On June 28, the Miami-based law firm Beck & Lee filed a class action lawsuit against the Democratic National Committee and DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz. “There are essentially six legal claims we are asserting in this lawsuit on behalf of the composed class members,” said attorney Jared Beck in a YouTube video announcing the lawsuit. “The first is a claim for fraud—against the DNC and Debbie Wasserman Schultz—based on the revelations from the recent Guccifer 2.0 documents purportedly taken from the DNC’s own computer network.” The Guccifer 2.0documents include internal memos in which the DNC broke legally binding neutrality agreements in the Democratic primaries by strategizing to make Hillary Clinton the nominee before a single vote was cast. The second claim filed is for negligent misrepresentation, a legal theory based on the first claim of fraud. The third claim alleges the DNC and Wasserman Schultzparticipated in deceptive conduct in claiming the DNC was neutral during the Democratic primaries, when there is overwhelming evidence suggesting favoritism of Clinton from the beginning. The fourth claim of the lawsuit seeks retribution of any monetary donations the DNC to Bernie Sanders‘ campaign. The fifth claim alleges the DNC broke its fiduciary duties during the Democratic primaries to members of the Democratic Party by not holding a fair election process. The sixth claim is for negligence on behalf of the DNC—for not protecting donor information—as hackers broke into the DNC networks, potentially compromising their personal information. “This lawsuit is our effort as attorneys to give a voice, in the political system, to all those who have been defrauded by the conduct of the DNC in supporting and promoting Hillary Clinton’s candidacy in violation of its own charter which requires it to be neutral,” added attorney Jeff Beck. The class of representatives in the class action lawsuit is currently in the thousands and continuing to grow, as any donor to Bernie Sanders’ campaign eligible to join. The Beck & Lee Law Firm has set up aFacebook Page with updates on the progress of the lawsuit. Hillary Clinton won the Democratic Primaries in large part due to the manufactured public consent within the Democratic Party that she would be the presidential nominee before the primaries even started. Prior to the first state to hold an election in the primaries, over 400 super delegates formallysupported Clinton. Clinton’s 2008 Campaign co-chair, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, did everything she could behind closed doors to ensure the 2016 primaries were not democratic, but rather a coronation for Clinton. “It is clearly the case that, when given truth serum, Debbie Wasserman Schultzvastly prefers Hillary Clinton to be the nominee—obviously—and to the extent that there are things that can be done institutionally and marginally to facilitate that outcome, they are being done,” said MSNBC host Chris Hayes this past May. Such favoritism for Clinton has extended throughout the Democratic Establishment. DNC vice chair Donna Brazile even foreshadowed the rigging in 2013, revealing in an interview with ABC News, “if Hillary Clinton gets in the race, there will be a coronation of her.” The DNC’s overtly fraudulent conduct and disregard for democracy has incited calls for Wasserman Schultz to resign, but the reforms and consequences for their transgressions don’t start and stop there. Had the DNC not colluded with theClinton Campaign to shield her from exposure, Clinton’s fate would have likely been similar to that of Republican presidential candidate Jeb Bush, who fell from grace in a broad pool after once being presumed to come out on top as the Republican Party’s presidential nominee. Beyond Bernie Sanders, who was initially viewed as a non-threatening fringe candidate, the field was cleared to ensure Clinton could coast through the primaries. The DNC also rescinded a ban on donations from lobbyists and super-PACS—first enacted by Barack Obama in 2008—by organizing a joint fundraising committee with the Clinton campaign called the Hillary Victory Fund. According to a report by Politico in April 2016, the Hillary Victory Fund laundered money to the Clinton campaign under the pretense of funding down-ticket Democrats. Hillary Clinton was never elected the Democratic presidential nominee, but was touted by the Democratic Party, who said it was her turn for the presidency—rather than leaving the decision to voters. Beck & Lee’s lawsuit the first of many consequences the Democratic Party will face for manipulating millions of voters.
But not to the same degree, or in the same way, which is why we don't see anything like the Republican lineup and management on the Dem side - any of it. There isn't even a Dem Priebus, let alone a Dem Cruz or a Dem Rubio or a Dem Trump.
Mod Note Link for the article in the OP: http://observer.com/2016/06/debbie-...d-class-action-lawsuit-for-rigging-primaries/ Sculptor, please be sure to cite your sources in the future.
