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

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Gryphon66

So Debbie Wasserman-Schultz resigned as DNC chair because???

The internal leak of DNC emails to wikileaks clearly shows they rigged things to favor Clinton. There are numerous incidents during the democratic primary of Sanders supporters being intentionally miscounted so Clinton got the delegates.

So, again I ask, which Primaries and/or Caucuses were mishandled by the State Elections Commissions?

Surely you have evidence of this claim? Surely you aren't lying?

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Annee

What a surprise that the Party voters and the Party leadership supported Clinton over Sanders, a life-long Independent.

Am I understanding some of these members correctly? Don't they understand that the Primaries and Caucuses are PARTY elections?

Clinton won in both pledged delegates and superdelegates. The shenanigans of the DNC are a separate issue, although, the right-wingers here are desperate to suggest otherwise.

I wonder why? Could it be the massive failure thus far of the Trump Administration and the Republican Congress?

Anything to distract from bad news, I guess.

I greatly appreciate your post.

Reps (not all, of course) pretty much have single focus: "Christian Fundamentalism, "white right", money".

Dems: are all the "color outside the lines" people. They lack focus because of their diversity.

I support the diversity - - but, they have to find a common FOCUS.

Bernie (the sham) divided the party even more. And is still doing it.

Bernie - The Gift that keeps on Giving - - to the Republican Power.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Xcathdra

You know, for a non-partisan, you're awfully partisan.

For someone to accuse me of that while ignoring the illegal activity by Clinton / DNC tells me you cant defend what they did because they did it so you decide to attack me to shift focus.

That tactic might work on you.. It doesnt work on me.

Nice attempt at a segue. I have stated that the Democrats should pay for any crimes.

I defend the truth; those like you prefer dishonesty.

No you said the 2016 Democrats should be held accountable.. Its nice to see you acknowledge they committed crimes though.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: MotherMayEye

From what I read, Obama's deal extended repayment into 2016, and the Party needed money it didn't have.

The Clinton Campaign supplied that money.

But why was Hillary's deal made first?

Before Obama's? I didn't read that. The 2012 Campaign left the Party in debt. Obama agreed to pay them back/balance the books.

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Xcathdra

You know, for a non-partisan, you're awfully partisan.

For someone to accuse me of that while ignoring the illegal activity by Clinton / DNC tells me you cant defend what they did because they did it so you decide to attack me to shift focus.

That tactic might work on you.. It doesnt work on me.

Nice attempt at a segue. I have stated that the Democrats should pay for any crimes.

I defend the truth; those like you prefer dishonesty.

No you said the 2016 Democrats should be held accountable.. Its nice to see you acknowledge they committed crimes though.

You want to hold people responsible that didn't commit any unethical or illegal actions?

The people who didn't follow protocol/broke the law should be appropriately punished.

Now, if you're tired of trying to muddy the water, you have evidence of the corrupted Primaries and Caucuses?

a reply to: Annee

Indeed. Democrats are a collection of individual groups with their own agendas which tends to diffuse the focus.

That's another reason the Republicans are in control of Congress (well, that and gerrymandering.)

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Annee

Indeed. Democrats are a collection of individual groups with their own agendas which tends to diffuse the focus.

That's another reason the Republicans are in control of Congress (well, that and gerrymandering.)

Bernie is the gift that keeps on giving to the Republican Power.

All he does is divide the Dems even more.

a reply to: Annee

Clinton was not the most popular Democratic candidate of modern times.

However, while I had some admiration for Bernie, I had none after he tried to co-opt the Democratic party. Plus, as you pointed out, his policy book is ... mostly fiction.

If I were blaming a single cause for the Trump Presidency, he would be it.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: MotherMayEye

From what I read, Obama's deal extended repayment into 2016, and the Party needed money it didn't have.

The Clinton Campaign supplied that money.

But why was Hillary's deal made first?

Before Obama's? I didn't read that. The 2012 Campaign left the Party in debt. Obama agreed to pay them back/balance the books.

Yes. Hillary's was first according to Politico's September 2015 article:

The deal with Obama for America is the second major joint fundraising agreement the DNC has inked recently. The DNC announced it had come to an agreement with Hillary Clinton's campaign in August after months of fractious negotiations. The agreement now includes 33 state parties, Shulman said, allowing wealthy donors to write a single check to be divided up among the parties and Clinton's campaign.

Link

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Annee

Clinton was not the most popular Democratic candidate of modern times.

However, while I had some admiration for Bernie, I had none after he tried to co-opt the Democratic party.

