DNC just admitted it had the legal right to rig the 2016 primaries!

on . Posted in Articles of Interest

MIAMI, Florida (PNN) - May 4, 2017 - Last year, the political election process exposed Amerikans to more corruption and vote rigging than at any time in their history. Now, a recent lawsuit has exposed that this corruption and fraud is actually standard operating procedure.

The lawsuit, filed against the Democrat National Committee and its former chair Devvie Wasserman Schultz by Bernie Sanders donors reveals the DNC believes its own rules of impartiality don’t apply, and it can pick whatever candidate it wishes.

“We could have voluntarily decided that, ‘Look, we’re gonna go into back rooms like they used to and smoke cigars and pick the candidate that way,” DNC’s lawyer Bruce Spiva told a Florida court.

The lawsuit, originally filed in June, accuses the DNC and its former Chairman Debbie Wasserman Schultz of seven different violations, including fraud, negligent misrepresentation, unjust enrichment, and negligence.

A South Florida court presided over by Fascist Police States of Amerika federal Judge William J. Zloch heard the defendants argue a Motion to Dismiss last week, which revealed a number of surprising arguments made by the DNC’s lawyers.

The most shocking was the argument that, despite impartiality being part of both its charter and bylaws, the DNC is free to choose the nominee it wishes, and could “go into back rooms like they used to and smoke cigars and pick the candidate that way.”

The defendants’ lawyers also argued the lawsuit is based on an “internal rule” which cannot be enforced, and that the term “impartial” can’t be defined.

“People paid money in reliance on the understanding that the primary elections for the Democrat nominee - nominating process in 2016 were fair and impartial,” the plaintiff’s lawyer Jared Beck said. “That’s not just a bedrock assumption that we would assume just by virtue of the fact that we live in a democracy, and we assume that our elections are run in a fair and impartial manner. But that’s what the Democrat National Committee’s own charter says. It says it in black and white.”

However, as the Free Thought Project pointed out last year, impartiality was nowhere to be found.

Beginning in Iowa and eventually getting blown wide open in Arizona, the fraud and suppression of votes quickly let Amerikans know that the DNC was set in their rigging ways.

Examples of this fraud were captured on video, documented on paper, and even broadcast live on television.

The defendants, in their motion to dismiss the lawsuit, argued that a judge cannot determine how the DNC carries out its nomination process, noting that it would “drag the court right into the political squabbles.”

However, Judge Zlock responded by saying, “So you are suggesting that this is just part of the business, so to speak, that it’s not unusual for, let’s say, the DNC, the RNC to take sides with respect to any particular candidate and to support that candidate over another?”

That is exactly what voters witnessed last year.

Mainstream media was even complicit in the selection of Hillary Clinton over Sanders. As the Free Thought Project reported last year, a firestorm exploded when the Associated Press abruptly announced Clinton had garnered sufficient delegates and superdelegates to clinch the nomination - before California even held its primary. Irate voters justifiably condemned the inexplicable announcement as premature, especially in light of Kalifornia polls showing Clinton outpaced by or neck and neck with Bernie Sanders.

Whether or not the judge will rule to dismiss the case remains unknown. However, if it does go to court, Wasserman Schultz and others would be forced to give depositions; and during these depositions, evidence from WikiLeaks, Guccifer and others will be presented.

Make no mistake, the DNC admitting to having the right to rig the 2016 Democrat Primary is just the tip of the iceberg. If this goes to trial, Amerika will see even more of the dark underbelly that is the Amerikan election process.

Eulogies

Eulogy for an Angel
1992-Dec. 20, 2005

My Father
1918-2010

brents dad

Dr. Stan Dale
1929-2007

stan dale

A. Solzhenitsyn
1918-2008

solzhenitsyn

Patrick McGoohan
1928-2009

mcgoohan

Joseph A. Stack
1956-2010

Bill Walsh
1931-2007

Walter Cronkite
1916-2009

Eustace Mullins
1923-2010

Paul Harvey
1918-2009

Don Harkins
1963-2009

Joan Veon
1949-2010

David Nolan
1943-2010

Derry Brownfield
1932-2011

Leroy Schweitzer
1938-2011

Vaclav Havel
1936-2011

Andrew Breitbart
1969-2012

Dick Clark
1929-2012

Bob Chapman
1935-2012

Ray Bradbury
1920-2012

Tommy Cryer
1949-2012

Andy Griffith
1926-2012

Phyllis Diller
1917-2012

Larry Dever
1926-2012

Brian J. Chapman
1975-2012

Annette Funnicello
1942-2012

Margaret Thatcher
1925-2012

Richie Havens
1941-2013

Jack McLamb
1944-2014

James Traficant
1941-2014

jim traficant

Dr. Stan Monteith
1929-2014

stan montieth

Leonard Nimoy
1931-2015

Leonard Nimoy

Stan Solomon
1944-2015

Stan Solomon

B. B. King
1926-2015

BB King

Irwin Schiff
1928-2015

Irwin Schiff

DAVID BOWIE
1947-2016

David Bowie

Muhammad Ali
1942-2016

Muhammed Ali

GENE WILDER
1933-2016

gene wilder

phyllis schlafly
1924-2016

phylis schafly

John Glenn
1921-2016

John Glenn

Charles Weisman
1954-2016

Charles Weisman

Carrie Fisher
1956-2016

Carrie Fisher

Debbie Reynolds
1932-2016

Debbie Reynolds

Roger Moore
1917-2017

Roger Moore

Adam West
1928-2017

Adam West

JERRY LEWIS
1926-2017

jerry lewis