Court Concedes DNC Rigged Primary against Sanders

DNC Primary Rigged

People will cling to the fact the court is saying they merely assume these things, but it is still a pretty big deal when they say stuff like:

“The Court thus assumes that the DNC and Wasserman Schultz preferred Hillary Clinton as the Democratic candidate for president over Bernie Sanders or any other Democratic candidate. It assumes that they stockpiled information useful to the Clinton campaign. It assumes that they devoted their resources to assist Clinton in securing the party’s nomination and opposing other Democratic candidates. And it assumes that they engaged in these surreptitious acts while publically proclaiming they were completely neutral, fair, and impartial. This Order therefore concerns only technical matters of pleading and subject-matter jurisdiction.”

Damn lol.

It's fine if you want to take this as gospel, but at least be consistent going forward and take all "assumed" truths as truth. Thanks in advance 👆

Originally posted by Robtard
It's fine if you want to take this as gospel, but at least be consistent going forward and take all "assumed" truths as truth. Thanks in advance 👆

Wait, you think it wasn't rigged against Bernie? I thought you knew it was. I mean, isn't it pretty obvious by now?

Originally posted by Sable
Wait, you think it wasn't rigged against Bernie? I thought you knew it was. I mean, isn't it pretty obvious by now?

Considering I've said something like '**** the DNC for what they did to Bernie' back when Clinton won the nom and you responded to that, not sure why you're asking now.

But I was referring to Surtur's double-standard of "assumed" information. Going forward I hope he takes it all as truth, as he does here.

I dont remember that post, but cool, they did **** him over badly.

Schultz needs to go play in raw sewage.

Originally posted by Robtard
It's fine if you want to take this as gospel, but at least be consistent going forward and take all "assumed" truths as truth. Thanks in advance 👆

You telling others to be consistent....lol. Too funny.

Originally posted by BackFire
Schultz needs to go play in raw sewage.

Isn't that a Sexist Comment?

Courts do not concede anything.

Aw look its one of those tryhards that think Bernie waa treated fairly. Adam I forgot you were pretty much the only die hard Hillary voter here. How much this must suck for you😂

Come back when you understand how courts work and what they do.

Originally posted by Sable
Aw look its one of those tryhards that think Bernie waa treated fairly. Adam I forgot you were pretty much the only die hard Hillary voter here. How much this must suck for you😂

Word is Debbie is awfully paranoid these days. Running from reporters, etc.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Come back when you understand how courts work and what they do.

Come back when you can read Mr 1%

Originally posted by Sable
Come back when you can read Mr 1%

Apparently, you cannot read, because you do not even know what concede means, let alone understand basic civics.

You didnt even read the article.

Nice lie in the other thread. Snake.

Allow me to help:

con·cede verb Admit that something is true or valid after first denying or resisting it.

Care to explain how a court concedes anything?

Pathetic attempt to move goal posts cause you cant admit Debbie Blabbermouth Shultz rigged it👆

Originally posted by Sable
Pathetic attempt to move goal posts cause you cant admit Debbie Blabbermouth Shultz rigged it👆

Here is my first post in the thread:

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Courts do not concede anything.

By all means, where did I move the goal post?

Official court document quote

The Court thus assumes that the DNC and Wasserman Schultz preferred Hillary Clinton as the Democratic candidate for president over Bernie Sanders or any other Democratic candidate. It assumes that they stockpiled information useful to the Clinton campaign. It assumes that they devoted their resources to assist Clinton in securing the party’s nomination and opposing other Democratic candidates. And it assumes that they engaged in these surreptitious acts while publically proclaiming they were completely neutral, fair, and impartial. This Order therefore concerns only technical matters of pleading and subject-matter jurisdiction.”

But please? Keep playing word games to try and circumvent the truth it was rigged.