After a startling revelation from former Democratic National Committee interim chair Donna Brazile that the DNC had engineered the party’s primary election system in favor of then-candidate Hillary Clinton, President Donald Trump suggested that the primary was illegally stolen from Bernie Sanders.
On Thursday, Brazile released a excerpt from her new book on Politico’s website. The excerpt explained how the Hillary Victory Fund, Hillary for America, and the Democratic National Committee signed a Joint Fund-Raising Agreement, which gave a significant advantage to Clinton’s campaign.
“Hillary would control the party’s finances, strategy, and all the money raised,” Brazile wrote. “Her campaign had the right of refusal of who would be the party communications director, and it would make final decisions on all the other staff. The DNC also was required to consult with the campaign about all other staffing, budgeting, data, analytics, and mailings.”
After this revelation, President Donald Trump tweeted out, “Donna Brazile just stated the DNC RIGGED the system to illegally steal the Primary from Bernie Sanders. Bought and paid for by Crooked H….”
Donna Brazile just stated the DNC RIGGED the system to illegally steal the Primary from Bernie Sanders. Bought and paid for by Crooked H….
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 3, 2017
….This is real collusion and dishonesty. Major violation of Campaign Finance Laws and Money Laundering – where is our Justice Department?
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 3, 2017
This is not the first time the DNC has been accused of illegally rigging the primary race between Sanders and Clinton.
According to a report in Newsweek, attorneys who filed a class-action lawsuit against the DNC argued that “the DNC violated Article 5, Section 4 of its own charter by working with a single campaign to effectively choose who would win the Democratic ballot.”
This portion of the DNC charter—article five, section four—states:
“These governing documents,” the complaint argues, “expressly obligate the DNC to maintain a neutral posture with respect to candidates seeking the party’s nomination for President during the nominating process.”
According to Newsweek, in response to the lawsuit the DNC contended that “the organization’s neutrality among Democratic campaigns during the primaries was merely a ‘political promise,’ and therefore it had no legal obligations to remain impartial throughout the process.”
And the court seems to have agreed with the DNC: The lawsuit was dismissed in late August.
In her book, Brazile agrees with the court, too. She says that, contra President Trump, the Clinton campaign’s actions were not illegal. “The funding arrangement with HFA and the victory fund agreement was not illegal, but it sure looked unethical,” Brazile notes. “This was not a criminal act, but as I saw it, it compromised the party’s integrity.”
If you have questions about this fact check, or would like to submit a request for another fact check, email Holmes Lybrand at [email protected] or The Weekly Standard at [email protected]. For details on TWS Fact Check, see our explainer here.
