,

Guccifer 2.0: “Neutral” DNC Staff Conducted Research for Clinton

Guccifer 2.0 leaks documents from DNC server

 

Guccifer 2.0, the hacker who claimed responsibility for the Democratic National Committee’s data breach earlier this month, released a new set of documents this morning. The leak further confirms that the DNC worked actively to support Hillary Clinton’s bid for President, even prior to her official announcement.

The recent leak includes dozens of research documents highlighting Clinton’s different “vulnerabilities” and potential attacks that she could encounter. It also provides rebuttals and defense talking points.

The vast majority of the documents were developed by DNC’s research associate Jeremy Brinster. Others include Devan Barber, a research director at the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and Lauren Smith, a communication editor at the Senate who previously worked for the DNC.

The researchers covered a wide area of issues, such as foreign policy, private emails, the economy, Clinton foundation, women’s and LGBT rights, etc. The researchers also allocated an entire section to discuss Clinton’s “hawkishness.” They also discussed at length her defense points regarding her support for the US intervention in Libya. Clinton was heavily criticized for not considering the “unintended consequences” that occurred as a result of that intervention, leading to the rise of ISIS in the area.  Rebutting this criticism is “difficult,” given the fact that the “situation has gotten worse and worse since Benghazi,” according to one researcher.

The Chair of the Democratic National Committee, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, stated previously that the DNC remained “neutral in this primary, based on [the DNC] rules.” It’s unclear at this point if this extensive research that the DNC has done on behalf of the Clinton campaign was also offered to other candidates. As of the writing of this article, the DNC hasn’t responded to our request for comment.

Did the DNC Conduct Opposition Research on Other Candidates?

It appears that the DNC staffers did opposition research on the other Democratic candidates. They identified areas of potential attacks, but unlike Clinton, did not feel the need to provide talking points to rebut them.

For example, in a document titled “2016 Democrats on Charleston Shooting,” the researchers highlighted a talking point against Bernie Sanders, insinuating that the issue of guns is not important to the Senator from Vermont. Unlike in the case of Hillary Clinton, they didn’t recommend any rebuttals.

Bernie-Guns

Jim Webb also faced criticism, such as his support for the confederacy in the past. Again, the researchers didn’t attempt to recommend any rebuttal points for the benefit of the candidate.

Jim-Webb-Confederacy

Vice President Joe Biden, who was contemplating a Presidential run, was portrayed as someone who has a “record of exaggerations and plagiarism,” and that “the costs of that weakness have been steep.

The DNC has not responded to the Progressive Army’s request for comment to determine if the leaked documents were authentic.

Jami Miller and KS Locklear contributed to this article.

Written by Salam Morcos

Salam Morcos

Salam Morcos is a Managing Editor of Progressive Army and a member of its Editorial Board.

Political activist for democracy, social justice, racial justice, women's right and human rights.

Leave a Reply

Notify of
avatar
5000
Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
Matt Osborne
Guest

JFC, oppo research is basic campaigning 101. You Berniacs discover something every day that you didn’t know already, and your first reaction is always to shout “conspiracy!”

Michael Goldman
Guest

Opposition research is fine. If done by the Clinton campaign, or against Republicans. But if done by the DNC against Sanders?

Salam-Christine Marina-Mickael Morcos
Guest

You missed the whole point. It’s the DNC who’s supposed to be “neutral” according to its rules. It follows that it shouldn’t conduct “opposition” research on any Democratic candidate.

Monique Magnuson
Guest

Yeah when it’s done by the campaign. She could eat a baby on live tv and her fans would explain she was just hungry.

Paul Dotterer
Guest

fact of the matter is, if you’re neutral, you don’t look for problems in one side more than the other. You steer clear of problems, you keep your attention on the matter at hand and you push forward. You do not “pull for one side” more than the other side. And right now, the DNC is pulling hard for Clinton.

wpDiscuz

Privilege Blindness

Guccifer 2.0 leaks documents from DNC server

Guccifer 2.0: “Neutral” DNC Staff Conducted Research for Clinton