Censorship Conspiracy Domestic Policy Expand Your Mind... Featured Politics Top News WikiLeaks

Inside The Odd And Under-Reported DNC Fraud Lawsuit

Since last summer, a group of people who supported the campaign for Senator Bernie Sanders, the Vermont socialist, have been waging a legal battle against the DNC for alleged fraud. But the ongoing class-action lawsuit against the Democratic National Committee related to last year’s presidential election just took a turn for the weird and now involves the Capitol Police.

The latest wrinkle in the still oddly underreported DNC fraud lawsuit is spooky, weird, and yet possibly also incredibly lame. – The Florida Squeeze

The claims state simply that the DNC and then-chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz worked to undermine Sanders in favor of Hillary Clinton during the democrat primary election. This particular lawsuit isn’t being widely discussed amongst the mainstream media’s talking heads either. There is an active attempt to undermine this story by mainstream media. The issue was first brought to the attention of the public when WikiLeaks released the John Podesta emails. Many detailed an active takedown of Sanders in favor of Hillary Clinton and were the main reason Debbie Wasserman Schultz resigned from her position as the DNC chairperson.

Related Reading: Court Confirms DNC And Wasserman Schultz Showed “Palpable Bias” Against Bernie Sanders

A court document filed this week with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida by the attorneys of the Sanders supporters said that they received a call for information about the case involving Wasserman Schultz, and claimed that it sounded like the caller used a voice changer. But the icing on the proverbial cake was that the caller ID apparently matched that of Schultz’ own district office in Aventura, Florida. Because of the possibility that the call actually came from Schultz or someone in her office, attorneys for the plaintiff were ethically obligated to notify the court.

Lawyers are bound by professional ethics to avoid direct contact with other parties represented by counsel. In the event of any accidental contact (such as individuals contacting opposing counsel by phone without their attorney) it’s the responsibility of the lawyers receiving the contact to document it and give notice to demonstrate they were not deliberately engaging in improper communications. – The Florida Squeeze


Although the purpose of the call is unknown, and DNC lawyers allege that a “spoof” phone number was used, Wasserman Schultz has had a history of erratic behavior involving this case. She appeared to be trying to avoid service of process when the suit was first filed. This conduct is more associated with deadbeat dads and crooked car dealers than with public officials. Schultz has also seemed curiously out of control in videos circulating regarding custody of her laptop which was confiscated in an investigation of former members of her information technology (IT) team. One of the videos shows a red-faced Wasserman Schultz at a budgetary hearing threatening “consequences” ostensibly to U.S. Capitol Police if a particular laptop isn’t returned immediately. There is a similar video where Wasserman Schultz is oddly agitated about protocol regarding the use of Dropbox.

Speculations that the call came from a third party don’t hold up either. The mainstream media is not even remotely interested in the DNC fraud lawsuit, to begin with, so it’s not like legions of creative people are out there on social media, coming up with ways to mess with the civil attorneys working on a bit of Democratic infighting grinding along in South Florida. There’s just not enough profile outside of the people and parties involved. The crank caller scenario would mean the perpetrator went to a lot of trouble for a couple of laughs that won’t even make it mainstream.

Related Reading: The DNC Fraud Lawsuit Has Been Dismissed. Dismiss The Democratic Party.

So who did it? The Florida Squeeze has summed it up perfectly:

Isn’t such a stunt incredibly childish and stupid? Sure, but hang around political circles long enough and you’ll learn that you can’t overestimate the stupidity of people under pressure. People who are elected to office, along with the staff who serve them, reflect a very specific sociology. They’re not necessary the best and brightest. They’re the people who like to win. The ‘best and the brightest,’ and ‘those who like to win’ have very different ideas about how to get on in the world. A bright person wouldn’t make this call. Someone who wants to win at all costs might. Or better yet, have someone make it for them.

Following the money trail is likely the best way to come up with answers. Despite the obvious lack of media interest in corruption in the democrat party, a lot is at stake in the DNC fraud lawsuit, for a lot of powerful democrats. As reported in Part 2 of the DNC Fraud Lawsuit series done by the Florida Squeeze, whole economies could be run on the money that was raised in 2015-2016 Presidential election cycle through joint fundraising agreements between Hillary Clinton, state parties, and the DNC. The potential for democrats to lose massive amounts of money and power because of this lawsuit should not be ignored, yet the media is trying their hardest to do just that.

Contributed by Dawn Luger

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.