The Young Turks Defends DNC Lying, Scamming, And Defrauding Bernie Sanders Supporters During Primary

The Young Turks Defends DNC Lying, Scamming, And Defrauding Bernie Sanders Supporters During Primary

On April 25th, 2017 arguments were heard in U.S. District Court Southern District in the case of Carol Wilding, et al. V. Democratic National Committee, et al. in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida. In a class action lawsuit, which the mainstream media has largely ignored, Bernie Sanders supporters are seeking damages in the form of returned campaign donations made to the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and to the Sanders campaign. Central to the plaintiff’s argument, Sanders supporters made donations in the understanding that they were participating in a free and fair elections process. Jared H. Beck, Esq., attorney for the plaintiffs, argued that evidence from leaked DNC emails showed that the DNC violated Article V, Section 4 of the DNC Charter, which stipulates that the DNC is required to ensure neutrality in the Democratic primaries, and therefore, defrauded Bernie Sanders supporters.

During arguments, Beck stated that “people paid money in reliance on the understanding that the primary elections for the Democratic nominee nominating process in 2016 were fair and impartial.” He further contended that, “that’s not just a bedrock assumption that we would assume just by virtue of the fact that we live in a democracy, and we assume that our elections are run in a fair and impartial manner. But that’s what the Democratic National Committee’s own charter says.”

Conversely, DNC attorney Bruce Spiva, who seemed somewhat unclear about what the Democratic National Committee actually does, argued that the court doesn’t have jurisdiction over the internal workings of the DNC. He also argued that the court would not be capable of interpreting what the DNC charter intended by its use of the words “impartial” and “evenhanded” and that the DNC has no obligation to honor the discretionary rule applying to neutrality. During arguments, Spiva stated,“we could have voluntarily decided that, look, we’re gonna go into back rooms like they used to and smoke cigars and pick the candidate that way. That’s not the way it was done. But they could have. And that would have also been their right, and it would drag the Court well into party politics, internal party politics to answer those questions.”

In essence, Spiva argued what previous DNC attorneys have argued, which is that there is no enforceable obligation for the DNC to run impartial and fair primary elections, and that Sanders supporters should have assumed as much. For most who read the transcripts, this was an enormous gaffe, it was the DNC admitting that they never intended to run a fair primary election, and in their opinion, they didn’t have to. They could coerce, manipulate, lie, and do whatever it took to ensure their choice would be nominated, voters be damned.

On May 1st, The Young Turks (TYT) published a commentary bit on the ongoing DNC lawsuit discussing the transcript of the most recent hearing, and rather than focusing on the DNC’s assumption that they are within their right to partake in such a wildly undemocratic practice, they chose to focus on legal semantics. In fact, John Iadarola, Michael Shure, and Mark Thompson seem to contend that the DNC was well-within their rights to enter a smoked filled room and choose the nominee. In a sort of, “hey that’s what the Republicans do” manner, the panel takes more issue with how the DNC lawyer made this disclosure than what the disclosure actually meant. Furthermore, panel member Mr. Shure goes out of his way to call the Plaintiff lawyers, Jared and Elizabeth Beck, “opportunistic lawyers,” implying they only took this case for the limelight.

What they missed, of course, is that Spiva’s argument is absurd, and it also completely undermines our democratic process of elections. It seems to escape the TYT panel’s attention that if the DNC is going to simply choose for the voter who the nominee will be, why hold primaries at all, why solicit our donations, and why waste our time? Furthermore, why are states paying.

--

Connect With The Host!

- BECOME A MEMBER:

- LIKE MY NEW FACEBOOK PAGE

- CHECK OUT MY ARTICLES:

SUBSCRIBE TO THE PROGRESSIVE VOICE

- FOLLOW THE PROGRESSIVE VOICE ON TWITTER:

- GO TO THE NEW WEBSITE FOR ALL ACCESS