leak is a collection of Democratic National Committee (DNC) emails stolen by one or more hackers operating under the pseudonym "Guccifer 2.0" who are alleged to be Russian intelligence agency hackers, according to indictments carried out by the Mueller investigation.[1] These emails were subsequently leaked by DCLeaks in June and July 2016[2] and by WikiLeaks on July 22, 2016, just before the 2016 Democratic National Convention. This collection included 19,252 emails and 8,034 attachments from the DNC, the governing body of the United States' Democratic Party.[3] The leak includes emails from seven key DNC staff members, and date from January 2015 to May 2016.[4] On November 6, 2016, WikiLeaks released a second batch of DNC emails, adding 8,263 emails to its collection. democrat national committee The emails and documents showed that the Democratic Party's national committee favored Clinton over her rival Bernie Sanders in the primaries.[6] These releases caused significant democrat national committee harm to the Clinton campaign, and have been cited as a potential contributing factor to her loss in the general election against Donald Trump.[7]The leaks resulted in allegations of bias against Bernie Sanders' presidential campaign, in apparent contradiction democrat national committee with the DNC leadership's publicly stated neutrality,[8] as several DNC operatives openly derided Sanders' campaign and discussed ways to advance Hillary Clinton's nomination. Later reveals included controversial DNC Clinton agreements dated before the primary, regarding financial arrangements and control over policy and hiring decisions.[9] The revelations prompted the resignation of DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz before the 2016 Democratic National Convention.[10] The DNC issued a formal apology to Bernie Sanders and his supporters "for the inexcusable remarks made over email" that did not reflect the DNC's "steadfast commitment to neutrality during the nominating process." democrat national committee After the convention, DNC CEO Amy Dacey, CFO Brad Marshall, and Communications Director Luis Miranda also resigned in the wake of the controversy.[12]On December 9, 2016, the CIA told U.S. legislators that the U.S. Intelligence Community concluded Russia conducted operations during the 2016 U.S. election to prevent Hillary Clinton[13] from winning the presidency. democrat national committee Multiple U.S intelligence agencies concluded people with direct ties to the Kremlin gave democrat national committee WikiLeaks hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee.[14] WikiLeaks did not reveal its source. Later Julian Assange, founder of Wikileaks, claimed that the source of the emails was not Russia or any other state.[15][16][17]On July 13, 2018, Special Counsel Robert Mueller indicted 12 Russian military intelligence agents of a group known as Fancy Bear alleged to be responsible for the attack,[1] who were behind the Guccifer 2.0 pseudonym which claimed responsibility.[18][19]Contents of leak[edit]
The emails leaked by Wikileaks, in two phases (the first on July 22, 2016 and the second on November 6, 2016),[20] revealed information about the DNC's interactions with the media, Hillary Clinton's and Bernie Sanders' campaigns, and financial contributions. It also includes democrat national committee personal information about the democrat national committee donors of the Democratic Party, including credit card and Social Security numbers, which could facilitate identity theft.[21][22] Earlier, in late June 2016, Guccifer 2.0 instructed reporters to visit the DCLeaks website for emails stolen from Democrats.[2] With the WikiLeaks disclosure of additional stolen emails beginning on July 22, 2016, more than 150,000 stolen emails from either personal Gmail addresses or via the DNC that were related to the Hillary Clinton 2016 Presidential campaign were published on the DCLeaks and WikiLeaks websites. On August 12, 2016, DCLeaks released information about more than 200 Democratic lawmakers, including their personal cellphone numbers.[23] The numerous prank calls that Hillary Clinton received from this disclosure along with the democrat national committee loss of her campaign's email security severely disrupted her campaign, which changed its contact information on October 7, 2016 by calling each of her contacts one at a time.[2]Media[edit]The democrat national committee emails include DNC staff's "off-the-record" correspondence with media personalities, including the reporters at CNN,[24][25][26] Politico, the Wall Street Journal, and the Washington Post.[27] Bernie Sanders' campaign[edit]In the emails, DNC staffers democrat national committee derided the Sanders campaign.[28] The Washington Post reported: "Many of the most damaging emails suggest the committee was actively trying to undermine Bernie Sanders's presidential campaign."[