DNC Admits to Shady, Backroom Politics During Class Action Lawsuit

Things are not looking any better for the Democratic National Committee this week, as the organization is still embroiled in a nasty court battle over their perverse treatment of voters in the 2016 democratic primary.

During the tumultuous and ultimately bizarre election of 2016, the democratic party found itself on the receiving end of one of politics’ most rude awakenings.  Not only did their “inevitable” candidate Hillary Clinton fall victim to Wikileaks whistleblowers exposing her for the corrupt career politician that she was, the disclosures by the website implicated her campaign and the DNC in a  scheme to nullify the support of her primary rival Bernie Sanders.

The evidence of scandal was so damning that DNC Chair Debbie Wassermann Schultz was forced to resign after an embarrassing week of constant heckling by her own constituents, including being booed right off of the stage in Florida.

Now, Bernie Sanders’ supporters are fighting back against the DNC in a class action lawsuit.  The suit claims that the proven-to-be-rigged primary system defrauded the Bernie Bros out of their donations to the democratic socialist’s campaign, and they are seeking to regain their lost money.

take our poll - story continues below

Should Jim Acosta have gotten his press pass back?

  • Should Jim Acosta have gotten his press pass back?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to The Constitution updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Trending: Art of the Meal

In their “defense”, the DNC has basically told the Bernie Army that they have the right to do whatever they wish, in terms of picking a nominee, and are not beholden to the concept of a fair election.

“Shortly into the hearing, DNC attorneys claim Article V, Section 4 of the DNC Charter—stipulating that the DNC chair and their staff must ensure neutrality in the Democratic presidential primaries—is ‘a discretionary rule that it didn’t need to adopt to begin with.’ Based on this assumption, DNC attorneys assert that the court cannot interpret, claim, or rule on anything associated with whether the DNC remains neutral in their presidential primaries.

“The attorneys representing the DNC have previously argued that Sanders supporters knew the primaries were rigged, therefore annulling any potential accountability the DNC may have. In the latest hearing, they doubled down on this argument: ‘The Court would have to find that people who fervently supported Bernie Sanders and who purportedly didn’t know that this favoritism was going on would have not given to Mr. Sanders, to Senator Sanders, if they had known that there was this purported favoritism.’

“Jared Beck, the attorney representing Sanders supporters in the class action lawsuit, retorted that the DNC Charter is not akin to political rhetoric a politician would use during a campaign, but rather an inherent and important part of democracy in America. The entire argument of the DNC in this lawsuit is to conflate the promises of a political candidate with those of an election arbiter bound to neutrality by the DNC Charter, and to claim that fraudulent inducement cannot ever be proven as the DNC attorneys allege, ‘I think there’s an impossible showing of causation.’”

This may very well go down in history as one of the dirtiest political moves of all time, especially given that Hillary Clinton had earlier been shown to stand no chance against republican candidate Donald Trump in the general election, while Bernie Sanders’ numbers showed a much more competitive hypothetical matchup.  As if that fact weren’t enough to incense Sanders’ supporters, this latest debauchery and denial from the DNC will certainly lead to a further fracturing of the already beleaguered party.


Please leave your comments below

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.