Lawyers For The DNC Argue That 'Primary Rigging' Is Protected By The First Amendment

[iceberg]

The parties can run their primaries however they see fit.

So don't have a primary then. Don't have debates, don't pretend you care about your candidate. Put how ever many hats you need for candidates, lay them on the floor and asked them to be filled with donations. Whoever gets the most wins.

Invite Iran, Saudi Arabia, Canada, Australia, Norway, China, North Korea or any other nation to donate as well. Fill that hat up and pick the person who gets the most.

You just KNOW this is great for American interests...blue ribbon winners all their lives who would prefer to anoint rather than compete fairly. As I said in the OP, full blown Canadians.

everyone at the RNC would be in jail, if it were illegal....

they actually did fight tooth and nail AGAINST Trump in the primary....

But did they rig it against him?

What rules did the DNC break? If no rules were broken then there was no rigging


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

then why did debbie get fired?

to be fair that could be from her haircut.

 

[The Derp]

Why lie about it? It happened. They tried every dirty trick and still failed. Stop buying info from the Russian intelligence. Steele told everyone where his info came from.

The Steele dossier isn't what prompted the investigation into Trump's campaign; Papadopolous blabbing to a diplomat was.

 

[iceberg]

Yep, you're full blown Canada now. Good luck folks.

Lawyers For The DNC Argue That 'Primary Rigging' Is Protected By The First Amendment

The document, provided by the law offices of the Attorneys for the Plaintiffs in the case, Jared and Elizabeth Beck, and appears to argue that if the Democratic Party did cheat Sanders in the 2016 Presidential primary race, then that action was protected under the first amendment. Twitter users were quick to respond to the brief, expressing outrage and disgust at the claims made by representatives of the DNC and Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

Why is a Canadian posting fake news to a US forum? Are you a paid operative for the Russians?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

so that is fake news? just so I'm clear your position on this, so I can call you a liar later.

It is very simple, if you read the actual court document it does not say what the article claims it does. But these sites count on you sheep not taking the time to check for yourself


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

did they rig the DNC primaries for hillary, thereby nullifying the votes of those who did NOT want hillary to represent them?

we're either allowed to have our vote count or we don't. core of who we are. these flippant games you play with them are what is ******* this country up. amazing to me shocked canadian is more american than many in here who only want their ID to be satisfied.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Yep, you're full blown Canada now. Good luck folks.

Lawyers For The DNC Argue That 'Primary Rigging' Is Protected By The First Amendment

The document, provided by the law offices of the Attorneys for the Plaintiffs in the case, Jared and Elizabeth Beck, and appears to argue that if the Democratic Party did cheat Sanders in the 2016 Presidential primary race, then that action was protected under the first amendment. Twitter users were quick to respond to the brief, expressing outrage and disgust at the claims made by representatives of the DNC and Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

Why is a Canadian posting fake news to a US forum? Are you a paid operative for the Russians?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

so that is fake news? just so I'm clear your position on this, so I can call you a liar later.

It is very simple, if you read the actual court document it does not say what the article claims it does. But these sites count on you sheep not taking the time to check for yourself


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

it says it appears to argue..... again, thanks for the lie. we appreciate it.

And that is a lie, it does not appear to argue that. But you will never know because like the good little sheep you will never question your masters


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[shockedcanadian]

Donna Brazile said the 2016 primary was rigged before she said it wasn't - CNNPolitics

Brazile, you might recall, is same person who alleges in her book -- "Hacks: The Inside Story of the Break-ins and Breakdowns that Put Donald Trump in the White House" -- that the DNC and the Clinton campaign had cut an unfair deal that disadvantaged Sanders. In exchange for Clinton's help in fundraising, she and her staff were given broad approval and control of the party committee well before she was the formal nominee, Brazile wrote.


Here's the key passage from Brazile's piece in Politico last week, which was excerpted from her book that is being released today

I had tried to search out any other evidence of internal corruption that would show that the DNC was rigging the system to throw the primary to Hillary, but I could not find any in party affairs or among the staff. I had gone department by department, investigating individual conduct for evidence of skewed decisions, and I was happy to see that I had found none. Then I found this agreement."

"The funding arrangement with HFA and the victory fund agreement was not illegal, but it sure looked unethical. If the fight had been fair, one campaign would not have control of the party before the voters had decided which one they wanted to lead. This was not a criminal act, but as I saw it, it compromised the party's integrity."