This is the thing about the Democratic establishment and the left wing: Only the left wing could leave establishment Democrats feeling sympathetic toward Debbie Wasserman Schultz. The debacle with Tulsi Gabbard essentially sealed the chairwoman's fate, as far as I'm concerned, but the longer the revolutionary train stays out in the dreaming realms, the less ridiculous Rep. Wasserman Schultz looks. As it is, she made some really dumb, technocratic, bureaucratic, essentially -cratic decisions, but the incendiary Bern has lost much of its scorch because to the one, people are tired of the Chicken Little routine, while to the other, the one thing that is apparently unacceptable in this contest has been that Sen. Sanders should be held to his own standards. And as a functional reality, it might be easier to sympathize with the apocalyptic whimpering if Mr. Sanders had actually brought a platform instead of a bucket list. In the end, the parties themselves are not openly democratic. We've known this for a long time. And it's all well and fine when Bill Maher jokes about free beer, no taxes, and vagina trees, but the essential complaint here suggests that, in, say, a sporting metaphor, people are wrong to expect that the superstar will make the team, and despite her career stats, and having devastated her rival during tryouts and preseason, the rivals supporters complain that it isn't fair because the superstar was expected to make the team before the tryouts ever started. Yes, the Democrats pretty much thought they knew who their nominee was going to be; this is actually considered a good thing some years, under some circumstances. That we should simply ignore the reasons why things are the way they are is exactly the kind of excremental passion-driven stupidity that gets people into all manner of unexpected trouble. The Democrats have superdelegates as a safeguard against something that has already happened in history. And look at the Republicans, disposing of the part of public service having to do with civic leadership, pandering to ill-informed mobs. Look at what it got them. These complaints boil down to the system in place not being the system they want. It is unclear at this point what they actually expect. Maybe the left has finally figured out the right wing's lawsuit-as-fundraising bit. We'll have to see what comes.
He owns the news site you just quoted the OP from: In July 2006, at age 25, Kushner purchased The New York Observer, a weekly New York City newspaper, for $10 million,[12] using money he says he earned during his college years by closing deals on residential buildings in Cambridge, Massachusetts, with family members providing the backing for his investments.[13] Since purchasing The Observer, he has pushed for changes to increase sales and created a new focus for the paper, [clarification needed] moving towards a tabloid format.[14] Kushner has been credited with increasing theObserver's online presence and expanding the Observer Media Group.[15][16] In December 2011, The New York Post reported that the Observer expected to become profitable for the first time.[17] A few things about the article. To the one, The Observer is hardly without bias given that it is owned by Trump's son in law. To the other, the very basis of the lawsuit, as described in the article shows a level of equal disconnect from Sander's supporters (if they are in fact suing for those reasons). It becomes even more problematic when one considers the focus on her. Frankly, the article reads like 'man lost to a woman, so it must be rigged'. If the lawsuit is based on what is written in that article, then the level of sexism and well, conspiracies, in his supporters is troubling for Sanders and his legacy.
Well here is the problem with that article, it's long on accusation and really short on evidence. Additionally, it's difficult to see how Sander's supporters have been damaged. Other than the word, I don't see anything fraudulent in that lawsuit even if everything they allege were true. Fraud has a very specific meaning. I'm certain the case will be tossed out of court as a frivolous lawsuit assuming they get a nonpartisan judge (i.e. not Republican activist). Just because they didn't like the debate schedule it doesn't mean they anything untoward occurred or Bernie was somehow damaged. Bernie's supporters need to get a life. They tried, they lost. Get over it.
The left wing is no longer in the slightest sympathy with the "establishment Democrats", who are completely responsible for the incompetently corrupt show their Party is putting on. Quit blaming Sanders. Sanders has nothing to do with your problems - you have a blind spot the size of the White House with this miserably compromised candidate you moon after, and if it sticks the country with President Trump you have nobody but your own koolaid addled selves to blame for the debacle. And used them to drive every good, viable, potential candidate off the podium in advance, sticking us with probably the only Dem available that any of the possible Republicans in the pipeline could actually beat, and if they somehow lose to can probably roll in any future negotiations. Smooth move, guys. Just brilliant. The problem is not the "system", it's the people - the officials, and the candidate. No "system" is user-proof.
