>Why isn't the DNC harder on crap like this?

Well, for starters, because the DNC doesn't run the Iowa caucus.

The DNC doesn't directly run the caucus, but the DNC (or maybe, more precisely, the democratic party) chooses to accept the results of the Iowa caucus and subsidizes (or entirely funds) the running of the caucus.

Additionally, the Iowa dem caucus (and primaries) aren't a governmental thing, the political parties aren't government organizations - they're private organizations that are just _all about the government and politics_ as such the Iowa caucus is really weirdly in a grey zone where there is even less necessary oversight than the administration of the general election in Iowa will have - but sort of more oversight since the DNC could just reject the results outright... Buuuut things like the voting rights act have forced some regulations into primary operation - it's all quite confusing...

The TL;DR though is that the DNC doesn't technically run the Iowa caucus but is more than capable of making the Iowa dem caucus committee feel a whole lot of pain and hold them accountable.

This is a political response but I think it's important to highlight that the DNC seems quite enthused about Buttigieg, lowering the likelihood that they'll pursue anything about a connection between his campaign and Shadow when compared to more fringe candidates like Warren, Steyer, Yang or Sanders.

The national party does not operate state elections and caucuses.

The DNC is composed of Clinton loyalists who want to stop Bernie Sanders from winning the nomination. John freaking Podesta was named to the Rules Committee for the national convention in Milwaukee.