WARNING: The article contains truncated vulgarities which some readers may find offensive.
It is perfectly acceptable to cheat, at least according to the Democratic National Committee. Oh sure, they make up stories about how President Donald Trump supposedly cheated and everyone is expected to be furious about it, even though their claims are baseless. However, by the same token, when it comes to Dem’s rigging the system since they feel that they ride upon such a moral high horse, the practice is a First Amendment issue and is to be allowed.
As Zero Hedge observes, the “litigation of the DNC Fraud Lawsuit and the appeal regarding its dismissal” took quite a twist when “the DNC and former DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz” decided to file “a response brief” saying that “if the Democratic Party did cheat Sanders in the 2016 Presidential primary race, then that action was protected under the first amendment.” That really is what attorneys for Jared and Elizabeth Beck are putting forward.
Since the parties, both the G.O.P and the Democrats, are not legally bound by a set of rules, it is hard to send anyone to jail for even openly cheating. This needs to be understood fully since the Republicans did acts similar to Ron Paul in 2012.
A frightening as it would have been (and that is putting it mildly), Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) would most likely be sitting in the Oval Office today if he had not been cheated. Even the most diehard Trumper must admit that, while there were virtually no “Clinton” signs or bumper stickers to be seen, “Feel the Bern” was as common as mosquitoes (and just as bothersome).
Due to “outspoken Twitter outbursts,” this was the approach taken in defense of Beck. “For example, Plaintiffs’ counsel Jared Beck repeatedly refers to the DNC as “shi*bags” on Twitter and uses other degrading language in reference to Defendants,” the defense counsel has stated. Hedge observes that there is no mention of the First Amendment here, oddly enough.
The same council was angered by how Beck “Repeatedly promoted patently false and deeply offensive conspiracy theories about the deaths of a former DNC staffer and Plaintiffs’ process server in an attempt to bolster attention for this lawsuit.” Again, how was this not well within his First Amendment rights?
Also, the defense counsel failed to note that Mr. Beck employed “the voice-modulated phone calls received by the law offices of the Becks which contained a caller-ID corresponding to the law offices of Debbie Wasserman Schultz.”
Attorneys for the DNC said, “There is no legitimate basis for this litigation, which is, at its most basic, an improper attempt to forge the federal courts into a political weapon to be used by individuals who are unhappy with how a political party selected its candidate in a presidential campaign.”
Wikileaks has already exposed how the Democratic National Committee favored heavily Mrs. Hillary Clinton over Mr. Sanders’ campaign. If this is allowed in court (as it should be), this will not help those trying to hide what was done.
There simply is no way that anyone who was awake, attended rallies, worked in the media, or talked to the average person on the street for ten seconds about politics during the campaigns did not hear support for Cruz, Trump, and Sanders all season long. Hearing the name “Clinton” (before the unfair dismissal of Sanders by the party that he foolishly chose to embrace) was as rare as hen’s teeth.
Now, as the facts come out, it was a Freedom of Speech issue to cheat the Senator from Vermont. How quaint.