Quantcast
DNC election was a huge fraud including Bernie Sanders, an insider perspective

Forums - Politics Discussion - DNC election was a huge fraud including Bernie Sanders, an insider perspective

Goatseye said:
Ruler said:

the CIA could and would have allready leaked it all if that would be the case, just like they leaked everything Trump was doing  since he took office

You have no clue what you're talking about. CIA is not a country club.

Yes it is thats where the defenition of Deep state comes from



Around the Network
Ruler said:
Goatseye said:

You have no clue what you're talking about. CIA is not a country club.

Yes it is thats where the defenition of Deep state comes from

What facts do you have to back your claim?



Do you have fun playing a console different than mine?

DON'T!!!

DNC lawyers are now on the record in court case, arguing DNC charter and bylaw requirements to conduct primary elections neutrally and impartially are not legally binding, that "impartial" is too vague a concept to have legal meaning, and that they could have chosen candidates by secret back-room deals despite public claims to have fair democratic process. Wow, that sounds like an argument somebody who acted 100% impartially would make (/s):

https://medium.com/theyoungturks/dnc-we-can-legally-choose-candidate-over-cigars-in-back-room-e3026730e252

Of course, it is not just DNC = bad and Sanders = good, as OP points out, he was in on it, making a point not to criticize Clinton outside narrow range of issues, ignoring her purposeful subversion of Freedom of Information Act and lying about the crime, her corrupt dalliances with foreign as well as domestic oligarchs (despite later going along with "Russia Bad!" attack line vs Trump, who never facilitated Uranium deals for Russian companies like Clintons did). Sanders downplayed "the email scandal" even when "the emails" revealed Clinton siding against his favorite policy, single-payer healthcare, to the extent of not making even her normal pitch on health-care, because anti-single-payer forces (insurance & pharma) feared that could help single-payer ballot initiative in Colorado: http://www.ibtimes.com/political-capital/hillary-clinton-campaign-avoided-helping-single-payer-ballot-measure-emails-show



mutantsushi said:

DNC lawyers are now on the record in court case, arguing DNC charter and bylaw requirements to conduct primary elections neutrally and impartially are not legally binding, that "impartial" is too vague a concept to have legal meaning, and that they could have chosen candidates by secret back-room deals despite public claims to have fair democratic process. Wow, that sounds like an argument somebody who acted 100% impartially would make (/s):

https://medium.com/theyoungturks/dnc-we-can-legally-choose-candidate-over-cigars-in-back-room-e3026730e252

Of course, it is not just DNC = bad and Sanders = good, as OP points out, he was in on it, making a point not to criticize Clinton outside narrow range of issues, ignoring her purposeful subversion of Freedom of Information Act and lying about the crime, her corrupt dalliances with foreign as well as domestic oligarchs (despite later going along with "Russia Bad!" attack line vs Trump, who never facilitated Uranium deals for Russian companies like Clintons did). Sanders downplayed "the email scandal" even when "the emails" revealed Clinton siding against his favorite policy, single-payer healthcare, to the extent of not making even her normal pitch on health-care, because anti-single-payer forces (insurance & pharma) feared that could help single-payer ballot initiative in Colorado: http://www.ibtimes.com/political-capital/hillary-clinton-campaign-avoided-helping-single-payer-ballot-measure-emails-show

How did Clinton facilitate the Uranium deal? What was the bargain used for the deal and how did that favored Clinton?

Before you clear Trump, he's been with Russian mob and government operatives since the 80's. But go on...



Do you have fun playing a console different than mine?

DON'T!!!

Goatseye said:
Ruler said:

Yes it is thats where the defenition of Deep state comes from

What facts do you have to back your claim?

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/16/world/americas/deep-state-leaks-trump.html?_r=0



Around the Network
Goatseye said:

Before you clear Trump, he's been with Russian mob and government operatives since the 80's. But go on...

