I agree that she isn't the person whose going to actually "do" anything behind the scenes but she would ultimately be the choice of communication between who is actually going to "do" something between his campaign and the DNC...because it would have to be a trusted and confidential line of communication. It does reek of the start of another planned intervention on behalf of Buttigieg since the Iowa caucus showed us exactly how they stacked the deck with his family owning and developing the app involved, many former Clinton people being hired to work for them and a former Obama lead campaign official being named the CEO of that company last September. Until the laws are changed that forbid family members from being directly involved in the actually election day processes in any whether personally or via companies used this type of activity will continue to happen. I find it rather odd as I was looking the other day at our state's requirements to be an election worker and they gave a list of questions you will be asked, one being do you work on behalf of a candidate (employment or voluntary), are you related to a candidate, are you affiliated with any companies that are involved in the election process (similar question along that line) (what they meant are producing any materials or other equipment that will be used), it also stated that you could be a campaign member or family member of a candidate but you could not work/volunteer to work in the districts they were running in on election day.

I don't know if I had to guess I'd think New Hampshire is going to come out fine as they will want to try land instill faith after the last attempt to manipulate, maybe they'll mess with Nevada or for sure manipulate on super Tuesday whereas they'll think it less noticeable to some who'll just be engulfed with being happy it wasn't there state election process that got messed up.

I think the most ironic thing to come out of this is the many liberals who don't think they'd did anything of this nature in 2016 to the Trump campaign. If what they did to Bernie in 2016 had been it most democrats I believe could actually still see it as that, an attempt against Bernie but not Trump. Given what we see going on now it highly less probable to believe that they wouldn't have done that to their opposing party candidate.

One other interesting thing I read the other day was an article where a reporter gave his speculation on what he thinks will happen. He felt that by the end of February, maybe early March they'll be a movement to bring Buttigieg in alignment with Elizabeth Warren. When you think about it it all makes sense since they are so into this appearances of diversity/inclusion kick regardless of the qualifications/consequences, (not that I am interjecting what qualifications there should be but making that remark in regards to Warren's statement of letting a nine year old influence her decision of secretary of education was more than a bit overboard) that it wouldn't be beyond me that they'd throw the whole election under the bus to maintain that status quo, a Buttigieg/Warren ticket would surely fulfill that objective.