DNC's-Hillary's Festivus: The Airing of Grievances and Lawsuit

4/21/2018 | SERKIT

[SERKIT]

Hillary and the DNC are late in their celebration of Festivus - at least the part about the airing of grievances. The airing of grievances are manifest in the recent "Kitchen Sink" lawsuit against any and all perceived reasons Hillary lost, except of course to the weak, weakened, and un-electable candidate selected by the DNC.

The more recent excuse should trigger a class action suit against all MEN since it was men, according to Hillary, who followed their spouses, sisters, daughters, and female co-workers into the voting booth and forced them to vote for Trump. When will THAT be filed?

[SERKIT]

The following list of Hillary's excuses as highlighted on her "Wha Hoppen?" tour seem to be the framework of the current lawsuit. Blame everyone except the person who should be blamed - Hillary herself.

One pet peeve in recent interviews on the MSM is the thought that, gee, if anyone should sue anyone, Bernie should sue the DNC for election collusion, election manipulation, or the denial of voters of their franchise of "every vote counts". The pundits need to be reminded that Bernie supports sued the DNC. The court basically ruled that a political party need no honor the vote of the people to select their Presidential candidate. Bernie was 'politically sodomized' and the court dismissed the suit. It gets lost in the mix that the Democrats nearly elected Bernie as their Presidential candidate as an Independent (just for the election cycle) then returned to his Independent/Socialist/Progessive status after he was screwed in the primaries, fixed by 'Lil Debbie and Donna. Will the DNC sue their own?

The prima facia eveidence of the "crime" is simply that Hillary lost. It is deemed a crime to be denied what Hillary felt was hers. In 2020, if she runs as a three-time loser, may be "you bastards still own me".

[Nevadan]

Good post.

[Raycpa]

I recall the horrors when Trump refused to say he would respect election results.

[subterfuge]

That’s only a partial list of the people and things HilRod blamed for her losing.

[Thank You Rush]

“”I recall the horrors when Trump refused to say he would respect election results.””

Something we never heard brought up again!!!!!

[Jim Noble]

The Constitution does not recognize “primaries”, “nominations”, “tickets”, or “presidential elections”, for that matter.

How state legislatures appoint their Electors is entirely at their discretion. These 50 state processes do not constitute a “Federal election” and should be free of regulation by Congress.

It is possible that the December convening of the Electoral College IS a “Federal election”, but since Article I grants Congress the power to regulate congressional elections but only grants the power to fix the date of the Electoral College voting, Congress probably lacks any other authority over that as well.

[Jim Noble]

I recall the horrors when Trump refused to say he would respect election results.

So do I. I thought it might be useful to preserve some of them., so I did:

A 'HORRIFYING' REPUDIATION OF DEMOCRACY -- The Washington Post, Oct. 20, 2016

DENIAL OF DEMOCRACY -- Daily News (New York), Oct. 20, 2016

DANGER TO DEMOCRACY -- The Dallas Morning News, Oct. 20, 2016

ONE SCARY MOMENT; IT ALL BOILED DOWN TO ... DEMOCRACY -- Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Oct. 21, 2016

"(Shock) spiked down the nation's spinal column last night and today when the Republican nominee threatened that this little election thing you got there, this little democratic process you've got here, it's nice, it's fine, but he doesn't necessarily plan on abiding by its decision when it comes to the presidency." -- Rachel Maddow, Oct. 20, 2016

"Trump's answer on accepting the outcome of the vote is the most disgraceful statement by a presidential candidate in 160 years." -- Bret Stephens, then-deputy editorial page editor at The Wall Street Journal

"I guess we're all going to have to wait until Nov. 9 to find out if we still have a country -- if Donald Trump is in the mood for a peaceful transfer of power. Or if he's going to wipe his fat a-- with the Constitution." -- CBS's Stephen Colbert, Oct. 19, 2016

"It's unprecedented for a nominee of a major party to themselves signal that they would not accept -- you know, respect the results of an election. We've never had that happen before. ... This really presents a potentially difficult problem for governing ..." -- MSNBC'S Joy Reid, Oct. 22, 2016

"This is very dangerous stuff ... would seriously impair our functioning as a democracy. ... This is about as serious as it gets in the United States." -- CNN's Peter Beinart, Oct. 20, 2016