In the first paragraph of that excerpt, Brazile says she can't find any evidence that the "DNC was rigging the system" until she unearths the fundraising agreement. In the second paragraph, she calls the fundraising deal "unethical" and adds: "It compromised the party's integrity." She adds that, as a result, the primary wasn't a fair fight.

 

[jc456]

So don't have a primary then. Don't have debates, don't pretend you care about your candidate. Put how ever many hats you need for candidates, lay them on the floor and asked them to be filled with donations. Whoever gets the most wins.

Invite Iran, Saudi Arabia, Canada, Australia, Norway, China, North Korea or any other nation to donate as well. Fill that hat up and pick the person who gets the most.

You just KNOW this is great for American interests...blue ribbon winners all their lives who would prefer to anoint rather than compete fairly. As I said in the OP, full blown Canadians.

everyone at the RNC would be in jail, if it were illegal....

they actually did fight tooth and nail AGAINST Trump in the primary....

But did they rig it against him?

What rules did the DNC break? If no rules were broken then there was no rigging


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

then why did debbie get fired?

to be fair that could be from her haircut.

right?

 

[The Derp]

Donna Brazile said the 2016 primary was rigged before she said it wasn't - CNNPolitics

Brazile, you might recall, is same person who alleges in her book -- "Hacks: The Inside Story of the Break-ins and Breakdowns that Put Donald Trump in the White House" -- that the DNC and the Clinton campaign had cut an unfair deal that disadvantaged Sanders. In exchange for Clinton's help in fundraising, she and her staff were given broad approval and control of the party committee well before she was the formal nominee, Brazile wrote.


Here's the key passage from Brazile's piece in Politico last week, which was excerpted from her book that is being released today

I had tried to search out any other evidence of internal corruption that would show that the DNC was rigging the system to throw the primary to Hillary, but I could not find any in party affairs or among the staff. I had gone department by department, investigating individual conduct for evidence of skewed decisions, and I was happy to see that I had found none. Then I found this agreement."

"The funding arrangement with HFA and the victory fund agreement was not illegal, but it sure looked unethical. If the fight had been fair, one campaign would not have control of the party before the voters had decided which one they wanted to lead. This was not a criminal act, but as I saw it, it compromised the party's integrity."

In the first paragraph of that excerpt, Brazile says she can't find any evidence that the "DNC was rigging the system" until she unearths the fundraising agreement. In the second paragraph, she calls the fundraising deal "unethical" and adds: "It compromised the party's integrity." She adds that, as a result, the primary wasn't a fair fight.

What is this supposed to prove, again? The primaries are different from the general election. Trump had Russian help during both.

 

[iceberg]

Donna Brazile said the 2016 primary was rigged before she said it wasn't - CNNPolitics

Brazile, you might recall, is same person who alleges in her book -- "Hacks: The Inside Story of the Break-ins and Breakdowns that Put Donald Trump in the White House" -- that the DNC and the Clinton campaign had cut an unfair deal that disadvantaged Sanders. In exchange for Clinton's help in fundraising, she and her staff were given broad approval and control of the party committee well before she was the formal nominee, Brazile wrote.


Here's the key passage from Brazile's piece in Politico last week, which was excerpted from her book that is being released today

I had tried to search out any other evidence of internal corruption that would show that the DNC was rigging the system to throw the primary to Hillary, but I could not find any in party affairs or among the staff. I had gone department by department, investigating individual conduct for evidence of skewed decisions, and I was happy to see that I had found none. Then I found this agreement."

"The funding arrangement with HFA and the victory fund agreement was not illegal, but it sure looked unethical. If the fight had been fair, one campaign would not have control of the party before the voters had decided which one they wanted to lead. This was not a criminal act, but as I saw it, it compromised the party's integrity."

In the first paragraph of that excerpt, Brazile says she can't find any evidence that the "DNC was rigging the system" until she unearths the fundraising agreement. In the second paragraph, she calls the fundraising deal "unethical" and adds: "It compromised the party's integrity." She adds that, as a result, the primary wasn't a fair fight.

clinton MO - skate between unethical and illegal and wonder why people have problems with her.

 

[The Derp]

clinton MO - skate between unethical and illegal and wonder why people have problems with her.

What happened in the DNC primaries isn't what prompted gullible voters into voting for Trump in the general.

The "emails" ginned up by Russian trolls was the issue.

"But what about her e-mails?"

