Did The DNC Help Hillary Clinton Beat Bernie Sanders? Fraud Lawsuit Takes Aim

originally posted by: Flatfish
Internet searches don't count. Anyone can say anything on the internet and they do on a regular basis.

Well actually they do since it would result in media outlets of different states reporting on voter fraud.

originally posted by: Flatfish
Yes, the states will provide the info and right now, the states aren't saying anything remotely similar to 3 million illegal votes.

You expect a state like California, which Clinton carried, to admit to fraud? Thats right up there with some states / media outlets playing word games anytime an illegal alien commits a crime.

originally posted by: Flatfish
And if they did, it would make them look pretty bad at their job of orchestrating a vote, now wouldn't it?

or complicit in voter fraud and then helping to cover it up.

It was obvious during the primaries that the DNC colluded with Hillary Clinton to undermine Bernie Sanders' bid for the Presidency. The emails that were revealed after her nomination but confirmed that. What is not always mentioned is the role that mainstream media played into the fraud also. It did that in its typical cagey ways of omission, spin, and outright lies when necessary. First, before the primary debates began, hardly a word was mentioned about Bernie and what he stood for. Once the primary debates began, it was no longer possible for mainstream media to ignore Bernie; so it did the next best thing — it disparaged Bernie the best it could although there was no dirt to sling. Bernie was discussed far more than Hillary during this period, but almost always with a negative (and often ludicrous) spin; meanwhile, Hillary was mentioned far less but almost always cast in a glowing light. Ironically but not coincidentally, during the period leading up to Hillary's nomination, mainstream media played Donald Trump as the golden (orange) boy, incessantly covering him. But at the moment it was clear that Hillary would squeak by Bernie to win the nomination, guess what mainstream media did? It ramped up its praise of Hillary as it did a complete turnaround to bash Trump every chance it got, which was ample given how Drumpf inserts foot on a regular basis. IMHO, it is mainstream media who essentially advanced Trump to the highest position in America, and the angry Bernie supporters, such as myself, who refused to vote for Hillary on principle alone, that she did not win the nomination fair and square. Ain't nobody got time for that. The Russians had little to with the election results. It was the DNC, mainstream media, and Hillary Clinton who destroyed any chance she had of winning the Presidency. And that's the way the cookie crumbles.

a reply to: tabularosa

I was gonna star this post until you called him Drumpf like an overgrown 12 year old. Show some dignity. Otherwise all valid observations, including that Trump gave the media plenty of ammunition.

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: Flatfish
Internet searches don't count. Anyone can say anything on the internet and they do on a regular basis.

Well actually they do since it would result in media outlets of different states reporting on voter fraud.

originally posted by: Flatfish
Yes, the states will provide the info and right now, the states aren't saying anything remotely similar to 3 million illegal votes.

You expect a state like California, which Clinton carried, to admit to fraud? Thats right up there with some states / media outlets playing word games anytime an illegal alien commits a crime.

originally posted by: Flatfish
And if they did, it would make them look pretty bad at their job of orchestrating a vote, now wouldn't it?

or complicit in voter fraud and then helping to cover it up.

Look, I don't expect for anyone to admit to anything.

What I expect is for those of you making the accusations to provide some actual proof.

I know you really prefer right-wing opinion over truth but that crap only floats in a toilet, never in a courtroom.

a reply to: Flatfish

That there were voting issues favoring Hillary is a fact. The only question is the extent.

a reply to: carewemust
Found the thread on Bernie being roughed up.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I did find the article on Bernie Sanders Accessing Clinton
Voter data.

Josh Uretsky, Sanders' national data director, is the staffer who was fired. A Sanders spokesperson called Uretsky's behavior "unacceptable," but Uretsky explained that he was trying to determine the nature of the breach rather than attempting to gain an unfair advantage. "We knew there was a security breach in the data, and we were just trying to understand it and what was happening," Uretsky told CNN. "To the best of my knowledge, nobody took anything that would have given the [Sanders] campaign any benefit."

arstechnica.com...

