Where Is the Support in the Left Media for the #DNCFraudLawsuit? Say It Ain't So - Both Thomas Frank and TYT Panel Shirk From Standing With DNC Collusion and Fraud Issues. Where Are Our Allies?
With the #DNCFraudLawsuit Gaining Momentum, Where Are The Left Journalists Covering Electoral Fraud/Voter Suppression/DNC Collusion of The Rigged the Dem Primary?/Loads of Evidence of Documented Foul Play, Here's Just Some From New York and Chicago/If Elections Are the Foundation of Democracy, Then Where Are We As A Country When They're Proven To Be Corrupted?
As the political waters become murkier and murkier, in most every direction at the moment, it becomes more and more incumbent on us to be ever vigilant citizen watchdogs and journalists. We must watch closely those who we we're inclined to think of as allies.
While the Neoliberal scum work their lapdog minions in the MSM, desperately clinging to the hope that the public will continue to be led by the leash through a ceaseless, confusing and desperate beach full of washed-up red herring narratives of Russia/Putin/BernieBros/Faux Feminism/the Resistance™, it's more important than ever that the true history of what happened during the Primary doesn't go down the Memory Hole. It'll be up to us to expose untruths/propaganda, as well as share developing real news about anything that would advance the cause of C99.
Frankly, my main position now is the rupturing of the two party system. I think the #DNCFraudLawsuit can help achieve that. The other component, which I'd prefer to get into another time, is the creation of a 3rd party around the gravitas Bernie Sanders currently has among our countrymen as the only adult in the room. As far as I can see now these are the two best hopes we have to help achieve the dismantling of the two party system.
It could be a long, hard road, especially when one realizes that what could be taken for granted as support may not in fact be there.
So I went looking to see where some of our allies stood. And like most things, it started off innocuous enough. Was taking my daily look at the YouTube subscription list, and this video headline caught my eye: "Thomas Frank: Why Bernie Sanders Would Have Won - The Nation."
Again, a pretty standard quote from Frank:
"You want to know the biggest lesson I learned touring Trumpland?
People hated Hillary Clinton. To a degree that even I, with my cynicism, did not understand.
I did not hate Hillary Clinton. I voted for her, and I agreed with Obama that she was very qualified. She deserved to be president. I didn’t think she’d be a great president, but I thought she’d be OK—certainly better than Donald Trump. I knew how to hate Donald Trump. That’s easy. He boasts about groping women. He says these evil things about Mexicans, and mocks the handicapped. It’s unbelievable the stuff this guy did and said. Hating him was easy.
What I did not understand was the degree to which people really hated Hillary Clinton. And that’s ultimately what this election was about: Which one do you hate more?"
There's potentially lots to unpack there, but that's not what I'm getting it. I think it's a fair assessment by him.
What really grabbed my attention about this video clip, which contains the interview, were two things:
The curious and distracting video production, which ultimately had the effect (probably intended) of reminding one of how incredibly unique and successful Bernie's historic campaign was. The video clips covered a lot of ground, including the incredible, supporter-organized, massive Bernie march in NYC (and others all over the country) prior to the Democratic Primary. To my knowledge, that has never happened before. Unprecedented, and should have been the portent to a overwhelming electoral victory for Bernie. It wasn't; he was cheated. The #DNCFraudLawsuit is an attempt to unpack some of that now, but will be contingent on the media, especially on the Left, giving this the kind of serious coverage it deserves. Seems my answer lie in the rest of the video.
There was this bombshell. Thomas Frank said,
"I'm not one of these people that thinks that she won the the nomination by cheating. Her side did cheat, there's no doubt about that. The Democratic National Committee did cheat. But she also won fair and square."
Wait...what?! What kind of insane doublespeak is this? Did you, Thomas Frank, just say that?
So, you didn't think she won by cheating, but then say, "Her side did cheat, there's no doubt about that." How do you square that? By digging deeper into and holding firmer onto the kind of Groupthink that infects even clear-eyed historians such as Frank, who after all is still part of the DC intelligentsia.
"The Democratic National Committee did cheat. But she also won fair and square."
To hear Frank, who completely gets it and has become somewhat of a kind of folk hero to me at this point in his career (for penning in "Listen Liberal," the blow by blow history of the Democratic Party's departure from Party of the People to Party of the Top 10%, and with that providing the clearest indictment yet, and presciently providing the backdrop for the current moment, to understand precisely why such a Democratic party celebrity candidate could, in fact lose, to the worst candidate of all-time, who on election day had a 60% disapproval poll) make such a surreal, contradictory statement, one that belies his whole fundamental understanding of what the Democrats are capable and of which he made the case for in his latest book, is just so disorienting, disappointing and disconcerting.
