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: 19
80
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 3 2017 @ 10:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: queenofswords
a reply to: Gryphon66

I sort of half-way agree with you on this, Gryph.

Bernie is bound to have known what was going on, at least, partially.

He wimped out or was bought out, imo, because, quite simply put, he didn't fight back. He didn't expose the Democrat Machine for what it is....dishonest, underhanded, theiving, lying, stealing, money-laundering, mafioso-like criminal enterprise.

He caved....then bought a nice lake house for a third home.


Well, will wonders never cease? LOL

Actually, while I don't disagree with you about Sanders' motivations ... I'm really not commenting on his or Clinton's preferability. Bernie's about the closet thing that we have to a genuine leftist in Congress ... and unlike what many here would assume, I don't think that far left economic policies are the best for the country. We're a mixed economy, and we need to stay that way. I'd love to see us get back under budget and start working on the deficit ... but that's neither here nor there.

Sanders took a shot. He increased his national recognition level. I've been unable to quantify his financial contributions to the party, but the fact is that if what Donna Brasille is saying is true, Clinton subsidized not only her campaign but also, to some extent, Bernie's by keeping the DNC afloat.

I am not a fan of the way the two-party system works in this country. I would much prefer a more direct democratic method. The fact remains, however, that there is nothing here, and no evidence, that Sanders was "cheated" out of votes or the nomination.

Perhaps this is what I need to say: it is obvious that the Party leadership preferred Clinton. However, if the rank-and-file members had chosen Bernie, it would have been very difficult to justify overriding that.


edit on 3-11-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Noted




posted on Nov, 3 2017 @ 11:20 AM
link   
For anyone who followed the Democratic Party primary, it was obvious the game was rigged against Bernie Sanders. There was collusion starting from day one with mainstream media that failed to hardly mention Sanders until the the primary debates; and it went downhill from there. Bernie was cheated, plain and simple. But more importantly, progressive Democrats were cheated. Bernie had a grand idea to join the Democratic Party and nudge it back to being a centrist or progressive party rather than a right leaning party. The Democratic Party today is dominated by its corporate sponsorship, thus is more traditional Republican than Democrat. And the Republican Party, well, it is slid off the far right. In short, working class people no longer have a voice in government. Bernie wants to change that, and hopped onto the Democratic bandwagon to bring in millions of eager, new voters looking for progressive change. You know, along the lines of the promises Obama made but did not deliver. Alas, we were left in 2016 with two right shoes, and with Trump and his jackboots. This will go down as one of the biggest political mistakes ever when the Democratic Party rejected millions of voters in an attempt to force upon them another round of establishment politics. Great job, Hillary and the DNC. You too, mainstream media. Think how strong the Democratic Party would be with all those new voters.



posted on Nov, 3 2017 @ 12:25 PM
link   
a reply to: tabularosa

Biden was probably cheated more than Bernie. Who knows what went down to keep him from running.



posted on Nov, 3 2017 @ 04:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: Pyle
a reply to: Xcathdra

So I have gone through this thread now and why do you keep copy pasting this like it actually proves your point?


Because the information in that brief is from the DNC lawyers during their defense. D. Brazile has said the same thing.

Why are you ignoring the very people who would know for certain what occurred?

Or, like I asked Gryphon66 who still cant support it - what info do you have that shows you are right and the DNC lawyers and former chair of the DNC are wrong?


The case was dismissed?

You are citing a portion of the judicial proceedings where the court is deciding if the plaintiffs have standing to sue. They assume everything the plaintiffs said was true about the case against the Defense. The defense has to defend as if they did everything the plaintiffs claim. It is how the courts deiced if the plaintiffs have a case to bring against the defendant.



posted on Nov, 3 2017 @ 05:34 PM
link   
If it wasn't for Senator Elizabeth Warren confirming that Hillary scammed the nomination, the MSM would not have covered the story.

Tonight, the CBS Evening News has a segment. Not sure what it will say though.



posted on Nov, 3 2017 @ 05:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Dude this is nuts, lol.



posted on Nov, 3 2017 @ 06:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Pyle
a reply to: Xcathdra

So I have gone through this thread now and why do you keep copy pasting this like it actually proves your point?


Facts have a way of proving their own point.

I would add that now that is on the table about rigging elections, what was to stop them from rigging Detroit and the illegal voters with licenses in Cali is sure a riggin'?


edit on 3-11-2017 by Justoneman because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2017 @ 06:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: RedParrotHead
It's obvious what happened. "They" wanted Trump to win and knew he couldn't beat Bernie. Since "they" control everything they allowed the RNC to dictate what happened in the DNC, thus accomplishing their goals of getting Trump in the White House and dividing us Americans. Wake up people.


Now this is crazy if true but, truth is crazier than fiction.

So far Trump is making the RINO's volunteer to step down and let someone else have it. I think that is good no matter who's team your own.



posted on Nov, 3 2017 @ 06:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: MOMof3
I don't see how Bernie could have won. The Bible belt would have never voted for him.


You might be right but the fact is the same pollsters saying Clinton was the winner said Bernie would win by more.

Guess we have to speculate but I suspect since they were wrong on Hilldog they might have been wrong on Bernie, that is fair.



posted on Nov, 3 2017 @ 06:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: queenofswords
a reply to: Gryphon66

I sort of half-way agree with you on this, Gryph.

Bernie is bound to have known what was going on, at least, partially.

