This is probably because the DNC was tipping the scales against Sanders in the 2016 nomination cycle, and there is evidence they are doing the same this cycle. For example, in the last Democratic debate, Sanders denied telling Warren that a women could not win the presidency, Sanders denied this, and the very next question to Warren was praised in a way such that this is an accepted fact. Some are also speculating that the timing of sending the impeachment articles to the Senate was intended to harm Sanders by way of preventing him from being able to campaign immediately prior to the first primary.
I agree the way the question came off as if they were straight up calling Bernie a liar, but I don't think it was intentional, and if it was, it's on the CNN moderator, not the DNC.
<>
I think if the moderator got warren to actually say it, instead of "Warren confirmed to CNN", it would be fine because it would be more explicit.
<>
Warren's campaign did confirm it, but this is somewhat circular considering it is almost certain that Warren's campaign leaked the conversation in the first place. I would consider the facts to be disputed based on Sanders' denial, and the lack of evidence.
On the topic of this being the fault of the CNN moderator vs the DNC, I would consider them to be one and the same, along with other MSM outlets. This is based in part on the consistent messaging among MSM outlets, and Democrat elected officials, down to the specific wording of what they are saying. I would go as far to say that most MSM media outlets are violating campaign finance laws, although any attempt to investigate or prosecute these violations would probably be unconstitutional, and most campaign finance laws are probably also unconstitutional.
Some are also speculating that the timing of sending the impeachment articles to the Senate was intended to harm Sanders by way of preventing him from being able to campaign immediately prior to the first primary.
The DNC has done shady things and definitely fucked Bernie last year, but these DNC/Biden conspiracy theories seem to be red meat for anyone who reveled in the Clinton conspiracy theories and are looking for any opportunity to make Biden Hillary 2.0 and experience that same sweet victory all over again.
I'm not saying Bernie has nothing to complain about, he does, and so do his followers. But he's also been fiercly independent from the Democratic party his whole life. If he didn't have to register as a Democrat to run, he'd have an (I) next to his name, so getting the same love from the DNC as rank and file Biden is not something he's ever expected.
Sanders running as an independent would almost guarantee a republican win, and might even result in result in Trump running the table in all 50 states (I would say at least a solid 45 would be a lock for Trump, and 5 would be a tossup).
I really don't see what else Pelosi could have been trying to accomplish by delaying sending the impeachment articles. She said she wanted witnesses to be called, but the witnesses she wants were not even subpoenaed by her house, and if witnesses were to be called, Trump would have the opportunity to call witnesses, which would be damaging to Democrats.
A more important point is the status quo is the DNC will screw Sanders over, and out of the Nomination. If they can't show Sanders' supporters this is not the case in 2020, they will have a lot of unhappy voters on their hands.
DNC removed the large influence of super delegates from the 2016 election by introducing new rules on super delegate voting.
The new rules are that super delegates cannot vote in the first round of delegate voting. They can vote in the second and all subsequent rounds of votes, if they happen. This means someone with few, or no votes in the first round, could potentially be a serious contender in the second round.