The question for me, to Frank is, how are you willing to disregard verifiable collusion by the DNC through the Wikileaks documents, which in all likelihood resulted in the widespread cheating to keep Bernie from the nomination?
One can not be hold diametrically opposed statements at once, as truth. One is the truth and one is not. This absolutely intellectually dishonest remark reminded me of the kind of garbage that passes for debate a TOP, and reminded me of a specific incident there.
During one of the primary debate open threads, I made a comment about one of Hillary's typically vapid, saccharine, pandering sweet nothing, Hallmark empty platitudes of which she is infamous. I basically said it is impossible for a politician to be for the rich and the poor at the same time. Some flunky Neoliberal lawyer named dhonig, who ran faster than almost anyone else to run interference as a Protectorate of the Financial Elites, sought to make an example of me to his Hills cheerleader squad by writing an essay around said comment. Of course, his super lame, pathetic attempt to defend the rich and their manifest transgressions against humanity was laughable and so emblematic of the kind servile malarkey those with some coin address the seriousness of economic/income inequality. He argued that rich people "want clean air too" - sniffle, sniffle - like to pet their dogs, etc, etc. Nevertheless, the disconnected, well-to-do, out-of-touch Neoliberal painted himself into a corner, where he was roundly tarred and feathered by the Progressives still there at the time.
Still stewing from Frank's insider's denial of fraud, and sensing by extension there may be something going with others of our "progressive" MSM, I went back to the TYT video I watched the night before about the DNC lawsuit. John Iadarola, who was a huge Bernie supporter, does a little roundtable on the #DNCFraudLawsuit (which we should be following on Twitter). In it the former staunch Bernie supporter unconvincingly says the lawsuit is "shortsighted" and "a bad idea." The whole exchange was a reminder of the curious omission on the part of the TYT Network to take the charge of DNC collusion with Clinton, with the kind of seriousness it certainly warrants. Again, I can't believe what I'm seeing from this "progressive" network. To top it off, Hillary suck-up Michael Shure offers this inanity, as if it closes the case: "Class action lawsuits are usually brought by opportunistic lawyers, and it's probably a lawyer fighting against an opportunistic lawyer." Respectfully, what the fuck - you clown?
The irony is TYT expects to run Justice Democrats against this establishment fraud. As a commenter said, "How do you condone this behavior AND the Justice Democrats at the same time? If you're gonna primary established Dems...ah f-ing forget it."
Do check out the comments section. It is raging with outrage at TYT for not supporting this. It's weird, YouTube comments section have always been the worst of the worst cesspools. But lately progressive videos have attracted some really good discussion forums.
Folks, this is our progressive media?
These are our progressive journalists?
Frankly, Thomas Frank should know better. Given the litany of Tammany Hall, Daley in Chicago, LBJ's rigged congressional seat (see the PBS "American Experience" doc, in which they might have forgotten to edit that out!), etc. For God's sake, in the 2008 NY Primary, Obama didn't get one vote in a precinct in which the local politicians were Hillary supporters (a recount was hastily ordered, to cover up the blatant vote rigging) . Fact is, the entire 2016 Democratic Primary was rife with evidence of electoral foul play and outright cheating, beginning with the Iowa Caucus, which, according to the Des Moines Register who endorsed Clinton, was deemed a "debacle."
Good thing for Tim Black. I then pulled up his really good interview with Jared Beck, who is bringing the DNC fraud case to court. Black offered a wide open platform for him to discuss the case. "BREAKDOWN: DNC Fraud Lawsuit with Attorney, Advocate: Jared Beck"
Beck is going up against a Goliath, a big dumb one perhaps, but nonetheless it's an uphill battle against an entrenched behemoth, with a lot of money to burn. But things seem to be proceeding in a way that there's hope for a discovery period and a trial. And if that happens, then the floodgates open. Of course, that would be contingent on a fully-functioning, dissenting Left media. Another aspect of the primary that comes into play here is the disorienting way we saw RW media cover some of the things Progressives were not seeing in the "supposed" LW media.
And here it's obvious, that there's a disconcerting lack of support from those we've come to think of as allies. That's a really bad thing. Because near the end of the interview, Black asked him if he was scared, given all that has happened. (I copied the transcript from YouTube and edited the best I could, removed some of the "you know" pauses for clarity)
The truth is, yes.
I know that people following this case you from the very beginning, you know, they've seen the video of our process server, a gentleman by the name of Sean Lucas, who served the lawsuit on the DNC when it was first filed. And he died under very mysterious circumstances, very sudden circumstances. You know, you can see the video of him serving the lawsuit on our on our youtube channel to this day, and there's many, many views. But he was found on his bathroom floor with a mix of three different drugs in his body. The death has been ruled an accident by the the DC Court coroner. But to my knowledge, no real investigation has been done into what exactly happened. He was a young man who by all accounts I've heard he wasn't a drug user, he was very healthy.
