It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Hillary Clinton Robbed Bernie Sanders Of The Democratic Nomination, According to Donna Brazile

page: 15
80
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 08:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: Gryphon66
I'm still waiting for anyone to show one Primary or one Caucus that was "rigged" against Sanders.

This is repeated over and over and over. I know why the liars backing up the right-wing media narrative are doing it, but surely, moderates, liberals and Democrats here can show us which election was fraudulent. Right?

Or is that all just more of the ever popular "anti-Clinton" narrative? And before you waste time on stupid claims that I'm pro-Hillary Clinton again, she is and was a psychotic liar who likely has committed heinous criminal acts ... just not the silly fringe garbage that the RW media chamber echoes.


I think you are conflating two things. When people say the "primaries were rigged," They aren't referring literally to just the voting station, rolls, or caucuses. They are referring to the DNC affair, DNC email leaks, etc.

You are focusing in on a literal meaning to obscure what people are actually referring to.

Again, it isn't a fair race if the media and party are skewed towards Hillary.


Oh he knows this.

He knows that no one is claiming russia or trump changed any votes or ballots, and yet he has went post after post after post screaming about that.

But now that the DNC did this, if no ballots were changed, then the election was legit.

Hypocrisy at its finest!
He is a she.

Yeah, the mental gymnastics of many mainline Democrats in this case is a sight to behold. Well, basically the whole election cycle.


Wrong again.

I’m a man.

I’m an Independent.
You sure aren't sounding like one. You sound like a stereotypical mainline Democrat liberal.


Thanks for your opinion. You sound like you talk out of all sides of your mouth and ignore the facts when it’s convenient.


Which facts? So far we have the side of facts on our side re the DNC and Dem leadership colluding against Bernie. We also have wikileaks emails regarding media collusion. What do you have?


I have the fact that you cannot show one instance in which Sanders was not on the ballot or didn’t receive the votes of those who chose him.

Can you demonstrate that now?
edit on 2-11-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Noted




posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 08:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

No you’re still lying.

Do you have evidence of election or voter fraud against Sanders?

It’s easy to prove if you do. All you have is a media narrative.



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 08:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

The info has already been provided.

You have to read it and understand it and finally accept it. Continually asking just makes you look out of touch man.

Demand proof, ignore proof, call people liars, demand proof and here we are.. your ever locked cycle lost in your denial.

DNC Lawyers, Donna Brazile and Elizabeth Warren all say it was rigged and yet you somehow know different than those directly involved.

Maybe you should provide your evidence that the DNC lawyers / D.B. are wrong and you are right.

We will wait for you to post your evidence.
edit on 2-11-2017 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-11-2017 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 08:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee
Hillary had no business running as a Democrat. She's not a Democrat. She's never been a Democrat.

Why should Hillary get special treatment.



I fixed it for you.



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 08:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: Gryphon66
I'm still waiting for anyone to show one Primary or one Caucus that was "rigged" against Sanders.

This is repeated over and over and over. I know why the liars backing up the right-wing media narrative are doing it, but surely, moderates, liberals and Democrats here can show us which election was fraudulent. Right?

Or is that all just more of the ever popular "anti-Clinton" narrative? And before you waste time on stupid claims that I'm pro-Hillary Clinton again, she is and was a psychotic liar who likely has committed heinous criminal acts ... just not the silly fringe garbage that the RW media chamber echoes.


I think you are conflating two things. When people say the "primaries were rigged," They aren't referring literally to just the voting station, rolls, or caucuses. They are referring to the DNC affair, DNC email leaks, etc.

You are focusing in on a literal meaning to obscure what people are actually referring to.

Again, it isn't a fair race if the media and party are skewed towards Hillary.


Oh he knows this.

He knows that no one is claiming russia or trump changed any votes or ballots, and yet he has went post after post after post screaming about that.

But now that the DNC did this, if no ballots were changed, then the election was legit.

Hypocrisy at its finest!
He is a she.

Yeah, the mental gymnastics of many mainline Democrats in this case is a sight to behold. Well, basically the whole election cycle.


Wrong again.

I’m a man.

I’m an Independent.
You sure aren't sounding like one. You sound like a stereotypical mainline Democrat liberal.


Thanks for your opinion. You sound like you talk out of all sides of your mouth and ignore the facts when it’s convenient.


Which facts? So far we have the side of facts on our side re the DNC and Dem leadership colluding against Bernie. We also have wikileaks emails regarding media collusion. What do you have?


I have the fact that you cannot show one instance in which Sanders was not on the ballot or didn’t receive the votes of those who chose him.

Can you demonstrate that now?


You don't really want to investigate this. The fact you think the media was biased against Clinton is absurd. Only the blind would think that.