How did I "clear" Trump if I never discussed him? Is it that hard to stay on topic? Why quote my links if you don't respond to them?
Here they are in case you had a case of temporary illiteracy the first time around:

"Democratic" National Committee's OWN on-the-record opinion on inherent neutrality (or not) of primary process:
 https://medium.com/theyoungturks/dnc-we-can-legally-choose-candidate-over-cigars-in-back-room-e3026730e252

Clinton emails that Sanders intentionaly down-played show her actively undermining Sanders healthcare policy:
http://www.ibtimes.com/political-capital/hillary-clinton-campaign-avoided-helping-single-payer-ballot-measure-emails-show

Or if you'd rather discuss punctuation than the topic at hand, here you go: &:'%9>8{}#@[]#)(!";"*,!



Hillary won fair and square. Sanders simply didn't have enough support among primary voters to garner the delegates needed. He did especially poor in the South, where Clinton cleaned up with the African-American vote. Polls showed Clinton with a significant lead for most of the primary season, and by time Sanders narrowed the gap, Hillary already had an insurmountable lead in the pledged delegate count.

If the primaries were held in all states on the same day in April, then assuming the overall polling tracked the same Sanders might have been able to squeak out a victory, but that's not how primaries are held.

So, let's not pretend that Hillary and the DNC somehow "stole" anything from Bernie. I live in South Carolina, one of the first primary states, and I voted for Sanders. Not because I felt he could win. I knew even then that with the way the polls were going, he was facing a very steep uphill battle that he stood very little chance of winning. I voted for him because I agreed with him on more issues and because I felt he was a stronger candidate than Clinton, who had issues with perceived trustworthiness (warranted or not) and had been dogpiled on by the right for nearly a quarter of a century, and as a consequence polled worse against Trump than Bernie did. But at the end of the day, not enough primary voters supported him.



Goatseye said:
Ruler said:

the CIA could and would have allready leaked it all if that would be the case, just like they leaked everything Trump was doing  since he took office

You have no clue what you're talking about. CIA is not a country club.

Probably meant the FBI. Gets so confusing at times with everyone being anti Trump too many initiails to remeber.

I mean lets just casualy meet with the DOJ to avert an FBI operation on my wife. Glad it somewhat failed and backfired on them



mutantsushi said:
Goatseye said:

Before you clear Trump, he's been with Russian mob and government operatives since the 80's. But go on...

How did I "clear" Trump if I never discussed him? Is it that hard to stay on topic? Why quote my links if you don't respond to them?
Here they are in case you had a case of temporary illiteracy the first time around:

"Democratic" National Committee's OWN on-the-record opinion on inherent neutrality (or not) of primary process:
 https://medium.com/theyoungturks/dnc-we-can-legally-choose-candidate-over-cigars-in-back-room-e3026730e252

Clinton emails that Sanders intentionaly down-played show her actively undermining Sanders healthcare policy:
http://www.ibtimes.com/political-capital/hillary-clinton-campaign-avoided-helping-single-payer-ballot-measure-emails-show

Or if you'd rather discuss punctuation than the topic at hand, here you go: &:'%9>8{}#@[]#)(!";"*,!

So how did Clinton facilitated the Uranium deal?



Do you have fun playing a console different than mine?

DON'T!!!

thranx said:
Goatseye said:

You have no clue what you're talking about. CIA is not a country club.

Probably meant the FBI. Gets so confusing at times with everyone being anti Trump too many initiails to remeber.

I mean lets just casualy meet with the DOJ to avert an FBI operation on my wife. Glad it somewhat failed and backfired on them

It's in the interest of the Intelligence Community to fight enemies foreign and domestic. If people wants to sell US, we're not gonna stand and watch.

Half of the steel being used in the Keystone Pipeline comes from Evraz (Russian owned steel company, owned by Putin close friend Abramovic).



Do you have fun playing a console different than mine?

DON'T!!!