When Major News is Not News at All: DNC Sued for Fraud
May 3, 2017 6:40:29 GMT -8
The Rebel Poet likes this
Post by acptulsa on May 3, 2017 6:40:29 GMT -8
Bernie Sanders donors are suing the Democratic National Committee because they donated to one candidate in good faith, while the party itself tilted the playing field in favor of someone else.
yournewswire.com/democratic-party-leader-served-election-fraud-lawsuit/
And to make matters even more fun, the DNC's lawyers are using a defense which asserts the word 'impartial' is undefinable and the concept is therefore unattainable.
yournewswire.com/democratic-party-attorneys-admit-dnc-is-corrupt/
Plugging keywords into a search engine is revealing. No television broadcast network, no cable news 'service', no major newspaper, no major radio news network, no wire service and not even Huffington Post are breathing a single word about it. Donors to a major party candidate are suing that political party, and the party is using the defense that they can't complain about rigging because they were complaining about said rigging before they donated, and this isn't news? This isn't historic? This isn't relevant to anyone's life?
It's the Lawsuit Which Must Not Be Named.
It's nice of the media to tell us how well informed we are, then decry how ignorant we are. It's nice of the media to tell us what a vigorous free press they are. I'm glad they find things to fill their 24/7 news shows, their websites, and their print media with. But, really? Can they not find even a little space to dedicate to what the hell is really going on?
But we can hardly be surprised. Since they are even more complicit in ensuring we choose only the pre-chosen candidates from each party, since they are the gatekeepers that ensure most people never even hear the names of the best candidates on each side (Rand Paul and Jim Webb? Who are they?), it's certainly understandable that they would desire to hide behind the Fifth Amendment on this subject. They aren't in the proverbial 'smoke-filled rooms' where candidates are selected to shove down the public's throats to shine the light of transparency there. The news media are puffing those contraband Cuban cigars.
It's time for another class action lawsuit. The entire nation needs to sue every self-identified purveyor of 'news' which has made no mention of this. I know the word 'news' is no easier to define than 'impartial' is. But millions of political donors suing a major political party for rigging the primary process purely and simply fits the definition.
yournewswire.com/dnc-sued-by-up-to-2-million-sanders-donors-in-class-action-lawsuit/
I can't believe I'm jealous of the socialist fools who donated to Sanders, but it would be something to be a part of this history. Why is no one suing the RNC?
yournewswire.com/democratic-party-leader-served-election-fraud-lawsuit/
“There are essentially six legal claims we are asserting in this lawsuit on behalf of the composed class members,” said attorney Jared Beck in a YouTube video announcing the lawsuit. “The first is a claim for fraud—against the DNC and Debbie Wasserman Schultz—based on the revelations from the recent Guccifer 2.0 documents purportedly taken from the DNC’s own computer network.” The Guccifer 2.0documents include internal memos in which the DNC broke legally binding neutrality agreements in the Democratic primaries by strategizing to make Hillary Clinton the nominee before a single vote was cast.
The second claim filed is for negligent misrepresentation, a legal theory based on the first claim of fraud. The third claim alleges the DNC and Wasserman Schultzparticipated in deceptive conduct in claiming the DNC was neutral during the Democratic primaries, when there is overwhelming evidence suggesting favoritism of Clinton from the beginning. The fourth claim of the lawsuit seeks retribution of any monetary donations the DNC to Bernie Sanders‘ campaign. The fifth claim alleges the DNC broke its fiduciary duties during the Democratic primaries to members of the Democratic Party by not holding a fair election process. The sixth claim is for negligence on behalf of the DNC—for not protecting donor information—as hackers broke into the DNC networks, potentially compromising their personal information.
The second claim filed is for negligent misrepresentation, a legal theory based on the first claim of fraud. The third claim alleges the DNC and Wasserman Schultzparticipated in deceptive conduct in claiming the DNC was neutral during the Democratic primaries, when there is overwhelming evidence suggesting favoritism of Clinton from the beginning. The fourth claim of the lawsuit seeks retribution of any monetary donations the DNC to Bernie Sanders‘ campaign. The fifth claim alleges the DNC broke its fiduciary duties during the Democratic primaries to members of the Democratic Party by not holding a fair election process. The sixth claim is for negligence on behalf of the DNC—for not protecting donor information—as hackers broke into the DNC networks, potentially compromising their personal information.
And to make matters even more fun, the DNC's lawyers are using a defense which asserts the word 'impartial' is undefinable and the concept is therefore unattainable.
yournewswire.com/democratic-party-attorneys-admit-dnc-is-corrupt/
Attempting to prove that the Bernie Sanders donors knew the DNC was biased all along, and therefore cannot complain about corruption after donating money, DNC attorneys produced evidence of Sanders donors posting links critical of Wasserman Schultz on social media and participating in online petitions.
Plugging keywords into a search engine is revealing. No television broadcast network, no cable news 'service', no major newspaper, no major radio news network, no wire service and not even Huffington Post are breathing a single word about it. Donors to a major party candidate are suing that political party, and the party is using the defense that they can't complain about rigging because they were complaining about said rigging before they donated, and this isn't news? This isn't historic? This isn't relevant to anyone's life?
It's the Lawsuit Which Must Not Be Named.
It's nice of the media to tell us how well informed we are, then decry how ignorant we are. It's nice of the media to tell us what a vigorous free press they are. I'm glad they find things to fill their 24/7 news shows, their websites, and their print media with. But, really? Can they not find even a little space to dedicate to what the hell is really going on?
But we can hardly be surprised. Since they are even more complicit in ensuring we choose only the pre-chosen candidates from each party, since they are the gatekeepers that ensure most people never even hear the names of the best candidates on each side (Rand Paul and Jim Webb? Who are they?), it's certainly understandable that they would desire to hide behind the Fifth Amendment on this subject. They aren't in the proverbial 'smoke-filled rooms' where candidates are selected to shove down the public's throats to shine the light of transparency there. The news media are puffing those contraband Cuban cigars.
It's time for another class action lawsuit. The entire nation needs to sue every self-identified purveyor of 'news' which has made no mention of this. I know the word 'news' is no easier to define than 'impartial' is. But millions of political donors suing a major political party for rigging the primary process purely and simply fits the definition.
yournewswire.com/dnc-sued-by-up-to-2-million-sanders-donors-in-class-action-lawsuit/
Jared Beck described this lawsuit as unique in that the goal is to not just secure financial compensation, but to fundamentally change the way the DNC exists and conducts business.
“You have people who say they’re homeless or unemployed, and they gave whatever was in their pockets to Bernie, and you have doctors and lawyers who have given thousands of dollars… We’re civil litigators, and usually our cases can be reduced to dollars and cents, but I don’t know if any amount of money could compensate for American democracy, which is priceless to me. I think anything short of a fundamental change in the way the DNC conducts itself is not acceptable… This isn’t a case that’s about money, this is a case about the fairness about the Democratic process.”
“You have people who say they’re homeless or unemployed, and they gave whatever was in their pockets to Bernie, and you have doctors and lawyers who have given thousands of dollars… We’re civil litigators, and usually our cases can be reduced to dollars and cents, but I don’t know if any amount of money could compensate for American democracy, which is priceless to me. I think anything short of a fundamental change in the way the DNC conducts itself is not acceptable… This isn’t a case that’s about money, this is a case about the fairness about the Democratic process.”
I can't believe I'm jealous of the socialist fools who donated to Sanders, but it would be something to be a part of this history. Why is no one suing the RNC?