Again, between the DNC collusion and media complicity you have a stacked race. When voters go to the polls having false information and having been propagandized, it is a stacked race. "If you control the press you control the people."

Also what about this? It's now admitted as of last week to be 200,000 purged.

"The first head has rolled after more than 100,000 voters were mistakenly purged from the Brooklyn voter rolls ahead of this week’s New York primary, which handed Hillary Clinton a much-needed win over Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders. Diane Haslett-Rudiano, the chief clerk of the New York Board of Elections, was suspended “without pay, effective immediately, pending an internal investigation into the administration of the voter rolls in the Borough of Brooklyn,” the agency said in a statement, according to the New York Daily News."

www.motherjones.com...
edit on 2-11-2017 by Quetzalcoatl14 because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-11-2017 by Quetzalcoatl14 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 08:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

Thanks for more of your unsolicited opinion. I’ve cited studies that demonstrate the negative press against Clinton.

Again you’re muttering media narrative. You have zero evidence that the Primaries were rigged.

Your candidate lost. Time to get over that.

Did the DNC purge those rolls? I’d be glad to look at that evidence if you have it.

You’re coming up zero thus far.
edit on 2-11-2017 by Gryphon66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 08:48 PM
link   
Your 'leadership' collusion and propping up a corrupt candidate handed Trump the election. Congratulations.

Also, please recite that study. Let's look at the source and break it down.

CAn you show me where the mainstream media was covering her war mongering and corruption, outside of Fox News or alt-right? Can you show me the 'extensive' coverage of the wikileaks emails? Can you show me the extensive coverage of the DNC lawsuit addressing these very issues? You can't. I had to tell most of my Dem friends about these things. Every time it was revelatory for them, even though they are even IN politics some of them. Anybody with half a brain saw the clear bias in favor of Clinton.
edit on 2-11-2017 by Quetzalcoatl14 because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-11-2017 by Quetzalcoatl14 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 08:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

I know. But the whole truth needs to be addressed.

Brazile and Bernie are willing players pretending they were 'in the dark'.

That's really an important piece of the puzzle.
edit on 11/2/2017 by MotherMayEye because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 08:52 PM
link   
More info on the “Brooklyn purge” ...




Did the purge have an impact on Clinton or Sanders voters?

Apparently, yes. Equally. Maybe. Here's the deal: We know where Clinton and Sanders won. And we know how many Democrats were purged in each of those election districts. But we don't know who the purged voters would have voted for, and we can't be certain how many tried to vote.

All of that said, the Democrats were purged at similar rates in election districts where Clinton won (8.2 percent purged) and where Sanders won (8.4 percent). In raw numbers, 60,523 Democrats were purged in districts that went for Clinton, and 15,527 were purged where Sanders won.


WNYC



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 08:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

Your 'leadership' collusion and propping up a corrupt candidate handed Trump the election. Congratulations.

Also, please recite that study. Let's look at the source and break it down.

CAn you show me where the mainstream media was covering her war mongering and corruption, outside of Fox News or alt-right? Can you show me the 'extensive' coverage of the wikileaks emails? Can you show me the extensive coverage of the DNC lawsuit addressing these very issues? You can't. I had to tell most of my Dem friends about these things. Every time it was revelatory for them, even though they are even IN politics some of them.


LOL and those like you that didn’t vote or threw away your vote had nothing to do with the Trump win?

Yeah keep telling yourself that.



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 08:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
More info on the “Brooklyn purge” ...




Did the purge have an impact on Clinton or Sanders voters?

Apparently, yes. Equally. Maybe. Here's the deal: We know where Clinton and Sanders won. And we know how many Democrats were purged in each of those election districts. But we don't know who the purged voters would have voted for, and we can't be certain how many tried to vote.

All of that said, the Democrats were purged at similar rates in election districts where Clinton won (8.2 percent purged) and where Sanders won (8.4 percent). In raw numbers, 60,523 Democrats were purged in districts that went for Clinton, and 15,527 were purged where Sanders won.


WNYC


The assertions at the time was that the purges seemed to target new democrats and new voters, who were more likely to be Sanders supporters than Clinton.



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 08:55 PM
link   
Sanders camp is weighing in now...




posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 08:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: Grambler

I know. But the whole truth needs to be addressed.

Brazile and Bernie are willing players pretending they were 'in the dark'.

That's really an important piece of the puzzle.


Yes but bernies voters and donors weren't.

They deserve to have their votes and money be treated fairly.

What we have right now is an admission that the primary was rigged.

We may receive evidence that it was rigged even worse in the future, but that does not mean we shouldn't be outraged at what we already know.

Not saying you arent outraged, but it appears others are making excuses.



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 08:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

You can either get a civil tone and stop with the “half a brain” crap or you can argue with yourself.



