Court Rules DNC Rigged Elections for Hillary ....

[g5000]

If the commie democrats would do this in their own party, is there any doubt that they would rig the shit out of any at-large or national election?

Apples and oranges. The DNC is a private organization. This was about their internal workings.

Oh please needle dick the DNC takes in millions of tax payers dollars.


.

Read the ruling, dipshit.

In addition to damages, Plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief that would bind the DNC to the present iteration of its charter. But “a political party’s determination of the structure which best allows it to pursue its political goals is protected by the Constitution.” Eu v. S.F. Cnty. Democratic Cent. Comm., 489 U.S. 214, 229 (1989) (internal marks omitted) (quoting Tashjian v. Republican Party of Conn., 479 U.S. 208, 224 (1986)). So, the choice——and attendant consequences——between “impartiality and evenhandedness” and Tammany Hall politics lies in the province of the DNC, not the judiciary.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Here's Napoleon's army of 680,000 which invaded Russia:

Here's Trump's imaginary army of 5,000,000 illegal voters in California he can't seem to find:

Boom in California Driver's Licenses to Illegals.

California's Voter Registration Law Automatically Registers Voters who obtain a Driver's License.

It shouldn't be too hard to figure out how this massive voter fraud scheme would work. We know that in 2014, at least 2.3 million illegals lived in California.

 

[busybee01]

On Friday, a federal judge ruled that the Democratic National Committee essentially rigged the primary election in favor of Hillary Clinton.

In a class-action lawsuit filed against the DNC and former chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the allegation was that the group was violating their own charter by rigging the state primaries for Clinton against Bernie Sanders. (It’s worth noting that even Harry Reid admitted it was rigged with his comment last year: “I knew – everybody knew – that this was not a fair deal.”)

The ruling, by Judge William Zloch was scathing: “In evaluating Plaintiffs’ claims at this stage, the Court assumes their allegations are true—that the DNC and Wasserman Schultz held a palpable bias in favor Clinton and sought to propel her ahead of her Democratic opponent,” the judge wrote. Then he dismissed the lawsuit.

The judge ruled that the court’s authority to intervene was limited in this case. The Observer writes: “The Court must now decide whether Plaintiffs have suffered a concrete injury particularized to them, or one certainly impending, that is traceable to the DNC and its former chair’s conduct—the keys to entering federal court. The Court holds that they have not.” The court added that it did not consider this within its jurisdiction. “Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction, possessing ‘only that power authorized by Constitution and statute.’”

Essentially, the order ruled that the primaries were rigged in Hillary’s favor, but there was very little the courts could do about it.

“The Court thus assumes that the DNC and Wasserman Schultz preferred Hillary Clinton as the Democratic candidate for president over Bernie Sanders or any other Democratic candidate. It assumes that they stockpiled information useful to the Clinton campaign. It assumes that they devoted their resources to assist Clinton in securing the party’s nomination and opposing other Democratic candidates. And it assumes that they engaged in these surreptitious acts while publically proclaiming they were completely neutral, fair, and impartial. This Order therefore concerns only technical matters of pleading and subject-matter jurisdiction.”

Court Issues Ruling on Bernie's Charge DNC Rigged Primaries

They did not rig the primaries. What the judge said was that the DNC and the DNC chairman violated the rules by actively supporting Clinton. They did the same thing in 2008 and Obama still won.

No rules were changed to make it harder for Sanders to win. The only reason he was able to stay in was because of Democrat rules on proportionality regarding delegate assignment. For example, in SC, Sanders was beaten by a 3-1 margin and still got delegates while Trump got 32% and all the delegates.

The fact is that this has gone on in both parties. The RNC and DNC has always had their favored candidates. Republicans have always been more open about rigging their primaries for their favored candidates. In 1976, Rhode Island had a 35% vote threshold that was clearly designed to prevent Reagan from receiving any delegates. Every Republican headquarters was a Ford for President office. The Republicans moved to exert more control over the debates as well to protect their favored candidates. In 2016, they required caucus states like Iowa, Minnesota, and Colorado to allocate delegates based on a straw poll which not everyone participated in. Don't bet that in 2020, the RNC won't be changing their delegate selection rules to protect Trump.

