Posted on 11/03/2017 11:05:12 PM PDT by John Semmens
This week, an excerpt from former Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Donna Brazile's forthcoming book asserted that the DNC conspired with Hillary Clinton to rig the Party's primary system to cheat Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders out of the presidential nomination. Ironically, Brazile lost her gig at CNN when Wikileaks revealed that she abetted the cheating by giving Hillary Clinton an advance peak at debate questions.
Brazile expressed shock that in exchange for a $20 million cash payment, the DNC under her predecessor Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (Fla) sold controlling interest to Hillary Clinton. "I don't know whether that was illegal, but it sure was unusual," Brazile wrote. "Normally, control over the National Committee isn't transferred to a candidate until after the nomination is secured at the convention."
Clinton expressed surprise following the publication of Brazile's contention, saying "from what I've heard, Donna hasn't been well. Perhaps a brain tumor has addled her thinking. The $20 million was a straightforward purchase of controlling interest much like many of the purchases made by Trump on his way to becoming a billionaire. Why is it okay for him to buy a hotel, but not for me to buy a political party? Trying to make my purchase look illegitimate is yet another example of the sexism that wrecked my campaign's chances."
Rep. Luis Gutiérrez (D-IL) announced that Brazile's evidence will be added to the impeachment case he is building against President Trump. "The dire threat that Mr. Trump's candidacy posed to America drove the most highly esteemed candidate that ever sought the office to have to resort to irregular tactics," Gutiérrez charged. "Corrupting her virtue in such a manner is the highest crime imaginable."
In related news, in testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee, Sean Edgett, Acting General Counsel for Twitter, Inc., admitted that "despite our efforts to stack the deck against him, Trump was able to effectively use Twitter to boost his campaign. We were able to suppress nearly 50% of the negative tweets about Clinton while allowing all the negative tweets about Trump to freely flow through our network. Clinton originated twice as many tweets as Trump did, but his tweets were re-tweeted twice as often. This type of clever and anarchic devolution of control from the company to its customers is a problem we are looking into."
if you missed any of this week's other semi-news/semi-satire posts you can find them at...
https://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Opinion/228573-2017-11-03-semi-news-semi-satire-november-5-2017-edition.htm
ping
John, is your stuff copy protected, or can it be used elsewhere to infuriate liberals?
As usual the satire is so close to the actual truth that most times most people wouldn’t even notice the difference.
That’s how off the rails leftist politics have gone. Gotta give the dems credit for one thing though; they really are masters at spin. They can twist anything around to make it sound like the opposition is the bad guy even if they just discovered the cure for cancer, diabetes, and male pattern baldness all at one time.
John, you really ARE the best!!!
No Tweets for you!
They'll try to call it fake news even when it is labeled as [semi-satire]. No matter what, the liberals will be "triggered!"
Hillary...virtue...in the same sentence!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.