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 08:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

You can either get a civil tone and stop with the “half a brain” crap or you can argue with yourself.


you can either get a civil tone and stop calling people liars or you can leave my thread.



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 08:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: thesaneone

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: thesaneone
a reply to: Gryphon66




And before you waste time on stupid claims that I'm pro-Hillary Clinton again, she is and was a psychotic liar who likely has committed heinous criminal acts ...



Yea you keep repeating this whopper in just about every anti Hillary thread.


... and here you are with pointless off-topic snark from the sidelines again.




Please help me understand how does someone claim to not like Hillary, calls her a psychotic liar who has committed many heinous crimes but still try to cover for them?




What have you added other then liars, liars and liars?


Because in the real world not everyone is on one team or the other. If i choose to counter the stupid lies here that Sanders was “cheated” when there has been ZERO evidence of that presented, why does that bother you?

I have presented plenty of sources for any statements of fact I have made. What have you done?


It is just these kind of people that allows criminals like the Clintons to corrupt American government for as long as they have.
edit on 2-11-2017 by Assessor because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 08:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: Gryphon66
More info on the “Brooklyn purge” ...




Did the purge have an impact on Clinton or Sanders voters?

Apparently, yes. Equally. Maybe. Here's the deal: We know where Clinton and Sanders won. And we know how many Democrats were purged in each of those election districts. But we don't know who the purged voters would have voted for, and we can't be certain how many tried to vote.

All of that said, the Democrats were purged at similar rates in election districts where Clinton won (8.2 percent purged) and where Sanders won (8.4 percent). In raw numbers, 60,523 Democrats were purged in districts that went for Clinton, and 15,527 were purged where Sanders won.


WNYC


The assertions at the time was that the purges seemed to target new democrats and new voters, who were more likely to be Sanders supporters than Clinton.


And? I quoted a local news source from June 2016. Do you have information that counters their claim? Or just hearsay?



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 08:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

Your 'leadership' collusion and propping up a corrupt candidate handed Trump the election. Congratulations.

Also, please recite that study. Let's look at the source and break it down.

CAn you show me where the mainstream media was covering her war mongering and corruption, outside of Fox News or alt-right? Can you show me the 'extensive' coverage of the wikileaks emails? Can you show me the extensive coverage of the DNC lawsuit addressing these very issues? You can't. I had to tell most of my Dem friends about these things. Every time it was revelatory for them, even though they are even IN politics some of them.


LOL and those like you that didn’t vote or threw away your vote had nothing to do with the Trump win?

Yeah keep telling yourself that.


Sorry, it has been calculated that third party left voters wouldn't have swayed it. Also, your corrupt candidate is not entitled to our vote. It is YOUR job, and the DNC's, to prop up a credible, honest, progressive candidate that can win and be supported by the real progressives. It is not our job to blindly support whatever candidate you shove down our throats.

You had your chance. The DNC and Clinton revealed themselves to be corrupt and unfair to Sanders. They also have proved for several decades to be just like the Republicans, shilling for wall street and the military-industrial complex. At the convention Sanders delegates and voices were pushed out. Instead of appointing a real progressive as vice president ya'll appointed another establishment shill, Tim Kaine. I said at that time this was a horrible move and showed no respect for the progressive wing of the party or Sanders supporters. People left in droves as a result, either staying home, voting third party, or the stupid ones which weren't progressives going for Trump.

Your problem is you don't get that real progressives and leftists won't support such maneuvers, or fake progressives (Clinton and the DNC). That's the establishments fault for working for the oligarchy and MIC rather than the common people. You don't get our vote!
edit on 2-11-2017 by Quetzalcoatl14 because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-11-2017 by Quetzalcoatl14 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 09:01 PM
link   
nypost.com...

Donna Brazile, former interim chair of the Democratic National Committee, said Hillary Clinton gained control of the political party before she won the presidential nomination in an effort to squeeze out Bernie Sanders. She began investigating whether Clinton “rigged the nomination process” as emails hacked from the DNC and published by WikiLeaks last year had suggested, she said in an except of her new book coming out next week that appeared Thursday in Politico. Brazile said she eventually discovered that Clinton had entered into a secret agreement with the Hillary Victory Fund, Hillary for America and the cash-strapped DNC that in exchange for raising funds, Clinton “​would control the party’s finances, strategy, and all the money raised.”
from NY post

www.theguardian.com... this one from gaurdian covers how anti sanders sentiment was rampant in the DNC via wikileaks