"Obviously, it's despicable for him to pretend that there's any chance that he would not accept the results of this election; it would be -- in 240 years you've never had anybody do it. ..." -- CNN's Van Jones, Oct. 20, 2016

“That’s horrifying. Let’s be clear about what he is saying and what that means. He is denigrating — he is talking down our democracy. And I am appalled that someone who is the nominee of one of our two major parties would take that position.” – Hillary Clinton

““Every losing presidential candidate in modern times has accepted the will of the voters, even in extraordinarily close races, such as when John F. Kennedy narrowly defeated Richard M. Nixon in 1960 and George W. Bush beat Al Gore in Florida to win the presidency in 2000,” – New York Times

[SERKIT]

While I fully appreciate the Constitutional component, the irony is rich that the party that drones on about voters’ rights and democratic principles, they sure screw over their own when the bullies/Clintons take over the party. The Republicans can be bad actors, too, but I get the distinct impression that primary voters should at least have a voice.

[bigbob]

This suit is a DNC fundraiser.

The DNC is broke. This suit allows them to play their favorite role - the underdog, the victim of the overwhelming forces of Republicans, Conservatives, talk radio, the VRWC, the evil Koch Bros., Wikileaks, or whichever boogieman best serves their purposes this time, so they can shake down the Democrat base for money. They will claim it is to support their legal expenses, but money is fungible.

It’s actually fairly smart, considering that normal fundraising has been terrible (thanks to Hillary), and the statute of limitations means they can’t wait too long.

[UB355]

Stupid post, the claim was women followed their men into voting for the Hill

[Diana in Wisconsin]

I agree, BigBob. It’s a Fundraiser for the DNC.

As of April 21, 2018 the DNC currently has $10 million on-hand:

https://www.opensecrets.org/parties/totals.php?cmte=DNC&cycle=2018

As of April 21, 2018 the RNC currently has $42 Million on hand:

https://www.opensecrets.org/parties/totals.php?cmte=RNC&cycle=2018

[Alberta's Child]

The Democrats are also the party of trial lawyers and useless bureaucrats. Find out who is representing the DNC in this lawsuit, and I guarantee it’s a top DC-NYC law firm that donated heavily to Hillary Clinton and needs to recover its “investment” through alternative means since she lost.

[CaptainPhilFan]

Excellent!!! First good laugh of the day!

[TomGuy]

Per her most recently revealed screed, ‘they’ were not going to let her become president anyway.

‘They’ includes a wide range, of course — about like that Vast Right Wing Majority who tried to take down her husband.

Poor Hillary. A sad legacy: Always a victim. Never a president.

‘But I was a contenda! a contenda! I tell ya!’

[poinq]

In Trump’s counter suit, he needs to look into those who caused riots and tried to disrupt his rallies especially in Chicago and California. Also, He should as for all connections between the press and the DNC. And the funding of the DNC by the Hillary Campaign. Of course the Dossier is a target as is any connection with the government like the state department, WH and the DOJ including the FBI. ALso, you might as well go after foreigners like Soros, Steele and Russians. Oh and don’t forget the Clinton slush funds.

[Diana in Wisconsin]

Dem Primary Fights Drain Coffers:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-04-20/democratic-primary-fights-drain-coffers-as-republicans-bank-cash

More fodder for the, ‘lawsuit as fundraiser’ theory. ;)

“The surge of enthusiasm among Democrats that’s produced a record number of candidates for Congress this year has come at a cost: spread out donations and campaign accounts drained by expensive primary fights.

Even as Democratic donors lavish money on the party’s U.S. House candidates in the first midterm election of Donald Trump’s presidency, an analysis of this week’s Federal Election Commission filings shows Republican candidates have more money in the bank in 17 of 23 districts rated as toss-ups in November by the non-partisan Cook Political Report.

‘Republicans owe their advantage to incumbency in most of these close races,’ said Sheila Krumholz, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics, a campaign finance research group in Washington. ‘Victors of wide-open primaries with well-funded opponents are usually left with depleted coffers.’”

Too bad, so sad. Not! We are seeing this in Wisconsin with our upcoming Governor’s race. The Dems have (at last count) ELEVEN ‘Rats running and NO Republican opposing Governor Scott Walker (R, WI).