Strange looking back on all of this now.
Creepy strange.

I think I'll look for an entire timeline!

originally posted by: Flatfish
What I expect is for those of you making the accusations to provide some actual proof.

Nah. You'll just dismiss anything as "right wing garbage" as long as it's not from CNN/MSNBC/ABC etc, as if they will ever report on anything like that.
You're simply here to deflect.

"After WikiLeaks published Democratic National Committee emails which suggested that DNC staffers had inappropriately backed Hillary Clinton in the primary campaigns while criticizing the Bernie Sanders campaign, Wasserman Schultz tendered her resignation as the head of the DNC, to become effective as of the close of the nominating convention in Philadelphia. According to reports in The Washington Post, Wasserman Schultz strongly resisted suggestions she resign, requiring a phone call from President Barack Obama to finally force her resignation."

But nah, I guess the head of the DNC resigned because she wanted to let other people have the stage, right?

Oh wait those are documents hacked by evil Russians we're not supposed to believe that, they are just right wing sexist racists that want to meddle with our election. Better ignore that and listen to CNN. Right?

originally posted by: 1337Kph

originally posted by: Flatfish
What I expect is for those of you making the accusations to provide some actual proof.

Nah. You'll just dismiss anything as "right wing garbage" as long as it's not from CNN/MSNBC/ABC etc, as if they will ever report on anything like that.
You're simply here to deflect.

"After WikiLeaks published Democratic National Committee emails which suggested that DNC staffers had inappropriately backed Hillary Clinton in the primary campaigns while criticizing the Bernie Sanders campaign, Wasserman Schultz tendered her resignation as the head of the DNC, to become effective as of the close of the nominating convention in Philadelphia. According to reports in The Washington Post, Wasserman Schultz strongly resisted suggestions she resign, requiring a phone call from President Barack Obama to finally force her resignation."

But nah, I guess the head of the DNC resigned because she wanted to let other people have the stage, right?

Oh wait those are documents hacked by evil Russians we're not supposed to believe that, they are just right wing sexist racists that want to meddle with our election. Better ignore that and listen to CNN. Right?

I don't think anyone in this thread is denying what the DNC did to Bernie Sanders, least not me.

Had you read my previous posts in this thread, you'd know that I was a Bernie supporter, both in spirit & financially, and I am a party to the class action suit that is the actual subject of this thread.

The proof I'm asking for is to substantiate other poster's claims that 3 million people voted illegally.

But feel free to open mouth & insert foot any time the urge arises.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Flatfish

That there were voting issues favoring Hillary is a fact. The only question is the extent.

It's also a fact that some people committed voter fraud to vote for Trump as I mentioned earlier about the case in the Carolinas.

Truth be told, most people who voted for Hillary had to force themselves to do it and then run home and shower off afterwards.

Just the same, there is absolutely no evidence of massive voter fraud in this country.

That's not even fake news, it's BS news.

I think the Clinton's blacked mailed Bernie Sanders into not contesting Hillary win. They offered to squash the FBI investigation into his wife for fraud, once Hillary became president. Why else would he remain quiet about the DNC corruption and give his support for Hillary.

He received hush money along with the blackmail to not contest Hillary nomination.

originally posted by: Echo007
I think the Clinton's blacked mailed Bernie Sanders into not contesting Hillary win. They offered to squash the FBI investigation into his wife for fraud, once Hillary became president. Why else would he remain quiet about the DNC corruption and give his support for Hillary.

He received hush money along with the blackmail to not contest Hillary nomination.

If that were the case, then what happened to the alleged fraud case against his wife?

If Hillary didn't win, then she wouldn't have been able to quash it. Where is it?

I never heard of any FBI fraud investigation into Jane Sanders anyway. I'm calling BS on that one.

a reply to: Flatfish

It's possible it was the DNC who said fall in line and we will quash it. They already had their President in office, they could have quashed it before the election.

Not saying it happened, merely saying it's plausible and doesn't require Hillary to win.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Well, I just saw a news report from USA Today where they said there is indeed an FBI fraud investigation underway.

