The perilous nature of the #DNCLeak and the resignation of Debbie Wasserman Schultz

The FBI is now investigated suspected Russian ties behind the hack and leak of 20,000 Democratic National Committee (DNC) emails. The emails contain lots of damning evidence that the DNC coordinated with the media to undermine the campaign of Bernie Sanders (including calling his faith into question), referring to Latino voters as “taco bowls” and “brand loyal consumers”, favoring donors (including promising big donors federal appointments) and enough other information to give the now-resigning DNC Chairwoman, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a massive headache (more on her in a bit) and throw the Democrats and their supporters into chaos during the convention.

But let’s go back to the FBI investigation of the hack, possibly by Russians. CNN reports (emphasis added):

The FBI on Monday confirmed they are investigating a hack into the Democratic National Committee, the first acknowledgment from the agency that they are probing the incident, which US officials suspect came from a Russian cyber attack.

Fallout over the emails led DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz to announce her resignation Sunday.

“The FBI is investigating a cyber intrusion involving the DNC and are working to determine the nature and scope of the matter,” the agency said in a statement. “A compromise of this nature is something we take very seriously, and the FBI will continue to investigate and hold accountable those who pose a threat in cyberspace.”

The suspected Russian hack is part of a wave of Russian cyber attacks aimed at political organizations and academic think tanks in Washington, US officials briefed on the investigations say.

Over the weekend, Wikileaks began publishing emails from the DNC. The group didn’t identify the source. But the campaign of presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton pointed the finger at Russia, saying the release of stolen emails was intended to help Republican nominee Donald Trump.

First, if the leaks are meant to help Republican nominee Donald Trump, and Russia (read Vladimir Putin) is behind it, this should set off alarm bells for anyone even remotely paying attention to the election.

What does Putin have to gain by undermining the Democrat’s in an election year? Clearly Putin thinks he has a lot to gain if Russia is behind the hack, and sees Trump as the avenue through which he will gain it.

It’s easy, as a conservative — especially in a year when many conservatives are dejected and disaffected by the GOP allowing Trump (who is not a conservative) to clinch the nomination — to celebrate the DNC leaks as a major political victory that might stop Hillary Clinton from winning the White House.

This should also give us pause.

A foreign nation is trying to influence an American election for their benefit. We should not be cheering the DNC leaks, as damaging as they are. Because today it’s the DNC. Tomorrow it’s the GOP, then us. Our nation needs to take cybersecurity far more seriously than it has, and maybe this will be the wake up call we need.

Yes, the DNC leaks are legitimate news and should be covered as legitimate news, but we have to not cross over into cheering this political windfall when it can, and likely will, happen to one of our preferred political parties or candidates down the road.

If Russia is behind the hack, they did not limit themselves to the DNC emails. They probably have much more just waiting to be released when the time is right (say, to strong-arm a Trump administration?).

This brings me to the biggest casualty of the DNC leaks: DNC chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz will be resigning from her position at the end of the Democratic National Convention this week in Philadephia, Penn.

Wasserman Schultz was a horrible chairwoman, and a vile politician. It was Wasserman Schultz who accused Wisconsin governor Scott Walker of giving women “the back of his hand” during the gubernatorial election in 2014. It’s not the only outrageous thing she’s said. But as chairwoman of the DNC, the Republicans saw massive gains at the state level. As of the 2014 midterms, Republicans completely controlled 59 of 98 state “partisan legislative chambers” and had at least 31 governorships. Democrats controlled only Vermont, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Delaware, California, Oregon, and Hawaii. The remaining states were a mix.

That is huge.

I have long argued the way you fight big tyrannies (e.g. those at the federal level) is to fight the little tyrannies at the state and local level. In 2012 and 2014 — spurred by dissatisfaction with Democrats thanks to the Obama administration and, yes, in part because Wasserman Schultz was an ineffective DNC chair — Republicans made major gains at the state and local level.

We now risk the DNC replacing Wasserman Schultz with someone who is far more effective in returning states to blue control.

Is that what we really want?

Update: This is not meant to minimize or detract from any of Clinton’s shady dealings with foreign nations through The Clinton Foundation, etc.