Clinton got 55% of the primary votes vs 43% to Sanders. Had the DNC been neutral, does that mean that Sanders would not have lost by a 3-1 margin in SC, 2-1 margin in Texas and Florida, 4-1 margin in Louisiana and Mississippi? If they controlled that many votes then how did Obama win in 2008?

 

[g5000]

On Friday, a federal judge ruled that the Democratic National Committee essentially rigged the primary election in favor of Hillary Clinton.

In a class-action lawsuit filed against the DNC and former chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the allegation was that the group was violating their own charter by rigging the state primaries for Clinton against Bernie Sanders. (It’s worth noting that even Harry Reid admitted it was rigged with his comment last year: “I knew – everybody knew – that this was not a fair deal.”)

The ruling, by Judge William Zloch was scathing: “In evaluating Plaintiffs’ claims at this stage, the Court assumes their allegations are true—that the DNC and Wasserman Schultz held a palpable bias in favor Clinton and sought to propel her ahead of her Democratic opponent,” the judge wrote. Then he dismissed the lawsuit.

The judge ruled that the court’s authority to intervene was limited in this case. The Observer writes: “The Court must now decide whether Plaintiffs have suffered a concrete injury particularized to them, or one certainly impending, that is traceable to the DNC and its former chair’s conduct—the keys to entering federal court. The Court holds that they have not.” The court added that it did not consider this within its jurisdiction. “Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction, possessing ‘only that power authorized by Constitution and statute.’”

Essentially, the order ruled that the primaries were rigged in Hillary’s favor, but there was very little the courts could do about it.

“The Court thus assumes that the DNC and Wasserman Schultz preferred Hillary Clinton as the Democratic candidate for president over Bernie Sanders or any other Democratic candidate. It assumes that they stockpiled information useful to the Clinton campaign. It assumes that they devoted their resources to assist Clinton in securing the party’s nomination and opposing other Democratic candidates. And it assumes that they engaged in these surreptitious acts while publically proclaiming they were completely neutral, fair, and impartial. This Order therefore concerns only technical matters of pleading and subject-matter jurisdiction.”

Court Issues Ruling on Bernie's Charge DNC Rigged Primaries

Just to be clear, the court did not find any voting was rigged.

They only found that the DNC's material support and resources were biased toward helping Clinton. It was assumed by the DNC that Clinton would be the nominee, and so they were already focusing their energy toward the general election and the anticipated attacks from the GOP.

 

[g5000]

Here's Napoleon's army of 680,000 which invaded Russia:

Here's Trump's imaginary army of 5,000,000 illegal voters in California he can't seem to find:

Boom in California Driver's Licenses to Illegals.

California's Voter Registration Law Automatically Registers Voters who obtain a Driver's License.

It shouldn't be too hard to figure out how this massive voter fraud scheme would work. We know that in 2014, at least 2.3 million illegals lived in California.

Now that is what fake news looks like, ladies and gentlemen. California does not register illegals to vote. They receive a very clearly marked non-citizen's drivers license.

This bullshit meme has been destroyed multiple times, and yet the tards still repeat it like brainless bots.

"I want to bleev it, so it must be true!"

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Now that is what fake news looks like, ladies and gentlemen. California does not register illegals to vote. They receive a very clearly marked non-citizen's drivers license.

This bullshit meme has been destroyed multiple times, and yet the tards still repeat it like brainless bots.

"I want to bleev it, so it must be true!"

Because the Democrats running California would NEVER "accidentally" give illegals a "citizen" DL and register them to vote....EVER!!!

We just can't let you people be in charge of shit. You're too corrupt.