A cache of more than 19,000 emails from Democratic party officials, leaked in advance of Hillary Clinton’s nomination in Philadelphia, details the acrimonious split between the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and Clinton’s former rival, Senator Bernie Sanders. Several emails posted by Wikileaks show DNC officials scoffing at Sanders and his supporters, and in one instance questioning his commitment to his Jewish religion. Some emails show DNC and White House officials mulling whether to invite guests with controversial backgrounds to Democratic party events. Democrats struggle for unity as protesters swarm Netroots convention Read more Earlier this year, Russian hackers stole material from the DNC’s email system, the party and an investigating cybersecurity firm acknowledged last month. Wikileaks did not reveal how it acquired the files, though a hacker who goes by “Guccifer 2.0” has also claimed to have breached the party’s system.
not every one likes wikileaks but meh i posted it anyways

www.politico.com... politicos take on and and they tend to be reveared for their neutrality and general good nature of them as a source

Before I called Bernie Sanders, I lit a candle in my living room and put on some gospel music. I wanted to center myself for what I knew would be an emotional phone call. I had promised Bernie when I took the helm of the Democratic National Committee after the convention that I would get to the bottom of whether Hillary Clinton’s team had rigged the nomination process, as a cache of emails stolen by Russian hackers and posted online had suggested. I’d had my suspicions from the moment I walked in the door of the DNC a month or so earlier, based on the leaked emails. But who knew if some of them might have been forged? I needed to have solid proof, and so did Bernie. So I followed the money. My predecessor, Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, had not been the most active chair in fundraising at a time when President Barack Obama’s neglect had left the party in significant debt. As Hillary’s campaign gained momentum, she resolved the party’s debt and put it on a starvation diet. It had become dependent on her campaign for survival, for which she expected to wield control of its operations. Debbie was not a good manager. She hadn’t been very interested in controlling the party—she let Clinton’s headquarters in Brooklyn do as it desired so she didn’t have to inform the party officers how bad the situation was. How much control Brooklyn had and for how long was still something I had been trying to uncover for the last few weeks. By September 7, the day I called Bernie, I had found my proof and it broke my heart.
so theres this as well and it seems a lot of sources are all covering pretty much the same thing that something shady went down during the primaries and the process

www.huffingtonpost.com... older link from Huffington post

Under normal circumstances it would be odd for DNC chair candidates to be discussing the intricacies of the presidential primary process when the contest is still at least 2½ years away. This DNC race comes months after not only a crushing election defeat but also a fractious Democratic primary replete with accusations of foul play hurled at the DNC and its then-chair, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.). And while the seven contenders onstage were loath to admit it, that primary casts a giant shadow over the contest to lead the party. Every one of the changes Buckley and Ellison put forward at the debate is a direct response to a specific instance of real or perceived DNC interference. Clinton’s Democratic primary race rivals, including Sanders and Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley, accused the DNC of deliberately limiting the number of debates and scheduling several for the weekends to aid Clinton, as well as allowing illegally high campaign donations to Clinton through their joint fundraising apparatus. Leaked emails from DNC staffers indeed became headlines, as Ellison hinted, because they revealed party staffers’ suggestions of potential attacks on Sanders and mockery of his candidacy
so if nothing occurred why would they change their policies to make sure something like that doesn't happen again?

www.vox.com... vox take on the matter a much more recent article

“The agreement — signed by Amy Dacey, the former CEO of the DNC, and [Clinton campaign manager] Robby Mook with a copy to [Clinton campaign counsel] Marc Elias— specified that in exchange for raising money and investing in the DNC, Hillary would control the party’s finances, strategy, and all the money raised,” Brazile wrote in the story under the headline “Inside Hillary Clinton’s Secret Takeover of the DNC.” Brazile added of the deal: “[Clinton’s] campaign had the right of refusal of who would be the party communications director, and it would make final decisions on all the other staff. The DNC also was required to consult with the campaign about all other staffing, budgeting, data, analytics, and mailings.” During the 2016 election, Sanders allies alleged that the DNC did not act as a neutral arbiter of the Democratic primary, favoring Clinton in its selection of debate times and fundraising. Their suspicions were only heightened when leaked emails published by WikiLeaks, and now reported to have been hacked by the Russians, appeared to show DNC staffers deriding Sanders and plotting ways to help Clinton. The accusations grew so heated that Wasserman Schultz resigned, which is when Brazile took over.
i wonder if this is going to effect donna's future with the democrats or if she is entirely done with politics after this book deal ,later in the article it covers what her book does and does not say just didnt feel like quoting more with how many snippits ive posted thus far

note i went out of my way to not use any "right leaning sources" this is just from mostly left leaning media sources ,i cant link to reddit as i think were not supposed to use other message boards as sources but if any one wants to go see how this is being taken on the bernie sanders for president reddit it looks apocalyptic and his supporters are livid



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 09:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

You can either get a civil tone and stop with the “half a brain” crap or you can argue with yourself.


Says the person who spent all week calling People traitors.

Any luck finding proof trump or Russians changed votes, or are you admitting that your cries against trump and the election were unjustified because he didn't steal the election?




top topics



 
80
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join