How long until Team Hillary pushes DWS off convention stage? Update: Team Sanders "can't guarantee" how its delegates will respond; Update: Withdraws

Update and bump to top, 1:39 pm ET: Debbie Wasserman Schultz has told the Orlando Sun-Sentinel that she won’t make an appearance at the convention after all:

In a brief phone conversation with the Sun Sentinel, she said:

“I have decided that in the interest of making sure that we can start the Democratic convention on a high note that I am not going to gavel in the convention,” Wasserman Schultz said.

How much credit does she get for reaching the obvious conclusion about three hours later than everyone else did? A better question: Did she really make this decision herself, or did Team Hillary get tired of tossing out hints and order her to stand down? Inquiring minds want to know.


Original post from 12:01 pm ET follows …

The end of Debbie Wasserman Schultz’ plans to make gavel-in appearances looks all but certain after the disaster with the Florida delegation. I put the over/under on an announcement at an hour earlier this morning, but so far the Democratic Party is still not grasping the sheer idiocy of putting the now-resigned DNC chair on stage:

It only took 48 minutes after this tweet for The Hill to notice that Team Hillary seems to be signaling Wasserman Schultz — frantically:

Allies of Hillary Clinton think Debbie Wasserman Schultz should remove herself completely from the Democratic National Convention, fearing that even the minor role she is set to play has become too much of a distraction.

Wasserman Schultz abruptly resigned as chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) on Sunday, amid an outcry over leaked emails that showed the DNC scheming against Sen. Bernie Sanders. In her resignation announcement, Wasserman Schultz said she would stay on as chairwoman through this week’s convention in Philadelphia, delivering opening and closing remarks.

But even such a limited role is too much at this point, Clinton allies say.

One ally pointed to the response Wasserman Schultz received at her home-state Florida delegation Monday morning, where she strained to be heard over a chorus of protests and boos. As she spoke, people stood on chairs holding up signs that said “emails,” “No!,” and “Thanks for the ‘help,’ Debbie.” Others repeatedly shouted: “Shame.”

“It’s causing the distraction no one wanted at the convention,” one ally said.

Not all of the allies are nameless, either. Here’s former DNC chair and longtime Hillary backer Ed Rendell on Morning Joe telling the panel that “it’s wrong” to put Wasserman Schultz on the stage. Pick it up at the 3:40 mark, warning her that it’s “for her own good” to stay away:

Former Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, who was once DNC chairman himself, said Monday he doesn’t see the merit in allowing Debbie Wasserman Schultz to gavel in the party’s convention amid an email scandal that has rocked the hearts of Bernie Sanders supporters.

“It’s wrong for her and it’s wrong for us,” Rendell said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” about allowing Wasserman Schultz even a minimal role after she submitted her official resignation on Sunday.

If that’s too subtle, perhaps Team Hillary chief John Podesta might have made it a little more clear on the same show, emphasis mine:

“It’s best for Hillary Clinton that we have a new chair of the party,” he said.

Podesta said Wasserman Schultz can still play a role in helping Clinton win the Oval Office.

“She’ll go out. She’ll campaign where she’s welcome, and we’ll move on from there.”

Clearly she’s not welcome in Philadelphia … or even in her home state of Florida. While Podesta also said that “she has the right to … open the convention,” he followed it up by saying, “I think that was her choice … I think we’re moving on.” That’s not exactly a rousing endorsement.

So how much longer will it take before someone on Hillary’s campaign takes that choice away from her? It’s not possible that she’ll actually take the stage so that over 1800 delegates can boo her in front of a national audience, is it? Is it? Because what’s coming is clear to everyone else:

Chris Riker, a pro-Sanders delegate from Miami’s 24th district waving a Bernie sign and shouting, said all delegates received an email that Wasserman Schultz would be speaking Monday.

“Honestly it’s their fault that this happened. There is absolutely no reason that a day after rightfully resigning in disgrace with the quote ‘Bernie Sanders will not be president’ leaked from an email that she should be addressing the delegates,” Riker said. “It’s bad for the party, it looks biased and quite frankly it looks tone-deaf.”

“I will literally boo anytime she’s involved in the convention because she shouldn’t be involved,” Riker added, remarking that the emails confirmed the chairwoman’s “biased conduct” and the state party made a poor decision in having her speak.

Hillary may be a bad candidate, but no campaign would be this inept. Not even in our fevered dreams. Right?

Update: The message from Team Sanders to Wasserman Schultz and the DNC is … prepare for a wicked Bern:

Should Wasserman Schultz decide to take to the stage at Wells Fargo Center, Weaver said Sanders’ team “would certainly encourage people to be respectful.”

“But I have to tell you, it may be a very difficult situation, Andrea, given the emails that we’ve seen and given the conduct over the course of the campaign,” Weaver explained. “I think there is a lot of justifiable upset about the way things were handled at the DNC. So we would certainly encourage people to be respectful, but I certainly cannot guarantee how our people will respond.”

Hint, hint … tick tock.