DNC Admits They Had The Legal Right To Rig 2016 Primaries

Screw the people! The lawsuit, filed against the Democratic National Committee, and its former chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, by Bernie Sanders donors reveals the DNC believes its own rules of impartiality don’t apply, and they can pick whatever candidate they wish.

DNC Admits They Had Legal Right To Rig 2016 Primaries

Last year, the political election process exposed Americans 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 Democratic National Committee, and its former chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, by Bernie Sanders donors reveals the DNC believes its own rules of impartiality don’t apply, and they can pick whatever candidate they wish.

“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 chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz of seven different violations, including fraud, negligent misrepresentation, unjust enrichment, and negligence.

As RT reports, 

A South Florida court presided over by U.S. 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 suit 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 Democratic nominee—nominating process in 2016 were fair and impartial,” the plaintiff’s lawyer Jared Beck said. “And 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 Democratic National Committee’s own charter says. It says it in black and white.”

However 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 Americans 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?” 

And that is exactly what voters witnessed last year.

The mainstream media was even complicit in the selection of Hillary Clinton over Sanders. A firestorm exploded when the AP 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 California 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 democratic primary is just the tip of the iceberg. If this goes to trial, America will see even more of the dark underbelly that is the Democrat election process.

 
 
via

Democrats Fabricated “Russia Hacked The DNC” To Justify Spying On Trump

They started setting Trump up as soon as the primaries were over.

Democrats Fabricated "Russia Hacked The DNC" To Justify Spying On Trump

The FISA request to spy on Trump was originally filed in June 2016. The Wikileaks of the DNC hacked emails were released July 22, 2016. The entire “Russia hacked the DNC” story was created to justify DNC spying on Trump before the election.

Look at the timeline:

May 26, Trump reaches enough delegates to unofficially win Republican Presidential nomination.

June 2016, FISA request rejected against Trump.

July 22, 2016 Wikileaks releases the emails against the DNC.

August 2016, DNC claims the emails are Russian propaganda and some are fake with the goal of harming Hillary Clinton’s Presidency.

The media runs with this story, this creates suspicion against Trump to suggest that Russia is trying to influence the election.

October a month before the election, another FISA request is accepted. This time because of “probable cause” no evidence actually needing to be required.

This allows the current federal government to spy on a Presidential candidate a month before the election, one who is a part of the opposing political party ( while Obama himself is actively campaigning with Hillary and the DOJ is working to help Hillary pass her investigation with no issues ).

The plan the Democrats had for the election was to rig it for Hillary by using dirty tactics by the Mainstream Media to destroy Bernie’s chance and to make Trump look bad, and also to potentially spy on him to find negative stories to run in the month lead up to the election. They were probably hoping to leak audio clips of Trump having private conversations saying politically incorrect things, like how they had the hot mic tape of him saying “grab her by the pussy” and used that to find 15+ random women to claim that he sexually assaulted them a few weeks before the election.

A more comprehensive timeline put together by a user a Reddit:

Obama creates office of Chief Technology Officer – Aneesh Chopra ties to Tim Kaine/Terry McAuliffe (DNC Virginia strategy), Todd Park (Healthcare.gov fiasco), Megan Smith (VP Google X)

10 Oct 2012 – Directive 19 (Protect whistleblowers just before election – failsafe?)

==2013== New term. Uranium One, wiretapping (journalists/Merkel/France), slush fund projects, BLM, ISIS rebranded / Syria mobilization, Euromaidan (Ukraine)

2014 – Fancy Bear attacks Germany, Ukraine. (coincidence?)

19 Mar 2015 – Obama appoints David Recordon (Facebook) as White House IT director.

8 April 2015 – Fancy Bear (ISIS fakeout) attacks France. (coincidence?)

16 June 2015 – Trump enters presidential race.

?? June 2016 – FISA request – denied.

7 June 2016 – Final GOP primary.

14 June 2016 – Reported that DNC servers hacked (after “one year” – coincides with Trump entering race – setup begins). Research dossier on Trump stolen, Hillary campaign data untouched. Peskov denies Russian interference.

15 June 2016 – CrowdStrike (Russian expat Dmitri Alperovitch ties to Atlantic Council) blames Fancy Bear(coincidence?)

6 Jul 2016 – Senate bill to revoke Hillary security clearance.

11 Jul 2016 – House bill to revoke Hillary security clearance.

22 Jul 2016 – Wikileaks – Hillary.

7 Oct 2016 – Wikileaks – Podesta. Press release.

9 Oct 2016 – Trump campaign alleges Clinton ties to Russia.

12 Oct 2016 – Putin denies hacking.

15 Oct 2016 – FISA warrant issued.

19 Oct 2016 – Hillary calls Trump a puppet at final presidential debate. (Civilian – who is leaking her information?)

20 Oct 2016 – Esquire details hacking operation.

31 Oct 2016 – FBI: No direct link to Trump.

24 Nov 2016 – Scary Russian trolls! (CTR/Shareblue?)

10 Jan 2017 – Trump intelligence allegations dossier “leaked”. (Dates curious – reports follow damaging press – retaliation?)

11 Jan 2017 – Clapper denies dossier came from IC.

12 Jan 2017 – Obama modifies E.O. 12333. (Another fail-safe?)

Isn’t it amazing how quickly the Mainstream Media ran and accepted the Russian narrative? Almost like they were fed orders for it and didn’t care how no connection to Russia existed.

Previously:
Loretta Lynch’s Final Order Allows The NSA To Give Spying Data To Other Federal Agencies
Hillary Set Up The ‘Russian Hack’ Excuse During The Debates
In 2013 Obama Legalized The Use Of Propaganda On The US Public

 

Hey Hillary… Get Over It!

Hillary Recount Get over it

A few thoughts on the recount effort to overturn the election.

If Hillary is having a hard time accepting her loss… Here is a reminder from July when Hillary Clinton and the DNC stole the nomination from Bernie Sanders through the rigged primary: ‘Clinton campaign boss to Bernie supporters: Get over it’

The chairman of the Hillary Clinton’s campaign, John Podesta, delivered a simple and sharp message to disgruntled Bernie Sanders fans Tuesday morning: “Get over it.”

Remember this tweet?


Now that the Clinton campaign says it will participate in Jill Stein’s recount efforts, it looks like Hillary Clinton is a direct threat to our democracy.

Such a nasty woman!

Jill Stein’s recount request raises many red flags. Why?

  • Jill Stein tweeted systematically against Hillary during the campaign… why would she now want to help Hillary’s campaign?
  • A recount will not help her become President in any way.
  • A recount only applies to the three states where Trump won tightly – these are Wisconsin (1%), Michigan (0.3%) and PA (1.2%) (The difference of percentage points in brackets). Why doesn’t it include states that Hillary won tightly? New Hampshire (0.4%) and Minnesota (1.4%)

Very suspicious.

Could it be that Hillary “joining the recount efforts” is not to overturn the election, but to make sure her own cheating is not discovered?

 

Load More