Obvious Advice Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Click to shove. You know, Iceaura, I've generally been trying to ignore your screeching diva routine, but here's a nickel's worth of free advice: Start making sense. No, seriously, man, try writing relevant posts. That would probably be helpful. Blind, blithering apoplexy just isn't useful. A candidate who can't be bothered to get a clue about his own fucking platform is not good or viable. At what point in history did you forget this basic and obvious aspect of reality? Just ... seriously, man― ―quit embarrassing yourself. Do better than Republicans, for fuck-all sake. I mean, really. Indicting millions of voters you need to support your cause, and that is the best you can come up with? I won't be thanking you or Sen. Sanders for the damage y'all have done to the American left. Don't worry, though, those of us who actually give a fuck about more than our own selves will clean up your mess.
What damage? If anything Sanders has greatly energized the base and attracted legions of new [young] voters. And he has made it clear that Trump cannot be allowed to be President. More importantly, he has driven the issues that people care about and forced her to change her game. And a good thing because she isn't going to get elected on women's issues.
Something by Burns goes here - O' wold some pow'r the giftie gie us etc. Or should I resort to quoting your posts? So? Even if that wasn't the koolaid talking, it wouldn't be helping you with Clinton. You've got a problem, and all the beer goggles in Christendom are not going to improve the view of this candidate that Dem pack of dishonest fatheaded manipulators has handed you. While you prattled about "competence", your fearless leader of the Democratic Party was losing ground to an elderly Jewish socialist who shouts too much and only registered as a Democrat for convenience - to the point where somebody had to resort to debate tricking, voter suppression, and tally machine rigging, to save appearances. Do you think that will work against Trump and the Republican Party? ? Look, honey, Sanders is not the source of your problems this season. Sanders is a symptom, publicity, at most. Clinton is the embodiment of the disease. Clinton is an actual source of this damage to the American left you lament while abetting, once again as she has been for her entire political career - definitively when she slapped down Wellstone's single payer initiatives (burdening the Dems with not only the current Republican invented botch from 1993, but the blame for it as it fails), but also in dozens of ways big and little ever since (supplying Obama with her Wall Street financial advisors in 2009, replacing the hopeful ones he attracted for his campaign, say). Nothing is more relevant in this matter than for the koolaid crowd to quit blaming Sanders for the DNC and the mess it made, and start trying to figure out how to somehow get your compromised little authoritarian rightie a majority electoral vote in November - if possible without trashing Warren's Senate position along with Sanders's. Because cynical gamester, worthless rightwing corporate pushover, and Israeli tool that she is, she is the only alternative we have to Trump. And she is going to get beat if her handlers and backers don't get a clue pretty quick.
On Symptom and Disease Such a flaccid tease. To bad you came to the show without a package. Bernie Sanders is a symptom of something, for certain. Yeah, something about symptoms and diseases. Quit making shit up.
Speaking of drinking the KoolAid, one of the lawyers bringing this lawsuit, refers to Sanders as "fearless leader".. I mean really.. Her twitter feed makes her look like she's a Trump supporter. She sounds like that lunatic who kept filing because she was certain that Obama is an African Muslim.. The lawsuit itself is ridiculous. I would be surprised if it wasn't thrown out of court. Some of her tweets show her as being completely deranged and typifies the whole Bernie Bro routine. For example: #DropOutHillary Monica used her mouth on a powerful man and got nothin' to show. You use yo' damn mouth on a roomful of 'em & get $200,000 [https://twitter.com/eleebeck/status/727988041529229312] #DropOutHillary There was a gal, Hillary Whose husband failed to fill her He Got a bj @work Just a complete jerk but no stocks, no pillory. [https://twitter.com/eleebeck/status/727984881876131841] Wow.. Just wow.. Beck is preying on these people to support her own agenda and it will simply damage Sander's legacy, what's left of it, even more. Dude, she won. I mean seriously, this is bordering on lunacy. Irony about "fearless leader" when the only one actually using such terms are people like Beck and his Bernie Bro's. And really, his registering as a Democrat for convenience kind of says it all about Sanders himself. The biggest irony is that you never complain about the DNC when Sanders wins. Only when he loses. Ergo, when he loses, the system must be rigged. When he wins, it isn't rigged? That's how you are playing it at the moment. Sanders supporters and Sanders himself are going out of their way to help Trump. He is acting against the very principles he demanded and is instead trying to use what he is against for his own benefit. The popular vote has gone to Clinton. He lost. He needs to accept that and so do his Bro's. In 2008, at about this time, Clinton stepped up and gave a powerful endorsement of Barack Obama. But she and Obama agreed on almost everything, while Sanders disagrees with Clinton on some issues and still exudes scorn for the Clinton campaign. “Our struggle continues,” Sanders said in a new fundraising email Wednesday. Speaking in California on Tuesday evening, he did little to discourage his audience as it booed mention of Clinton. That’s just irresponsible. And now that Clinton has won a majority of pledged delegates, it’s a violation of Sanders’ own principles to try to get superdelegates to vote for him rather than for the people’s choice. “Defying history is what this campaign has been about,” Sanders said Tuesday, but at this point he’s also defying his own values — and, just maybe, bolstering the prospects of the candidate who is the anti-Sanders. I understand the passion and heartache of his followers, but I watched such idealism help elect Nixon and George W. Bush, and I flinch at the thought of similar idealists this year helping to elect a President Trump.
