Court Concedes DNC Rigged Primary against Sanders

So, I will take that as your—get this—concession.

Nah you cant read. Kindly fck off

Well, one of us cannot, and it is fairly obvious to those of us who can, who that person is.

Why is why you keep lying

Originally posted by Sable
Why is why you keep lying

I'm actually curious on what he and other leftists here have to say about this story:

A New Report Raises Big Questions About Last Year’s DNC Hack

The thread about it has been largely ignored.

He's playing word games so he doesn't have to deal with what the court said. it's rather sad.

Originally posted by Silent Master
He's playing word games so he doesn't have to deal with what the court said. it's rather sad.

Indeed, but it's not gonna fly.

Adam: what is your opinion on what the court said?

Originally posted by Silent Master
He's playing word games so he doesn't have to deal with what the court said. it's rather sad.

Exaxtly what I said. Adam is a Clinton loyalist and hated Bernie, which explains his pathetic behavior.

Originally posted by Silent Master
He's playing word games so he doesn't have to deal with what the court said. it's rather sad.

What is sad is the notion that anyone should trust the reading comprehension of someone who does not even have a basic command of the English language.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
What is sad is the notion that anyone should trust the reading comprehension of someone who does not even have a basic command of the English language.

Your thoughts on what the court said are what?

awful

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
awful

Lol triggered across multiple threads, awesome.

triggered? why? i gave an answer.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
triggered? why? i gave an answer.

Oh you're so very triggered lol. You threw a fit over me using the word awful, it's why you are going around using it as a response lol.

Make no mistake: I'm not asking you to cease this behavior.

Originally posted by Surtur
Oh you're so very triggered lol. You threw a fit over me using the word awful, it's why you are going around using it as a response lol.

Make no mistake: I'm not asking you to cease this behavior.

i forgot that it's only okay when you do it. i just keep forgetting those special manbaby rules that everyone except for you has to adhere to.
maybe post a thread listing all your special snowflake rules, and the mods can sticky it? would save a lot of confusion and hassle.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
i forgot that it's only okay when you do it. i just keep forgetting those special manbaby rules that everyone except for you has to adhere to.
maybe post a thread listing all your special snowflake rules, and the mods can sticky it? would save a lot of confusion and hassle.

Lol did you truly think this excuse would fly? You're obviously quite triggered over the usage of the word, it is plain to see.

I don't care if you use it, but I'm not going to ignore the reason why lol. You. Are. Triggered.

Originally posted by Surtur
Indeed, but it's not gonna fly.

Oh, yeah? Who is going to enforce that, you?

Originally posted by Surtur
Adam: what is your opinion on what the court said?

My opinion is that you and Sable do not understand what the court said. From the article he posted, and you selectively quoted from:

OPINION: Court Concedes DNC Had the Right to Rig Primaries Against Sanders

On August 25, 2017, Federal Judge William Zloch, dismissed the lawsuit after several months of litigation during which DNC attorneys argued that the DNC would be well within their rights to select their own candidate. “In evaluating Plaintiffs’ claims at this stage, the Court assumes their allegations are true—that the DNC and Wasserman Schultz held a palpable bias in favor Clinton and sought to propel her ahead of her Democratic opponent,” the court order dismissing the lawsuit stated. This assumption of a plaintiff’s allegation is the general legal standard in the motion to dismiss stage of any lawsuit. The allegations contained in the complaint must be taken as true unless they are merely conclusory allegations or are invalid on their face.

The order then explained why the lawsuit would be dismissed. “The Court must now decide whether Plaintiffs have suffered a concrete injury particularized to them, or one certainly impending, that is traceable to the DNC and its former chair’s conduct—the keys to entering federal court. The Court holds that they have not.” The Court added that it did not consider this within its jurisdiction. “Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction, possessing ‘only that power authorized by Constitution and statute.'”

In other words, the court did not find any evidence of wrongdoing. Rather, it is a procedural move in a civil proceeding to accept the truth of the claim of the plaintiffs in order to assess whether they were materially injured. And upon evaluation, the court found that they were not, and dismissed the entire suit. You two would know that if you had bothered to read the article in full instead of once again falling for the click bait headline.

I never said it was evidence lol. I will ask one final time: what do you think of what the court said?

Originally posted by Surtur
I never said it was evidence lol. I will ask one final time: what do you think of what the court said?

No shit. I did not say you did. I said you did not understand what the court said. And I stand by that.