So whenever something like that happens it creates concern. And then you put that together with the death of Seth Rich, who, you know, many people believe that he was in fact the leaker that leaked the documents to Julian Assange, the WikiLeaks documents, of course. He was found indeed while....he was killed in a supposed, you know, supposedly in a botched robbery. Except they didn't take his wallet and they didn't take his watch or....and he was walking home at like 3:00 in the morning and, you know, we have no information as to what happened there you know.
I'm not jumping to conclusions about what happened to those two those young men, but I think whenever you have a suspicious deaths or unexpected deaths...in a situation like that, it raises concerns. And so, you know, you can't let that stop you. I think the issues that we're talking about are you know too important to really let something like that slow you down. I know that lots and lots of people, many, many people across the country, are making enormous sacrifices and putting their lives at risk every day. I mean just look at the people at Standing Rock, okay, you know. At the end of the day I think it's an easy decision to press forward with this.
But I think we're living in very very unusual times. I think there is a lot of very heated discourse out there a lot of uncertainty as to where our political system is headed. I think I'd be a fool to say that you know these are these are normal times and you know, it's business as usual. I guess that's a long answer to your question, Tim.
But by the end of Tim Black's interview I felt inspired to join what Beck called attention to as "citizen journalism" and join the ranks with my small contribution today.
Part and parcel to the #DNCFraudLawsuit is the rampant voter suppression and electoral fraud throughout the primary, which is on full display in the following video evidence of the New York Board of Elections debacle.
I went back into my emails and found this Change.org petition from a year ago attempting to get the AG and Comptroller, both who expressed publicly grave concerns about the NY primary, to hand count 10% of the ballots. And again the comments section yield some nuggets of information I had previously been unaware of, which was the same for the following clips. It's heartening when you realize there are plenty of folks like us who are very pissed off and willing to take the time to express themselves thusly and share information.
One after another in this video, come regular folks, up to take the stand to be on record about what they saw. Their testimony appeared to me to be credible.
After an impassioned poll worker in Chelsea eloquently and gives her credentials as a bonafide New Yorker who has benefitted from the fine social programs including Stuyvesant HS and Cooper Union Hall as a student and as an adult an Affordable Living apartment, a City University math professor followed quite calmly and said this:
Good afternoon. My name is Dr. Claire McAllister. I'm here as a concerned voter.
My polling place was in the Bronx. I didn't have any issues myself. But I am a CUNY professor and a number of my students did. So I'm partly here to speak on behalf of them. I will second a lot of the statements that were already brought up and I don't need to waste time repeating them.
But as a mathematician I feel like it's my duty to call attention to the numbers.
The exit polls were showing in the Democratic primary a four point spread between Clinton and Sanders. 45 minutes after the polls closed, the same media reported that Clinton had won the state by 17 points. As the polls were designed to catch election fraud, and they're designed to make sure there's a maximum of about four percent error in either direction. So either, even giving the polls the maximum leeway of inaccuracy, you would expect Clinton to have won by no more than about eight points.
A 17-point lead is statistically virtually impossible.
This raises the question of election fraud, and necessitates a full and independent investigation, by a party with no stake in new york city or state politics, or the outcome of the election, in general.
Hi, good afternoon. My name is Erica ----. I'm a resident of Brooklyn. I'm here speaking from my own experience as an individual.
I am a human rights and anti-corruption lawyer I've been practicing in that area for the last 11 years Amnesty International and the Open Society Foundations. I'm now working independently. I'm also a certified fraud examiner.
On the day of the election I used the opportunity of my free time to volunteer to monitor polling sites and identified myself as a lawyer, so that people could ask questions if they have it.
Not only was my day a barrage, from 7am to 9pm, of questions about every single aspect of this voting process, it was also a barrage of questions about criminal law family law, every, you know, immigration law.
There is so much confusion as to who had the right to do what I feel from a from a human rights perspective that the right of self-determination has been absolutely violated for most people in the city. Because it's not just as some others have already mentioned. It's not just the affidavit ballots that you have. It's all the ones that you don't have, and it's the impact of the lack of communication than the lack of clarity for the rest of the public.
I think it's also the impact of the media that resulted in the media around the so-called, "result," of the primary, which is not really the results because the votes have not been counted yet. I will be making the same, you know, request of state agencies involved, that actually what you've presented is not enough. It's not enough
Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Sandra Ramirez. I'm a Marine Corps veteran and I went to war in 2007. I live in Bed-Stu, Brooklyn.