 

[Lastamender]

clinton MO - skate between unethical and illegal and wonder why people have problems with her.

What happened in the DNC primaries isn't what prompted gullible voters into voting for Trump in the general.

The "emails" ginned up by Russian trolls was the issue.

"But what about her e-mails?"

33,000 gone forever, but nothing to hide. The costliest way to permanently delete them, and the cheapest, a hammer.
What about those e-mails, they would put her fat ass in jail.

 

[iceberg]

clinton MO - skate between unethical and illegal and wonder why people have problems with her.

What happened in the DNC primaries isn't what prompted gullible voters into voting for Trump in the general.

The "emails" ginned up by Russian trolls was the issue.

"But what about her e-mails?"

hey asstard.

i didn't say a thing about her e-mails. i said her entire history is ripe with skirting between ethics and law.

and i didn't know it was e-mails from the russians. i thought it was bots on facebook. oh wait, fake websites giving fake news. oh wait, bots replying and keeping stupid comments in articles going...

 

[jc456]

Yep, you're full blown Canada now. Good luck folks.

Lawyers For The DNC Argue That 'Primary Rigging' Is Protected By The First Amendment

The document, provided by the law offices of the Attorneys for the Plaintiffs in the case, Jared and Elizabeth Beck, and appears to argue that if the Democratic Party did cheat Sanders in the 2016 Presidential primary race, then that action was protected under the first amendment. Twitter users were quick to respond to the brief, expressing outrage and disgust at the claims made by representatives of the DNC and Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

Why is a Canadian posting fake news to a US forum? Are you a paid operative for the Russians?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

so that is fake news? just so I'm clear your position on this, so I can call you a liar later.

It is very simple, if you read the actual court document it does not say what the article claims it does. But these sites count on you sheep not taking the time to check for yourself


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

it says it appears to argue..... again, thanks for the lie. we appreciate it.

And that is a lie, it does not appear to argue that. But you will never know because like the good little sheep you will never question your masters


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

and yet in the document it states:

the Supreme Court has repeatedly and “vigorously affirm[ed]” that the First Amendment reserves “special place” and accords “special protection.” Cal. Democratic Party v. Jones, 530 U.S. 567, 575 (2000). See also DE 62 p. 18 (RE p. 626) (“‘[A] political party’s determination of the structure which best allows it to pursue its political goals is protected by the Constitution.’”) (quoting Eu v. v. San Francisco Cty. Democratic Cent. Comm., 489 U.S. 214, 229 (1989)).

 

[ColonelAngus]

Debates: RIGGED (CNN provided questions to DNC in advance)
Primary: RIGGED (HILLARY LITERALLY BOUGHT THE DNC, SHE WAS THE PREDETERMINED WINNER OF THE PRIMARY PROCESS)
GENERAL ELECTION (HILLARY LOST BECAUSE *******ALLEGEDLY******** TRUMP AND PUTIN RIGGED THE ELECTION....and that wasn't fair to Hillary)

 

[The Derp]

33,000 gone forever, but nothing to hide.

What do you think is in those 33,000 e-mails? Or are you just trolling about them? You remember that Bush the Dumber deleted millions of e-mails related to the Iraq War and US Attorney Firing scandal, yet not a peep from the Conservatives about that. So why are you all hot and bothered about these emails? Simple; because Russia told you to be hot and bothered about them. So you were because your mushy brain was hacked.

The costliest way to permanently delete them, and the cheapest, a hammer.

Is that what Bush did when he "lost" millions of e-mails about Iraq and the politically-motivated firing of US attorneys?

What about those e-mails, they would put her fat ass in jail.

By that standard, Kushner, Trump, Uday and Qusay Trump, and Ivanka belong in jail too because they all use private servers for government business too.

 

[jillian]

Yep, you're full blown Canada now. Good luck folks.

Lawyers For The DNC Argue That 'Primary Rigging' Is Protected By The First Amendment

The document, provided by the law offices of the Attorneys for the Plaintiffs in the case, Jared and Elizabeth Beck, and appears to argue that if the Democratic Party did cheat Sanders in the 2016 Presidential primary race, then that action was protected under the first amendment. Twitter users were quick to respond to the brief, expressing outrage and disgust at the claims made by representatives of the DNC and Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

it is so heartwarming that trumploons think that someone who isn't a registered democrat had some type of entitlement to the democratic party nomination.

lol..