 

[g5000]

California's Voter Registration Law Automatically Registers Voters who obtain a Driver's License.

You really should read your own links, tard!

Licenses granted under the law have "federal limits apply" printed on them, which means that unlike California law enforcement, law enforcement officers in other states and federal officials aren't obligated to accept the licenses as a valid form of identification.

Dumbass.

On the back, these licenses say, “This card is not acceptable for official federal purposes. This license is issued only as a license to drive a motor vehicle. It does not establish eligibility for employment, voter registration, or public benefits.”

 

[g5000]

Now that is what fake news looks like, ladies and gentlemen. California does not register illegals to vote. They receive a very clearly marked non-citizen's drivers license.

This bullshit meme has been destroyed multiple times, and yet the tards still repeat it like brainless bots.

"I want to bleev it, so it must be true!"

Because the Democrats running California would NEVER "accidentally" give illegals a "citizen" DL and register them to vote....EVER!!!

We just can't let you people be in charge of shit. You're too corrupt.

You're bullshit claim that illegals are automatically registered to vote which you made to support your bullshit claim three million illegals voted in California gets blown out of the water. So now you're down to the "I wouldn't put it past 'em!" argument.

Awesome.

 

[Slash]

While I am fine if the DNC gets absolutely ruined by this, if Bernie next election decides he's going to switch parties and become a Republican a few months before the race, and return to my other party a few months after his party isn't elected, I'd hope to hell that the RNC blackballed him as well.

 

[g5000]

This is what happens when you drink Trump's piss.

It takes Trump two seconds to invent a lie, and then you tards try to backward engineer evidence to support it, and end up making gigantic asses of yourselves.

When will you ever learn?

Clearly never.

You DESERVE to be lied to. You really do.

 

[g5000]

While I am fine if the DNC gets absolutely ruined by this, if Bernie next election decides he's going to switch parties and become a Republican a few months before the race, and return to my other party a few months after his party isn't elected, I'd hope to hell that the RNC blackballed him as well.

This is a good point.

Socialist Bernie ditched the Democratic party and registered as an Independent. Then he thought he could be the Democratic candidate?

So the DNC said, "Fuck this guy."

It's too bad the RNC didn't do the same thing to Trump. He was a registered Democrat all during the Bush Administration. He was a cut-and-run Democrat on Iraq. He was "very pro-choice." He called Bush a liar about WMDs, and demanded Bush be impeached. In his books he calls for socialized medicine and an Assault Weapons Ban.

The RNC should NEVER have let him in the fucking door.

And now we have pseudocons sucking his cock every day.

 

[Timmy]

Rnc also played favorites .

Remember the varsity debates while others were banished to the JV debates ?

 

[Spare_change]

FAKE NEWS

Florida judge dismisses fraud lawsuit against DNC

Could the Moderators brand this thread as Fake...

The OP should be branded as a liar and spreader of Fake News...

As for the rest of ye gullible idiots, are ye embarrassed..

Obviously, you didn't bother to actually read the original post ....go ahead and catch up .... we'll wait for you.

 

[Spare_change]

>
Court Rules DNC Rigged Elections for Hillary .


DERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRPPPPPPPPPPPPP DERP DERP DERP


rigged them so she would lose ..

THERES IDIOTS, THEN THERES IDIOTS.

Worked, huh?

 

[Spare_change]

The ruling, by Judge William Zloch was scathing: “In evaluating Plaintiffs’ claims at this stage, the Court assumes their allegations are true—

Essentially, the order ruled that the primaries were rigged in Hillary’s favor, but there was very little the courts could do about it.

“The Court thus assumes that the DNC and Wasserman Schultz preferred Hillary Clinton as the Democratic candidate for president over Bernie Sanders or any other Democratic candidate. It assumes that they stockpiled information useful to the Clinton campaign. It assumes that they devoted their resources to assist Clinton in securing the party’s nomination and opposing other Democratic candidates. And it assumes that they engaged in these surreptitious acts while publically proclaiming they were completely neutral, fair, and impartial. This Order therefore concerns only technical matters of pleading and subject-matter jurisdiction.”