I came here today to talk about voter incident reporting that I took when I was volunteering at the Working Families Party. I even seen numerous calls, not even numerous calls, one after another phone calls of people who couldn't get to vote, were being turned away at the gates, who were being denied that the opportunity to fill out an affidavit. But today when I see a board like this, sitting back and pathetically laughing at people, laughing at the general public, denying a motion to adjourn that the certification of the primary, when clearly there's a problem here to serve the people.
We the people demand a result resolution to the problem of over a hundred thousand voters were just deregistered. Scott Stringer and De Blasio came out conceding the fact that they were behind because you know we just never got around to it. Well, just get around to doing a revote... I am a Democrat. I registered on time okay, so I got to vote. But my brothers and sisters did not. I saw senior citizens who made arrangements to get to their polling location turned around they've been active Democrats active Republicans it had nothing to do with their party...they were denied the right to vote.
It undermines democracy. I didn't go to war with my friends, some of whom, many of whom did come back just to get this thrown away. I and my brothers and sisters are entitled the right to vote....We deserve that respect...For you guys to just deny a motion to adjourn certification, without having heard anybody's voices first? Yeah...that is unpalatable.
Here's a scene of a military veteran exploding with anger about the voter suppression he witnessed.
The absolute capricious and rude way the imperious Elections Board dealt with this is on full display in the video. An hour-plus worth of impassioned personal testimony documenting widespread voter fraud during the NY, is here.
It was the same in Chicago, maybe worse there, if you can believe that.
If you don't believe this could happen, that the auditors cover up election fraud, then you need to see this Redacted Tonight segment about the Chicago Board of Elections:
Testimony from the poll workers there, included these two revelations:
"Essentially, in the audit they were erasing votes that the electronic voting machine paper record indicated had been cast."
"The hand tally showed that Bernie Sanders had happened to get 223 votes and that Hillary Clinton had gotten 46 less. The hand tally showed that.
But to meet the official recommended results, they had to literally erase Bernie Sanders votes, and add Hillary Clinton's votes. Yes, approximately 70 times about 500 active machines in the field - and there's more that we have documented here. That's a lot of votes."
To which Lee described what Chris Hedges refers to as "the banality of evil", a term Hannah Arendt coined:
This is how corporate tyranny works. It's anonymous and it's bland and its a bore. It
looks like a dopey guy in an ugly tie going "hmm...that's interesting, that we
totally rigged these elections, that is, that is something i'll look into one day with. Now if you'll excuse me I have a very boring wife who also dresses only in beige and we need to go watch VHS tapes of The Price is Right together."
A year ago on Redacted Tonight, Lee Camp had elections expert Richard Charnin on. Watch the beginning if you want to be reminded of how vicious and determined the HRC attack dogs in the MSM were to squash to smithereens any and all mention of election fraud. As Lee says, "I mean it only makes sense that ninety percent of the time, Google's algorithm can accurately predict which articles you want to read out of billions of articles on the internet. Yet we have just not cracked the code on exit polling mathematics."
I was too disgusted to look at any of the other primaries. If this much malfeasance and fraud went on in just these two, and the primaries themselves started off with the infamous summation by the Des Moines Register, who like every paper in the country endorsed HRC, that the caucus was a "debacle," there is enough of a trail to warrant a serious investigation into voter suppression and election fraud in the 2106 Democratic Primary.
The writing's on the wall, according to even some establishment Dems, such as Robert Reich, who supported Bernie during the primary but Hillary in the GE. ""Democratic Party Will Be Irrelevant To Our Future"
In summary, if Thomas Frank and TYT, perceived allies in the fight for progressive platforms and exposing the fraudulent Democratic Part for abandoning its base, can maintain such contradictory and spineless positions in the face of so much evidence, then who are our allies?
Clean and fair elections are the bedrock of democracy. If they have been proven not only very vulnerable,but in all probability subject to the will of the party insiders as well vested business interests who conspire with them to get the results they seek, then we have a serious case to make to the American people for the dismantling of the Two-Party system, of why, at the very least, a third party is imperative. There is no accountability when neither party has any interest in fixing this.
Once you jump into the whirling vortex that is the world of Elections, and find out such things as the relationship between the existing party and its locally run board of elections, whose positions are appointed by the party in power (all but ensuring that the Primary results will be what they want), and that most are computerized touchscreens subject to easy manipulation with no accountability and/or literally the results wind up in a little black box inscrutable from the public, it becomes completely evident that they are by and large a charade (check out testimony from woman in NY about appearing as an observer of a 5% recount in NY, which sounds like Third World banana republic, beginning at 18min). That's proven, because the "US Ranks Dead Last in Electoral Integrity."