a little background: (in 2 parts) the source, the middle, and the lawyer the middle: US Uncut is a decentralized direct action group in theUnited States established in February 2011 to combat corporate tax avoidance and highlight cuts to social spending and public sector jobs.[1] It draws its name, organizing structure, and tactics from UK Uncut, a movement that began four months earlier in London, England. The group's first action occurred simultaneously in 50 cities across the United States, mostly at Bank of Americabranches. Since then, the group has expanded both its targets and its numbers.[2] As of May 2011, over 100 cities have had Uncut sponsored actions.[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_Uncut Their take/ the lawyer: Millions of Bernie Sanders’ donors may now have legal recourse against the Democratic primaries they saw as rigged. Beck & Lee Trial Lawyers, a civil litigation firm based in Miami, Florida, is announcing the filing of a class action lawsuit against the DNC early next week, alleging fraud and collusion with the Hillary Clinton campaign. While roughly one hundred people have officially signed on as plaintiffs, partner Jared Beck told US Uncut that thousands of requests for legal paperwork have come in within the last 48 hours. “Signed agreements are coming in steadily and we continue to get new requests by the minute,” Beck said. Anyone who donated to the DNC after Bernie Sanders entered the race for the Democratic nomination, either directly or indirectly through third-party payment platforms like ActBlue, is eligible to join the lawsuit, along with anyone who donated to Bernie Sanders’ campaign throughout the course of the primaries and caucuses. “We think that the DNC has been running absolutely out of control and completely disregarding their responsibilities, rights, and duties to the public,” attorney Elizabeth Beck told US Uncut. Jared Beck said whether or not a “class” in the lawsuit is deemed valid by the court will depend on a number of factors, but the number of class representatives in the lawsuit could be as high as the number of individual donors to Sanders’ campaign. Around two million people donated a combined seven million contributions averaging $27 apiece. Sanders accumulated more than $222 million in donations throughout the primaries and caucuses. “The way a class action works in civil litigation is that not everybody who is represented or is a member of the class needs to be a class plaintiff,” Beck said in a phone interview. “We’ll be seeking relief for everybody who falls into the class around the country.” “Given the average donation of $27, that could be a lot of people, to say the least,” he added. The basis for the lawsuit stems from DNC internal communications published by hacker Guccifer 2.0, who took ownership of the compromising of DNC servers and allegedly leaked their contents. Among other items, the leaks revealed emails showing the DNC had been actively working behind the scenes to boost Hillary Clinton’s profile in the media as early as May 26, 2015, nearly a month after Sanders had entered the race for the Democratic nomination. New leaks published this week showed the DNC spent time and resources assessing Clinton’s vulnerabilities as a candidate in the early summer of 2015, and the DNC even drafted talking points for campaign operatives to suggest as narratives to members of the media, attempting to inject their own phrasing into third-party stories. Beck said he believes the lawsuit will be successful, as Article 5, Section 4 of thecharter and bylaws of the Democratic Party explicitly requires the chair of the DNC to remain impartial during the primary process: In the conduct and management of the affairs and procedures of the Democratic National Committee, particularly as they apply to the preparation and conduct of the Presidential nomination process, the Chairperson shall exercise impartiality and evenhandedness as between the Presidential candidates and campaigns. The Chairperson shall be responsible for ensuring that the national officers and staff of the Democratic National Committee maintain impartiality and evenhandedness during the Democratic Party Presidential nominating process. Beck also said a fraud lawsuit is justified due to multiple actions taken by DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who served as co-chair of Clinton’s 2008 campaign. Wasserman Schultz repeatedly claimed neutrality throughout the primary season despite numerous allegations from the Sanders campaign and national media that she tipped the scales in Clinton’s favor throughout the Democratic primary, most notably by scheduling the debates during low-viewership timeslots and by shutting down the Sanders campaign’s access to its voter file database for 24 hours.