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Why is a Canadian posting fake news to a US forum? Are you a paid operative for the Russians?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

so that is fake news? just so I'm clear your position on this, so I can call you a liar later.

It is very simple, if you read the actual court document it does not say what the article claims it does. But these sites count on you sheep not taking the time to check for yourself


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

it says it appears to argue..... again, thanks for the lie. we appreciate it.

And that is a lie, it does not appear to argue that. But you will never know because like the good little sheep you will never question your masters


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

and yet in the document it states:

the Supreme Court has repeatedly and “vigorously affirm[ed]” that the First Amendment reserves “special place” and accords “special protection.” Cal. Democratic Party v. Jones, 530 U.S. 567, 575 (2000). See also DE 62 p. 18 (RE p. 626) (“‘[A] political party’s determination of the structure which best allows it to pursue its political goals is protected by the Constitution.’”) (quoting Eu v. v. San Francisco Cty. Democratic Cent. Comm., 489 U.S. 214, 229 (1989)).

Which does not in anyway speak of rigging anything.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[ColonelAngus]

Yep, you're full blown Canada now. Good luck folks.

Lawyers For The DNC Argue That 'Primary Rigging' Is Protected By The First Amendment

The document, provided by the law offices of the Attorneys for the Plaintiffs in the case, Jared and Elizabeth Beck, and appears to argue that if the Democratic Party did cheat Sanders in the 2016 Presidential primary race, then that action was protected under the first amendment. Twitter users were quick to respond to the brief, expressing outrage and disgust at the claims made by representatives of the DNC and Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

it is so heartwarming that trumploons think that someone who isn't a registered democrat had some type of entitlement to the democratic party nomination.

lol..

it's funny that Obamonkeys don't mind being part of a ruse.

 

[Lastamender]

Yep, you're full blown Canada now. Good luck folks.

Lawyers For The DNC Argue That 'Primary Rigging' Is Protected By The First Amendment

The document, provided by the law offices of the Attorneys for the Plaintiffs in the case, Jared and Elizabeth Beck, and appears to argue that if the Democratic Party did cheat Sanders in the 2016 Presidential primary race, then that action was protected under the first amendment. Twitter users were quick to respond to the brief, expressing outrage and disgust at the claims made by representatives of the DNC and Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

it is so heartwarming that trumploons think that someone who isn't a registered democrat had some type of entitlement to the democratic party nomination.

lol..

Hillary is not a registered Democrat, bless her heart, no one else thought they were entitled to the nomination but her.

 

[The Derp]

i didn't say a thing about her e-mails. i said her entire history is ripe with skirting between ethics and law.

But her e-mails were the focus of the Russian bot and Conservative troll effort to spread propaganda during the 2016 election. So you're pretending people voted against Clinton in the general election because of how the DNC ran the primary, but that's a load of horseshit, and you know it.

And where are Trump's tax returns?

and i didn't know it was e-mails from the russians. i thought it was bots on facebook. oh wait, fake websites giving fake news. oh wait, bots replying and keeping stupid comments in articles going...

It was Conservative/Russian bots that were amplifying bullshit about e-mails in the last couple months of the campaign, after their previous bullshit -Pizzagate- resulted in a deranged Conservative being manipulated into holding up the pizza joint because of Russian propaganda about a child sex trafficking cult run out of the pizza shop's basement (the pizza shop didn't even have a basement).

 

[jc456]

so that is fake news? just so I'm clear your position on this, so I can call you a liar later.

It is very simple, if you read the actual court document it does not say what the article claims it does. But these sites count on you sheep not taking the time to check for yourself


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

it says it appears to argue..... again, thanks for the lie. we appreciate it.

And that is a lie, it does not appear to argue that. But you will never know because like the good little sheep you will never question your masters


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

and yet in the document it states:

the Supreme Court has repeatedly and “vigorously affirm[ed]” that the First Amendment reserves “special place” and accords “special protection.” Cal. Democratic Party v. Jones, 530 U.S. 567, 575 (2000). See also DE 62 p. 18 (RE p. 626) (“‘[A] political party’s determination of the structure which best allows it to pursue its political goals is protected by the Constitution.’”) (quoting Eu v. v. San Francisco Cty. Democratic Cent. Comm., 489 U.S. 214, 229 (1989)).

Which does not in anyway speak of rigging anything.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

but it is what the OP was about. so again, the defense appears to argue, and that is exactly what they argued. so there is nothing wrong with the OP and makes you the liar.