Court Issues Ruling on Bernie's Charge DNC Rigged Primaries

A perfect example of how the America-hating worthless lying Fake News scum on the Right ALWAYS lie and NEVER quote anything accurately by leaving out the MOST important info out of what they quote!!!

The ruling clearly stated that they are REQUIRED to ASSUME the argument is true, and in no was RULED the argument was true!!!!!

From the actual Court Ruling with the part the lying scum left out that undeniably qualifies the part they quoted and completely denies the Federalist Fake News fake interpretation of the ruling:

"This Order does not concern who should have been the Democratic Party’s candidate for the 2016 presidential election; it does not concern whether the DNC or Wasserman Schultz generally acted unfairly towards Senator Sanders or his supporters; indeed, it does not even concern whether the DNC was in fact biased in favor of Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primaries. At this stage, the Court is required to construe the First Amended Complaint (DE 8) in the light most favorable to Plaintiffs and accept its well-pled allegations as true. See Stalley ex rel. U.S. 8 Case 0:16-cv-61511-WJZ Document 62 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2017 Page 8 of 28 v. Orlando Reg’l Healthcare Sys., Inc., 524 F.3d 1229, 1232-33 (11th Cir. 2008).

The Court thus assumes that the DNC and Wasserman Schultz preferred Hillary Clinton as the Democratic candidate for president over Bernie Sanders or any other Democratic candidate..."

Are you truly that short? You can't read the words? Are you reading disabled?

READ THE FUCKING RULING!!

 

[Spare_change]

On Friday, a federal judge ruled that the Democratic National Committee essentially rigged the primary election in favor of Hillary Clinton.

In a class-action lawsuit filed against the DNC and former chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the allegation was that the group was violating their own charter by rigging the state primaries for Clinton against Bernie Sanders. (It’s worth noting that even Harry Reid admitted it was rigged with his comment last year: “I knew – everybody knew – that this was not a fair deal.”)

The ruling, by Judge William Zloch was scathing: “In evaluating Plaintiffs’ claims at this stage, the Court assumes their allegations are true—that the DNC and Wasserman Schultz held a palpable bias in favor Clinton and sought to propel her ahead of her Democratic opponent,” the judge wrote. Then he dismissed the lawsuit.

The judge ruled that the court’s authority to intervene was limited in this case. The Observer writes: “The Court must now decide whether Plaintiffs have suffered a concrete injury particularized to them, or one certainly impending, that is traceable to the DNC and its former chair’s conduct—the keys to entering federal court. The Court holds that they have not.” The court added that it did not consider this within its jurisdiction. “Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction, possessing ‘only that power authorized by Constitution and statute.’”

Essentially, the order ruled that the primaries were rigged in Hillary’s favor, but there was very little the courts could do about it.

“The Court thus assumes that the DNC and Wasserman Schultz preferred Hillary Clinton as the Democratic candidate for president over Bernie Sanders or any other Democratic candidate. It assumes that they stockpiled information useful to the Clinton campaign. It assumes that they devoted their resources to assist Clinton in securing the party’s nomination and opposing other Democratic candidates. And it assumes that they engaged in these surreptitious acts while publically proclaiming they were completely neutral, fair, and impartial. This Order therefore concerns only technical matters of pleading and subject-matter jurisdiction.”

Court Issues Ruling on Bernie's Charge DNC Rigged Primaries

They did not rig the primaries. What the judge said was that the DNC and the DNC chairman violated the rules by actively supporting Clinton. They did the same thing in 2008 and Obama still won.

No rules were changed to make it harder for Sanders to win. The only reason he was able to stay in was because of Democrat rules on proportionality regarding delegate assignment. For example, in SC, Sanders was beaten by a 3-1 margin and still got delegates while Trump got 32% and all the delegates.