“The DNC needs to do what it says in its charter, which is to be even-handed and unbiased in response to the slate of candidates running for the nomination,” Beck told US Uncut. Elizabeth Lee Beck, a senior partner at the firm who is helping to coordinate the lawsuit, said thousands of messages have poured in from Sanders supporters across the country. “People use words like, ‘angry,’ ‘I feel cheated,’ ‘Thank you for giving us a voice,'” Elizabeth Beck said. “I’ve read comments like, ‘I would have gotten the same results as if I had flushed my money down the commode.'” “The common thread among all these emails is they feel deeply aggrieved and cheated, which is a natural response to being defrauded,” she added. Elizabeth Beck described the shock she felt at an email from a Sanders supporter that spoke to the depth of sacrifice that the Vermont senator’s donors made to support his campaign. “I remember someone said, ‘I donated $35, but if I had known then what I know now, I wouldn’t have done it. That was a trip to the grocery store,'” she recalled. According to Jared Beck, no venue has yet been picked to file the lawsuit, which he expects to be officially filed early next week to allow for a hearing before the Democratic National Convention on July 25. Under federal law, the DNC, as a defendant in a class action lawsuit, has 20 days to respond upon being served. He said there are several options the DNC can choose from in how it responds. “They can issue a motion to dismiss or move to stay the case, which means they try to delay it. I don’t know what kind of strategy we’ll see from them,” Beck said. “There’s not a lot of precedent for this type of lawsuit, so it’s really hard to say what we’d expect from the defendant at this point.” Jared Beck described this lawsuit as unique in that the goal is to not just secure financial compensation, but to fundamentally change the way the DNC exists and conducts business. “You have people who say they’re homeless or unemployed, and they gave whatever was in their pockets to Bernie, and you have doctors and lawyers who have given thousands of dollars… We’re civil litigators, and usually our cases can be reduced to dollars and cents, but I don’t know if any amount of money could compensate for American democracy, which is priceless to me. I think anything short of a fundamental change in the way the DNC conducts itself is not acceptable… This isn’t a case that’s about money, this is a case about the fairness about the Democratic process.” Beck and Lee is a civil litigation firm that has previously won multi-million dollar judgments in previous civil cases. While their firm is based in Florida, they have prior experience in nationwide class action lawsuits, with Elizabeth Lee Beck serving as co-lead counsel in a nationwide class action case against Unilever. Anyone wanting to join Beck & Lee’s lawsuit is encouraged to email dncfraud@jampac.us and follow the progress of the lawsuit on its official Facebook page. Tom Cahill is a writer for US Uncut based in the Pacific Northwest. He specializes in coverage of political, economic, and environmental news. You can contact him via email at tom.v.cahill@gmail.com. the source: Guccifer 2.0 The anonymous hacker known as Guccifer 2.0 who claims to be behind the Democratic National Committee (DNC) computer network breach has released more information on Thursday, including a third batch of documents and FAQ-styled text that names Wikileaks' Julian Assange, NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden, and Army whistleblower Chelsea Manning as "the heroes of the computer age." http://www.commondreams.org/news/20...sange-snowden-manning-are-heroes-computer-age ok whither hence?
as/re Gussifer 2.0 On the Duty of Civil Disobedience by Henry David Thoreau ? Is there/ can there be a line to be drawn between broad civil disobedience, "and an ax to grind"?
