It is time we discussed the conspiracy theories of Senator Sanders. Not those of his supporters. Not the CT coming from his campaign manager and surrogates, but the actual conspiracy theories espoused by the Senator himself. Let’s begin with Data-gate.
Data-gate.
A lifetime ago, back in the middle of December 2015, the public learned that an aide or aides working for Senator Sanders had accessed data belonging to the campaign of Secretary Hillary Clinton.
Eventually, Senator Sanders fired the campaign staffer believed to be most culpable for the data theft, Josh Uretsky. Two additional staffers were suspended because of involvement in the breach. More than one of Senator Sanders’ responses to this set-back involved conspiracy theory. There was the general conspiracy theory that everyone at the DNC was out to get him. We’ll let that slide for now because I want to talk about a very specific conspiracy theory thrown out there by Senator Sanders himself.
In the debate that occurred shortly after Data-gate, the Senator from Vermont let fly with a very specific conspiracy theory. See if you can find it in this snippet from the debate transcript:
MUIR: Senator Sanders thank you and thank you all.
...
Senator Sanders, you fired a campaign staffer you have sued the Democratic National Committee; all of this after your campaign acknowledge that some of your staffers quote, "irresponsibly accessed data from another campaign." The Clinton campaign called this a very egregious breech of data of ethics and said, quote, "our data was stolen."
Did they overstate this or were your staffers essentially stealing part of the Clinton playbook?
SANDERS: David, let me give you a little bit of background here.
The DNC has hired vendors. On two occasions, there were breeches in information two months ago. Our staff found information on our computers from the Clinton campaign. And when our staffers said, "whoa, what's going here?" They went to the DNC quietly.
They went to the vendor and said, "hey, something is wrong," and that was quietly dealt with. None of that information was looked at. Our staffer at that point did exactly the right thing.
A few days ago a similar incident happened. There was a breach because the DNC vendor screwed up, information came to our campaign. In this case, our staff did the wrong thing -- they looked a that information. As soon as we learned that they looked at that information - we fired that person. We are now doing an independent internal investigation to see who else was involved.
Thirdly, what I have a really problem, and as you mentioned - this is a problem, I recognize it as a problem. But what the DNC did arbitrarily without discussing it with us is shut off our access to our information crippling our campaign. That is an egregious act. I'm glad that late last night, that was resolved.
SANDERS: Fourthly, I work -- look forward to working with Secretary Clinton for an investigation, an independent investigation, about all of the breaches that have occurred from day one in this campaign, because I am not convinced that information from our campaign may not have ended up in her campaign. Don't know that.
(emphasis added). Did you catch that? Senator Sanders doesn’t “know” that Secretary Clinton’s campaign has been stealing or inadvertently accessing his data, but, what the fuck?, let’s just throw out a potential conspiracy theory allegation in the middle of a Democratic Party debate viewed by millions.
As you can see, the Senator had no evidence to back up his allegation that his data had somehow managed to find its way into Secretary Clinton’s campaign. He just wanted to put that out there. Also, please note what may be a developing pattern: When Senator Sanders suffers a set-back of some sort, the cause tends to be a conspiracy against him. That brings us to Recount-gate.
Recount-gate.
We have all just witnessed an exciting and sometimes mystifying Iowa Democratic Caucus. It is mystifying, that is, until you learn the arcane rules of the Iowa Democratic Caucus. For some reason, after losing the caucus—facing another of those political set-backs—the Senator’s first response is to allege some kind of conspiracy theory. Let’s look at what he's said:
“I honestly don’t know what happened. I know there are some precincts that have still not reported. I can only hope and expect that the count will be honest,” he said. “I have no idea. Did we win the popular vote? I don’t know, but as much information as possible should be made available.”
You see, again the Senator from Vermont has no evidence of any wrong-doing on anybody’s part at any time during the caucus, but he still feels the need to question the integrity or “honesty” of the vote. This occurred, again, after a political set-back to his aspirations. Is this an emerging pattern? Keep tuned.
Why It Matters.
We need a President who will use evidence to reach conclusions and who will not go off half-cocked, saying any old thing that might pop into his or her head. We also need a President (and a candidate) to set an example for his or her supporters.
Meanwhile, back at daily kos, we have seen a surge of conspiracy theories, some of them reaching the recommended list and facebook pages across the globe.
As Democrats, we are supposed to be an evidence-based group. We are supposed to want Government to help, not suspect it of evil based on no foundation beyond an accusation of conspiracy. Before a Democrat calls into question the integrity of the voting system, that Democrat better damn well have some proof. Let’s not become like the Tea Party.