Democratic Party Attorneys Admit DNC Is Corrupt

September 23rd, 2016

Awake Goy

DNC attorneys have admitted that the Democratic party is corrupt and claim that Bernie Sanders donors knew this all along and therefore cannot sue them for election fraud.

In a desperate attempt to get the class action lawsuit alleging election fraud by the Democratic National Committee thrown out of court, DNC attorneys have admitted that the Democratic party is corrupt and attempted to prove that Bernie Sanders donors knew this all along and therefore cannot sue them.

This unexpected move by the DNC attorneys follows their attempts earlier this month to get the class action lawsuit thrown out on a technicality.

These actions suggest that the DNC understands the case against them has merit, and as such they are attempting to get the lawsuit thrown out before plaintiff’s attorneys have a chance to delve into damaging and potentially incriminating details in court.

“The DNC was biased in favor of one candidate – Hillary Clinton – from the beginning and throughout the process,” the plaintiffs wrote in their original lawsuit. The complaint, which was filed in federal court in Florida, alleges fraud, as well as negligence as it relates to external hacks on the DNC server. The Bernie Sanders donors contend that the trove of DNC emails posted by Wikileaks and Guccifer 2.0 further proves that the Democratic Party was working against Bernie Sanders from the start.

The unusual motion by the DNC attorneys has raised belief among the plaintiffs that their case has merit, and that the DNC are running scared.

“Speaking just for myself, I will say that after reading the DNC’s motion, I am more convinced than ever about the merits of our claims, as well as the significance of this case to restoring integrity to our country’s democratic process,” Jared Beck, an attorney who represents the plaintiffs, told LawNewz.

Attempting to prove that the Bernie Sanders donors knew the DNC was biased all along, and therefore cannot complain about corruption after donating money, DNC attorneys produced evidence of Sanders donors posting links critical of Wasserman Schultz on social media and participating in online petitions.

Here is a quote from the DNC’s motion:

“For example, Rick Washik, donated to the Sanders Campaign between February 2016 and June 2016, months after posting a link to a petition that claimed that Congresswoman Wasserman Schultz was biased. Catherine Cyko, FAC ¶ 19, donated to the Sanders Campaign between February 28, 2016 and June 30, 2016, after she posted an article accusing the DNC of bias. Marlowe St. Cloud Primacy , made her first reported donation to the Sanders Campaign on March 8, 2016, several days after posting an article accusing the DNC of bias.Rosalie Consiglio,, made her first reported donation to the Sanders Campaign a week after posting an article accusing the DNC of bias…

This sample demonstrates that, aside from not being actionable, Plaintiffs’ theory that donors relied upon Defendants’ statements about neutrality to make donations they would not have otherwise made is not plausible.” [citations omitted]