The fact is that this has gone on in both parties. The RNC and DNC has always had their favored candidates. Republicans have always been more open about rigging their primaries for their favored candidates. In 1976, Rhode Island had a 35% vote threshold that was clearly designed to prevent Reagan from receiving any delegates. Every Republican headquarters was a Ford for President office. The Republicans moved to exert more control over the debates as well to protect their favored candidates. In 2016, they required caucus states like Iowa, Minnesota, and Colorado to allocate delegates based on a straw poll which not everyone participated in. Don't bet that in 2020, the RNC won't be changing their delegate selection rules to protect Trump.

Clinton got 55% of the primary votes vs 43% to Sanders. Had the DNC been neutral, does that mean that Sanders would not have lost by a 3-1 margin in SC, 2-1 margin in Texas and Florida, 4-1 margin in Louisiana and Mississippi? If they controlled that many votes then how did Obama win in 2008?

Let me see if I understand ...

1) The ruling elite realized their hold on Democrat Party power was threatened.
2) The ruling elite made up special rules to handicap opposition to their preferred candidate.
3) The ruling elite created "super delegates" to offset the will of their constituency.
4) The ruling elite followed their own incestuous rules.
5) As a result of rule manipulation and voter suppression, Clinton got 55% of the votes (which, oh by the way, includes these so-called "super delegates) while Sanders only got 43%
6) The ruling elite were successful in ensuring their chosen candidate would APPEAR to have won the primaries.
7) Therefore, no harm was done ... the people weren't supposed to ACTUALLY have input into the process anyway. They were just window dressing!

I got it ... NOW I understand.

 

[Rambunctious]

The sign of a typical DittoTARD mindlessly parroting their MessiahRushie!!!

Better that than a Obamabot mindlessly walking around like a zombie believing everything the Left says hook like and sinker...

 

[jc456]

REPORT: The sun rose in the east this morning.

RUBE: FAKE NEWS!

TRUMP: Eleventy million Mexicans voted in Montana.

RUBE: Eleventy million Mexicans voted in Montana!

REPORT: Who Is Registered to Vote in Two States? Some in Trump’s Inner Circle

TRUMP: See? I told you eleventy million illegal Mexicans voted for Hillary!

PARROTING RUBES: See? We told you eleventy million illegal Mexicans voted for Hillary!

 

[g5000]

On Friday, a federal judge ruled that the Democratic National Committee essentially rigged the primary election in favor of Hillary Clinton.

In a class-action lawsuit filed against the DNC and former chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the allegation was that the group was violating their own charter by rigging the state primaries for Clinton against Bernie Sanders. (It’s worth noting that even Harry Reid admitted it was rigged with his comment last year: “I knew – everybody knew – that this was not a fair deal.”)

The ruling, by Judge William Zloch was scathing: “In evaluating Plaintiffs’ claims at this stage, the Court assumes their allegations are true—that the DNC and Wasserman Schultz held a palpable bias in favor Clinton and sought to propel her ahead of her Democratic opponent,” the judge wrote. Then he dismissed the lawsuit.

The judge ruled that the court’s authority to intervene was limited in this case. The Observer writes: “The Court must now decide whether Plaintiffs have suffered a concrete injury particularized to them, or one certainly impending, that is traceable to the DNC and its former chair’s conduct—the keys to entering federal court. The Court holds that they have not.” The court added that it did not consider this within its jurisdiction. “Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction, possessing ‘only that power authorized by Constitution and statute.’”

Essentially, the order ruled that the primaries were rigged in Hillary’s favor, but there was very little the courts could do about it.

“The Court thus assumes that the DNC and Wasserman Schultz preferred Hillary Clinton as the Democratic candidate for president over Bernie Sanders or any other Democratic candidate. It assumes that they stockpiled information useful to the Clinton campaign. It assumes that they devoted their resources to assist Clinton in securing the party’s nomination and opposing other Democratic candidates. And it assumes that they engaged in these surreptitious acts while publically proclaiming they were completely neutral, fair, and impartial. This Order therefore concerns only technical matters of pleading and subject-matter jurisdiction.”