He wimped out or was bought out, imo, because, quite simply put, he didn't fight back. He didn't expose the Democrat Machine for what it is....dishonest, underhanded, theiving, lying, stealing, money-laundering, mafioso-like criminal enterprise.

He caved....then bought a nice lake house for a third home.


Well, will wonders never cease? LOL

Actually, while I don't disagree with you about Sanders' motivations ... I'm really not commenting on his or Clinton's preferability. Bernie's about the closet thing that we have to a genuine leftist in Congress ... and unlike what many here would assume, I don't think that far left economic policies are the best for the country. We're a mixed economy, and we need to stay that way. I'd love to see us get back under budget and start working on the deficit ... but that's neither here nor there.

Sanders took a shot. He increased his national recognition level. I've been unable to quantify his financial contributions to the party, but the fact is that if what Donna Brasille is saying is true, Clinton subsidized not only her campaign but also, to some extent, Bernie's by keeping the DNC afloat.

I am not a fan of the way the two-party system works in this country. I would much prefer a more direct democratic method. The fact remains, however, that there is nothing here, and no evidence, that Sanders was "cheated" out of votes or the nomination.

Perhaps this is what I need to say: it is obvious that the Party leadership preferred Clinton. However, if the rank-and-file members had chosen Bernie, it would have been very difficult to justify overriding that.



I have come to understand that the DNC didn't necessary prefer Hillary...they just needed her financing after Obama drained them and put the party in debt! Basically, Hillary had paid to play.



posted on Nov, 3 2017 @ 07:44 PM
link   
The wheels are coming off the bus. The same bus everyone will throw Hillary under, and already have started to.



There are more skeletons in the closet than a Tim Burton film.
edit on 3-11-2017 by thepixelpusher because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2017 @ 07:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: tabularosa

Biden was probably cheated more than Bernie. Who knows what went down to keep him from running.


That's an interesting question. With Sanders you have a potential deal to bury the investigation into his wife's scheme. Maybe they have dirt on uncle Joe, too.

Or just old fashioned money, I suppose.

I was pretty surprised when Bernie stepped aside and got immediately in line behind the Clinton campaign. I figured he was just a "controlled opposition" to move the narrative farther left. I don't think they thought he'd be as popular as he seemed to be, and/or they underestimated the distaste for the establishment candidate who was running the DNC.



posted on Nov, 3 2017 @ 08:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Pyle

The case was dismissed not because the charges could not be proven but because the Federal judge said he did not have jurisdiction. Thats why the federal ruling was appealed and also why the lawsuits have been refiled in state courts.

I know you guys dont like whats happening but you really should keep up on the topic if you are going to debate it.



posted on Nov, 3 2017 @ 08:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: muzzleflash
a reply to: Xcathdra

Dude this is nuts, lol.


and yet not surprising in the least...

When you spend decades, as both Clinton's have, perfecting corruption and getting away with it it is only a matter of time before they get over confident, make a mistake / forget the lie they told before it blows up in their faces.



posted on Nov, 3 2017 @ 09:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
If it wasn't for Senator Elizabeth Warren confirming that Hillary scammed the nomination, the MSM would not have covered the story.

Tonight, the CBS Evening News has a segment. Not sure what it will say though.


Warren spent the primaries and general with her arm around the losing party. Clinton is done with politics and Warren is not (at least in her mind anyways). You are going to see more and more Democrats distancing themselves from Hillary.

Also by Hillary admitting she knew about and funded the dossier she single-handedly yanked the carpet out from under people in her inner circle. John Podesta, her campaign manager, already testified he did not know about the dossier or who paid for it.

If Clinton knew about it, Podesta knew about it.
edit on 3-11-2017 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-11-2017 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2017 @ 10:23 PM
link   
From the only Democrat left (Tulsi Gabbard) that I respect, remember she resigned her position to support Sanders.


Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii), a former vice chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), called the 2016 Democratic primary "unethical" on Thursday in response to an exposé on the party's ties to the Clinton campaign."Today we heard from Donna Brazile that what many suspected for a long time, is actually true: the DNC secretly chose their nominee over a year before the primary elections even occurred, turning over DNC control to the Clinton campaign," Gabbard said in a statement Thursday, calling the 2016 primary "rigged.""The deep financial debt, closed door decision-making, complete lack of transparency, and unethical practices are now front and center," she added.


Listen up all you Clinton supporters, Gabbard is your last best hope to beat Trump and many independents will join in.

My suggestion support her going forward, she is the only one that stepped out of the mess Clinton created very early, and can't be tarnished with what happened in the 2016 debacle that is rabidly unfolding.


edit on 3-11-2017 by Blue_Jay33 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2017 @ 10:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

I agree Hillary threw him under the bus and left him open to federal charges if i was john idbe worried. He lied just like papadopoulos did.



posted on Nov, 3 2017 @ 10:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Blue_Jay33

Nanci pollosi wont allow that shes planning on picking up the torch forthe party. Shes all ready distancing herself from the DNC.



posted on Nov, 3 2017 @ 10:45 PM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr

Pollosi has no chance, ZERO !
She is from the Clinton era, Trump would crush her.

Here is the final nail in the coffin from the most liberal progressive, this video is trending on YouTube front page right now.
And he is really mad about it because he knows this rigged primary largely contributed to his side getting beat and humiliated in the general election.




posted on Nov, 3 2017 @ 11:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdrai don't know but seems like fraud to me if you got all these bernie supporters sending you money and killary being in charge of it. sounds sort of like racketeering.




top topics



 
80
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join