First I've even heard of it, but I've been traveling for the last ten days and haven't watched much news.

Guess my BS call was off base.

I'd still be willing to bet she gets vindicated.

a reply to: Flatfish

We have provided proof.. You refuse to either follow it or flat out ignore it or cant be bothered to do the research on your own.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Flatfish

We have provided proof.. You refuse to either follow it or flat out ignore it or cant be bothered to do the research on your own.

So, you're saying you've provided proof that 3 million people voted illegally in the last election?

That's the only proof I've ask for in this thread and if that's what you're saying, YOU ARE A BALD FACED LIAR!

It is you who failed to do their research, as in you didn't even read enough of this thread to even know what I demanded proof of before you start running your mouth.

Laziness like that only serves to promote ignorance. I call it "Willful Ignorance."

a reply to: Flatfish

There is an ongoing investigation into the 2016
Election on the issue of Fraudulent votes.

President Trump has ordered by executive order.

So, we will just have to wait for that.

As to the Electoral College and the +77 votes
that gave Trump the win, why try and detract
popular vote numbers?

The laws have not changed on that in centuries!

I smell piles of sour grapes.

a reply to: Flatfish

Speaking of willful ignorance do some research. You are one of those people who will make a claim and then refuse to research it on your own for fear of being wrong so you stick your head in the ground. As you have been told all you have to do is google search voter fraud and you can get an idea that it is real / exists.

Napolitano: California To Allow Illegal Immigrants To Vote For The Next President [VIDEO]

Judge Andrew Napolitano says that “if you are an illegal alien in California, get a driver’s license, register to vote, you can vote in local, state, and federal elections in California and those votes count.”

On “Fox & Friends” Tuesday, host Steve Doocy explained, “The state of California has passed legislation that will automatically register eligible voters when they obtain or renew a driver’s license. Governor Jerry Brown says it’s a way to increase voter turnout, but critics warn the measure could add millions of illegal people to the rolls because the state allows undocumented aliens to get driver’s licenses.”

Napolitano explained that in California, when one signs up for a driver’s license, one does not have to prove that they are in America legally. Napolitano explained that “other states… permit registration [to vote] at the time you get a driver’s license, have you go through another procedure in which you have to demonstrate citizenship.”

click link for article...

* - Experts: California voter registration system 'highly susceptible' to fraud

* - Racketee ring Lawsuit Exposing Nationwide Vote Rigging in DNC Primaries Could Derail Clinton

Then there is the DNC lawsuit...

But by all means ignore the obvious...

originally posted by: Flatfish

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Flatfish

So if the conclusion is this happened, but they don't have documentation you accept, then for you it doesn't count? Because part of the Democrats modus operandi is to destroy documentation. In fact that is their official stance on ID's given to illegals, destroy all documentation provided. Keep no records so it's hard to prove even though it happened.

Look, I don't know where you come up with all these crazy hypotheticals but it's not that hard to understand.

If it won't hold up in court, then it won't hold up for me.

I don't want to hear a bunch of stupid crap about how you'd have the evidence but......

Prove your case or shut the hell up.

Unlike our dumbass president, I still have faith in our courts and system of justice.

There won't be a court case. The investigation will determine the extent of fraudulent votes.
Quite clearly I am not going to put up $3m on the off chance that the govt provide a list of names for you with proof.
You're bet sounds as though you are already steeling yourself to deny any findings if you don't like them.

How about this. Wait for the results of the investigation.
Like i said, i suspect way more than 3m voting illegally, and not just in this election.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Apparently you don't understand the definition of the word proof.

Show me the proof that 3 million people casts illegal votes.

Not what you think is obvious, but documented proof. You know, the kind that holds up in court.

a reply to: UKTruth

All I'm saying is, if you want my money you're gonna have to provide proof that what you're alleging, actually took place.

Not what could have happened or what might have happened or what Trump says happened.

If it's a real problem, then we should be seeing some prosecutions. Or are you saying that it's a problem that 50 states attorneys generals are ignoring?

Give me a break!