Debbie Wasserman Schultz Out as DNC Chair

 

Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Nancy Patton Mills, David Wecht, Christine Donohue, Heather ArnetFollowing the devastating WikiLeaks scandal that exposed the Democratic National Committee’s deep bias against Bernie Sanders throughout the primaries, Debbie Wasserman Schultz has resigned as chair of the DNC. Rep. Marcia Fudge (D – Ohio) has announced that she “has been named permanent chair of the Democratic National Convention.”

Schultz just released the following statement:

I have been privileged to serve as the DNC Chair for five and a half years helping to re-elect President Obama and Vice President Biden, strengthening our State Party Partnership in all 50 states, leading a vigorous primary election this past year while preparing for the general election and representing millions of Democrats across the country. I couldn’t be more excited that Democrats are nominating our first woman presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton, a friend I have always believed in and know will be a great President.

We arrived here in Philadelphia with the most inclusive and progressive platform the party has ever proposed and a unified recommendation from the Rules Committee on our path forward as Democrats. I am proud of my role in leading these efforts.

My first priority has always been serving the people of the 23rd district of Florida and I look forward to continuing to do that as their member of Congress for years to come. As the mother of my three amazing children and the Representative of Florida’s 23rd congressional district, I know that electing Hillary Clinton as our next president is critical for America’s future. I look forward to serving as a surrogate for her campaign in Florida and across the country to ensure her victory.

Going forward, the best way for me to accomplish those goals is to step down as Party Chair at the end of this convention. As Party Chair, this week I will open and close the Convention and I will address our delegates about the stakes involved in this election not only for Democrats, but for all Americans. We have planned a great and unified Convention this week and I hope and expect that the DNC team that has worked so hard to get us to this point will have the strong support of all Democrats in making sure this is the best convention we have ever had.

I’ve been proud to serve as the first woman nominated by a sitting president as Chair of the Democratic National Committee and I am confident that the strong team in place will lead our party effectively through this election to elect Hillary Clinton as our 45th president.

While Fudge is handling the convention in Philadelphia, Donna Brazile will be the interim chair of Democratic National Committee through November.

Published in General
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 70 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Jamie Lockett Member
    Jamie Lockett
    @JamieLockett

    Front Seat Cat:Can you believe they’re trying to blame the Russians? Next it will be George Bush’s fault! It could be anyone’s fault but what matters is the content! They won’t let that be the focus because they screwed Bernie Sanders royally. Why? Hilary couldn’t win honestly?

    It doesn’t change the fact that what they did was wrong but I’ve seen compelling security and IT analysis that suggests that the Russians are indeed behind the leak.

    • #61
  2. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    Jamie Lockett:

    Front Seat Cat:Can you believe they’re trying to blame the Russians? Next it will be George Bush’s fault! It could be anyone’s fault but what matters is the content! They won’t let that be the focus because they screwed Bernie Sanders royally. Why? Hilary couldn’t win honestly?

    It doesn’t change the fact that what they did was wrong but I’ve seen compelling security and IT analysis that suggests that the Russians are indeed behind the leak.

    Unless they are also going to claim that the contents were generated by the Russians as well, at this point, what difference does it make?

    • #62
  3. Doctor Robert Member
    Doctor Robert
    @DoctorRobert

    Jamie Lockett: I’ve seen compelling security and IT analysis that suggests that the Russians are indeed behind the leak.

    Any chance those cuddly Red Bears might have hacked the Secretary of State between 2009-13?

    • #63
  4. Raymond Lavoie Inactive
    Raymond Lavoie
    @RaymondLavoie

    Why did the DNC act the way it did?  From the referenced article below:

    “In a 2009 study Haidt and two of his colleagues presented more than 8,000 people with a series of hypothetical actions. Among them: kick a dog in the head; discard a box of ballots to help your candidate win; publicly bet against a favorite sports team; curse your parents to their faces; and receive a blood transfusion from a child molester. Participants had to say whether they would do these deeds for money and, if so, for how much—$10? $1,000? $100,000? More? Liberals were reluctant to harm a living thing or act unfairly, even for $1 million, but they were willing to betray group loyalty, disrespect authority or do something disgusting, such as eating their own dog after it dies, for cash. Conservatives said they were less willing to compromise on any of the moral categories.”