Court Issues Ruling on Bernie's Charge DNC Rigged Primaries

They did not rig the primaries. What the judge said was that the DNC and the DNC chairman violated the rules by actively supporting Clinton. They did the same thing in 2008 and Obama still won.

No rules were changed to make it harder for Sanders to win. The only reason he was able to stay in was because of Democrat rules on proportionality regarding delegate assignment. For example, in SC, Sanders was beaten by a 3-1 margin and still got delegates while Trump got 32% and all the delegates.

The fact is that this has gone on in both parties. The RNC and DNC has always had their favored candidates. Republicans have always been more open about rigging their primaries for their favored candidates. In 1976, Rhode Island had a 35% vote threshold that was clearly designed to prevent Reagan from receiving any delegates. Every Republican headquarters was a Ford for President office. The Republicans moved to exert more control over the debates as well to protect their favored candidates. In 2016, they required caucus states like Iowa, Minnesota, and Colorado to allocate delegates based on a straw poll which not everyone participated in. Don't bet that in 2020, the RNC won't be changing their delegate selection rules to protect Trump.

Clinton got 55% of the primary votes vs 43% to Sanders. Had the DNC been neutral, does that mean that Sanders would not have lost by a 3-1 margin in SC, 2-1 margin in Texas and Florida, 4-1 margin in Louisiana and Mississippi? If they controlled that many votes then how did Obama win in 2008?

Let me see if I understand ...

1) The ruling elite realized their hold on Democrat Party power was threatened.
2) The ruling elite made up special rules to handicap opposition to their preferred candidate.
3) The ruling elite created "super delegates" to offset the will of their constituency.
4) The ruling elite followed their own incestuous rules.
5) As a result of rule manipulation and voter suppression, Clinton got 55% of the votes (which, oh by the way, includes these so-called "super delegates) while Sanders only got 43%
6) The ruling elite were successful in ensuring their chosen candidate would APPEAR to have won the primaries.
7) Therefore, no harm was done ... the people weren't supposed to ACTUALLY have input into the process anyway. They were just window dressing!

I got it ... NOW I understand.

The DNC ruling elite prevented an outsider from taking over their party.

Too bad the RNC didn't do the same.

 

[easyt65]

>
rigged them so she would lose .. THERES IDIOTS, THEN THERES IDIOTS.

Rigged them just so she could get over the 1st hurdle and make it to the actual election, something she could not due by herself.

In order for Hillary to make it to election day with her name on the ballot...

The DNC Chairwoman had to rig the DNC Primaries in Hillary's favor, Democrats had to engage in voter fraud during the Primaries, and the Democrats had to cheat during the Primary debates just to help Hillary beat Bernie Sanders to win the DNC nomination - again, something she could not do on her own...

After that...
Obama lied about knowing about Hillary's server...

Her tech aide accepted immunity in exchange for testimony then pled the 5th...

Obama's US AG committed Obstruction to prevent Hillary from being Indicted for her crimes...

Obama's FBI Director had to claim Hillary was too stupid to know she was breaking the law (despite her signed forms declaring she fully understood the law and Comey's false claim that ignorance of the law is somehow a legal defense for breaking laws WHEN IT IS NOT)

Democrats, the DNC, and the Liberal media had to protect Hillary from being pushed out of the race while it was revealed she was under multiple FBI investigations for crimes she DID commit - crimes that included ESPIONAGE...when even Liberals can not deny any GOP candidate under the same circumstances would DEFINITELY been forced out of the campaign.


ALL OF THAT had to be orchestrated, plotted, and carried out for Hillary to even make it to election day still on the ballot....and the best reason for them to go through all of that was summed up by Hillary: 'It's My Turn!'

Bwuhahahaha........