DNC leak validates old campaign concerns: Rekha Basu

By the time the speeches by Michelle Obama, Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders had calmed some of their angst, by the time Paul Simon had delivered a particularly soothing rendition of Bridge Over Troubled Waters, the sting of Sarah Silverman’s chide to the Bernie crowd may have abated.

“You’re being ridiculous,” the comedian had rebuked those still demanding he get the nomination or they go home.

Silverman, herself a Bernie supporter, had given up the ghost of a Sanders defeat of Hillary Clinton. But you can forgive others for not being ready days after learning that top officials at the officially neutral Democratic National Committee had actively tried to help Clinton win the nomination. People can’t really be mollified until their legitimate grievances are acknowledged and apologized for.

Newly released emails show that under Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s leadership, the DNC bent the rules of fair play to favor Clinton, confirming what Sanders has been telling the new and disenfranchised voters he energized: that the system is rigged to enable power to perpetuate itself.

One email written by Brad Marshall, the DNC’s chief financial officer, strategized about making Sanders’ religion a liability before the Kentucky and West Virginia primaries. “It might make no difference but for KY and WVA can we get someone to ask his belief," Marshall wrote.  "He had skated on saying he has a Jewish heritage. I think I read he is an atheist. This could make several points difference with my peeps (Southern Baptists)."

DNC official Mark Paustenbach proposed in a May 21 email to the DNC communications director a story line “that Bernie never ever had his act together, that his campaign was a mess." It wasn’t approved, however.

Wasserman Schultz has resigned as chair but without offering a mea culpa. She was still at the convention, still speaking at a breakfast without trying to make amends to those booing her. Clinton has named her honorary chair of her 50-state campaign and a national surrogate. The rationale the outgoing chair seemed to be using to favor Clinton was that Sanders wasn’t a registered Democrat before he got on the ballot and Clinton, a longtime party insider, would get the nomination anyway. In one email, she actually wrote, “He isn’t going to be president.” So much for letting voters decide.

Look, I’m as horrified as anyone at the chance of a Trump presidency, and I believe Clinton is exceptionally qualified for the job. But the fear of Trump winning doesn't justify meddling with the primary process. It has done Clinton no favors.

Bern-or-busters, I've been there: Stephen Henderson

The main story coming out of the hacking and release of 20,000 Democratic Party emails has been the bizarre prospect of the Russian government being behind it on Trump's behalf. But this story deserves addressing, too, if only because it vindicates the candidates who openly suspected the game was rigged against them. Before the Iowa caucuses, Sanders and fellow Democratic presidential candidate Martin O’Malley protested favoritism toward Clinton by Wasserman Schultz.

Last September, four Democratic county chairs from around Iowa complained.  O'Malley supporter Larry Hogden of Cedar County said, "Even if it's not intentional, it would certainly appear that the DNC is showing favoritism to Hillary by not scheduling a lot of debates." Clinton herself was agreeable to more.

The DNC also demanded its candidates sign an exclusivity clause, barring anyone who took part in an unofficial debate from a party-sanctioned one. "I think it's outrageous, frankly, that anyone in the Democratic Party would think it's their job to tell the people of Iowa or New Hampshire or any state that they're not allowed to have presidential debates," O'Malley said then. "It runs counter to everything that we believe as a country.”

The DNC even cut off Sanders' access to a voter database containing  information about his supporters in retaliation for his staffers inappropriately obtaining data from the Clinton campaign. But access was restored after the Sanders campaign filed a federal lawsuit (The Sanders campaign apologized, fired one staffer and suspended two others). Weaver claimed the move was part of the DNC's "pattern of conduct" to help Clinton and undermine Sanders. Wasserman Schultz dismissed that as "bluster."

Just what Democrats needed, another email flap: Laurie Roberts

POLICING THE USA: A look at race, justice, media 

Last December in Iowa, Sanders also complained the DNC held debates when few people would watch them — such as Saturday evenings. A Des Moines debate Nov. 14 coincided with an Iowa football game and drew 11 million fewer viewers than the last Republican debate, held on a weeknight. Sanders claimed to The Register that it was "intentionally designed to make sure that I and Gov. O'Malley get less exposure."

There’s a saying to the effect that just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean people aren't after you. In this case, it's on point. We know campaigns get dirty and this year, they seem to have hit a low point for both parties. There are calls for the dismissal of staffers besides Wasserman Schultz who tried to discredit candidates, but a change of faces isn't enough. The party needs to also open up the process by, among other things, scrapping superdelegates and allowing same-day registration. It needs to start acting less like a closed club and more like a grass-roots organization of the people.

Rekha Basu is a columnist for The Des Moines Register, where this column first appeared. Follow her on Twitter: @rekhabasu

In addition to its own editorials, USA TODAY publishes diverse opinions from outside writers, including our Board of Contributors. To read more columns, go to the Opinion front page, follow us on Twitter @USATOpinion and sign up for our daily Opinion newsletter.