    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/calling-truce-political-wars/

    • #64
  5. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    Doctor Robert:

    Jamie Lockett: I’ve seen compelling security and IT analysis that suggests that the Russians are indeed behind the leak.

    Any chance those cuddly Red Bears might have hacked the Secretary of State between 2009-13?

    Oh no, Doctor Robert. How can you even think such a thing.

    They have it, all have it. So do the Chinese, and the Iranians, and the North Koreans, and MI-6, and DGSE, and the Mossad …

    Any intelligence service that doesn’t have it all should be made to turn in their I Spy tee-shirts and their Man From U.N.C.L.E. lunchboxes.

    • #65
  6. Richard Fulmer Inactive
    Richard Fulmer
    @RichardFulmer

    Percival:

    Jamie Lockett:

    Front Seat Cat:Can you believe they’re trying to blame the Russians? Next it will be George Bush’s fault! It could be anyone’s fault but what matters is the content! They won’t let that be the focus because they screwed Bernie Sanders royally. Why? Hilary couldn’t win honestly?

    It doesn’t change the fact that what they did was wrong but I’ve seen compelling security and IT analysis that suggests that the Russians are indeed behind the leak.

    Unless they are also going to claim that the contents were generated by the Russians as well, at this point, what difference does it make?

    Well, it suggests that the Russians are attempting to affect our election.  Shouldn’t we be concerned about that?  If not, why not?  Thanks.

    • #66
  7. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    Richard Fulmer:

    Percival:

    Jamie Lockett:

    Front Seat Cat:Can you believe they’re trying to blame the Russians? Next it will be George Bush’s fault! It could be anyone’s fault but what matters is the content! They won’t let that be the focus because they screwed Bernie Sanders royally. Why? Hilary couldn’t win honestly?

    It doesn’t change the fact that what they did was wrong but I’ve seen compelling security and IT analysis that suggests that the Russians are indeed behind the leak.

    Unless they are also going to claim that the contents were generated by the Russians as well, at this point, what difference does it make?

    Well, it suggests that the Russians are attempting to affect our election. Shouldn’t we be concerned about that? If not, why not? Thanks.

    They want the guy who gets all his information from “the shows” and will hire “all the best people” to handle defense. If I were them, I would.

    • #67
  8. Leigh Inactive
    Leigh
    @Leigh

    Richard Fulmer: Well, it suggests that the Russians are attempting to affect our election. Shouldn’t we be concerned about that? If not, why not? Thanks.

    1. Yes.
    2. Doesn’t mean we should try to simply figure out what they want and do the contrary.
    3. It’s possible there’s no specific aim to help one candidate, just a general interest in causing chaos.
    4. The story about Manafort messing with the Republican platform on Eastern Europe is disturbing.
    5. It’s also possible it’s a shot across Clinton’s bow: hey, just to remind you I know stuff and can reveal it at decidedly inopportune moments.
    • #68
  9. Chris O. Coolidge
    Chris O.
    @ChrisO

    Richard Fulmer: Well, it suggests that the Russians are attempting to affect our election. Shouldn’t we be concerned about that? If not, why not? Thanks.

    It’s someone doing it in retribution for some thing or someone. There is a person or group that picked up the Guccifer baton, perhaps it’s him/her/them. I would expect the Russians to leverage such information at the most optimal time. This reveal serves no end except embarrassment.

    On the other hand it could be an enticement for later cooperation. So, I suppose, be concerned if Hillary wins, and don’t be concerned if she loses.

    • #69
  10. Doctor Robert Member
    Doctor Robert
    @DoctorRobert

    Chris O.: So, I suppose, be concerned if Hillary wins, and don’t be concerned if she loses.

    That’s a good point you make Chris, Hillary’s compromise by the near-certain hacking of her SOS email, which will almost certainly leave gobs of interesting, probably impeachable data on the buy offs and bribes (there’s a good word no one uses anymore!) sent to the Clinton foundation in return for the niceties she distributed hither and yon across the planet while holding that august position, in the hands of Putin and the Chicoms and the French and everyone else with a modem and a Romanian hacker friend, leaves one wishing that I had not written this as a run-on sentence and thereby gotten lost in my own rhetoric.

    But you get my point.

    There’s a lot of bad data about her out there.

    When she is POTUS, someone will use these data to influence her, and we will all suffer the results.

    I just hope said results are not too calamitous.

    • #70
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.