If I were blaming a single cause for the Trump Presidency, he would be it.

Absolutely!!!!!!!

Hillary was basically "Swiftboated" by the Right and apparently the Russians. While no one at the top level of government has completely clean hands - - - the Conspiracies covered hers deep in dirt.

originally posted by: SlapMonkey

originally posted by: face23785
This is a cute way to try to rationalize the suspension of democracy in the DNC primary last year.

Trump isn't a Republican but the RNC let the voters choose. Too bad the DNC didn't care what their voters wanted.

With 20/20 hindsight and the opinion that Clinton really should have won with a landslide, maybe I'm underestimated the amount of those who would have voted for Bernie.

As a true Independent who has voted Republican mostly, Independent (Ross Perot), and Democrat (Obama twice, to keep McCain/Palin out and Romney out). I did like Obama’s platform the first time, but by second time he made it clear he had no intention of honoring most of it. While not 100% in line with Bernie’s platform, I was ready and willing to vote for him unless Rubio was the nominee, depending on his VP pick. Once it was the head of the Clinton Cartel as the Democrat Party nominee, my vote was going to ANYONE who could prevent that travesty, which eliminated all but the current POTUS. And before the SJWs come out, I would also vote for Condoleeza Rice (or another qualified woman) in a heartbeat! No issues voting for a woman, just has to be the right woman and not a career criminal...I think there are MILLIONS who think like me, so your analogy here is likely correct. Had the DNC not unethically coronated HRC, Bernie Sanders would likely be POTUS today!

a reply to: MotherMayEye

I'm in the office and don't have time for research ATM ... how does that time-frame agree with her announcement of candidacy for 2016?

a reply to: Gryphon66

No - the liar would be you.

you demand proof then ignore it when its provided and then pretend it never happened. Something you consistently do in these threads.
Rather sad actually that you mimic the behavior the DNC consistently demonstrates.

Maybe you will believe it if it came from Democrats and the Court?

* - Wasserman Schultz, DNC Rigged the Primary, but Judge Dismisses Fraud Suit Anyway

However, the DNC’s attorneys never bothered refuting the lawsuit’s claim that the primary process was biased against Sanders.

Instead, they argued the DNC has a right to conduct primaries however it chooses, and, furthermore, that Sanders supporters knew the primaries were rigged, therefore relieving the DNC of any responsibility it might have had.

This, from the New York Observer: “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 asserted that the court cannot interpret, claim, or rule on anything associated with whether the DNC remains neutral in their presidential primaries.”

The DNC itself admitted they rigged the primaries and had every right to do so.

originally posted by: Hazardous1408
I watched the democrat primaries with a lot of interest...
Cheering for Bernie...
He got a lot of votes...

But Hillary got more...

So how was he “cheated” exactly?

From what I have read, he was cheated of campaign funding that was due him during the primaries.
There also many questions about whether he was cheated of votes in a number of states, including Nevada, IIRC.

a reply to: Gryphon66

You want to hold people responsible that didn't commit any unethical or illegal actions?

They clearly broke the DNC's charter, so I'm not sure saying they didn't commit any unethical actions is entirely warranted.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: MotherMayEye

I'm in the office and don't have time for research ATM ... how does that time-frame agree with her announcement of candidacy for 2016?

She had already announced.

But, it's preposterous that Brazile says she didn't know about this deal. Politico reported on it back in September 2015. It's like she threw DWS under the bus and I am not sure why she would do that.

a reply to: Xcathdra

The DNC itself admitted they rigged the primaries and had every right to do so.

The DNC did this blatantly in front of everyone then pretended it was a fair process. That is what kept the bernie voters home. Had he lost fairly hillary may have had a chance.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Good for you, you found an article which demonstrates, there was no illegal activity regarding the Florida Primary.

You have an opinion piece suggesting that alleged "favored treatment" of Clinton by the DNC is the same as screwing with the votes in the Primary?

Where is the proof that the votes in the Primary were altered, corrupted, etc? Do you have any thing besides an opinion piece?

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Hazardous1408
I watched the democrat primaries with a lot of interest...
Cheering for Bernie...
He got a lot of votes...

But Hillary got more...

So how was he “cheated” exactly?

From what I have read, he was cheated of campaign funding that was due him during the primaries.
There also many questions about whether he was cheated of votes in a number of states, including Nevada, IIRC.

To the tune of over 100 million dollars.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Why thank you Donna.



We didn't really need Brazile to tell us something that everyone has known if they were paying attention.