With a major lawsuit in progress exposing alleged election fraud in eleven states, and with Bernie Sanders refusing to drop out of the race and preparing a groundbreaking speech for the convention, the signs are Hillary Clinton will be implicated in a huge election rigging scandal involving the DNC and the mainstream media.
Hillary Clinton did not win theDemocratic primaries through democratic means. The Democratic presidential nomination was stolen through systematic manipulation of the primary process. Over 400 super delegates pledged their support to Clinton before a single American cast a vote, the DNC is led by a Clinton surrogate, and mass consent for Clinton’s coronation was fed to the public throughmainstream media outlets owned by wealthyClinton donors.
The Democratic primaries exhibited a total disregard for the values necessary in a democracy, and a Clinton win solidifies an oligarchy in which corporations and wealthy donors use the government as a means to push their own agendas.
‘Like a giant octopus sprawling its slimy legs over our cities, states and nation’
These interests circumvented democracy to help Hillary Clinton out-raise Bernie Sanders by over $80 million from Super-PACs. These are the companies who offshore thousands of American jobs, who pushed for a Wall Street bailout when their greed and recklessness delivered our country into the worst recession since the Great Depression, and who have destabilized foreign regions around the world through unnecessary military intervention. Hillary Clinton represents an extension of disastrous policies, and her crowning by Establishment Democrats, before a single vote was cast, ensures corruption and dirty politics will continue as the status quo for years to come.
DNC emails prove they rigged it for Hillary
“A document leaked by a hacker who took responsibility for the Democratic National Committee data breach appears to show the DNC coordinating with Hillary Clinton from the start of the presidential campaign — just as Bernie Sanders has claimed,” The New York Post reported Thursday.
According toUS Uncut, the document indicates the “DNC was diligently cleaning up Clinton’s record, using ‘specific hits to muddy the waters around ethics, transparency, and campaign finance attacks on HRC.”
HRC is a commonly used abbreviation for Hillary Rodham Clinton.
“The document to the DNC dated May 26, 2015 — a month after Sanders kicked off his presidential bid — declared that ‘our goals & strategy’ are to ‘provide a contrast between the GOP field and HRC,’” The New York Post reported.
In other words, the leaked document shows the DNC was actively working to get Clinton elected, while working against and smearing her rivals like Sanders and former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley.
In the document’s “Reporter Outreach” section, the paper reads: “Working through the DNC and others, we should use background briefings, prep with reporters for interviews with GOP candidates, off-the-record conversations and oppo pitches to help pitch stories with no fingerprints and utilize reporters to drive a message.”
Evidence the DNC had decided Clinton was their candidate in May 2015 of last year, before a single American had voted for her.
Election fraud and voter suppression
The leaked documents provides credibility to multiple election fraud accusations made towards the Clinton campaign in recent months.
“Beginning in Iowa and climaxing with the holy mess that occurred in Arizona, the Democratic presidential primaries have been a Wagnerian Ring Cycle of electoral ‘shenanigans,’ cynical rule-bending and outright voter suppression,” The Huffington Post reported in March of this year.
“The DNC has relied upon its favorite scapegoats (benign incompetence, and of course, Republicans) to explain away the convenient ‘mishaps’ and anomalies that have consistently favored Clinton as she elbows her way to the Democratic coronation ceremony in Philadelphia.”
Adding more credibility to this accusation of widespread Democratic primary election fraud is a recent paper out of Stanford University, where two graduate students from the prestigious school declared that election fraud has swung the election for Clinton.
“First, we show that it is possible to detect irregularities in the 2016 Democratic Primaries by comparing the states that have hard paper evidence of all the placed votes to states that do not have this hard paper evidence. Second, we compare the final results in 2016 to the discrepant exit polls. Furthermore, we show that no such irregularities occurred in the 2008 competitive election cycle involving Secretary Clinton against President Obama,” the paper reads.
“As such, we find that in states wherein voting fraud has the highest potential to occur, systematic efforts may have taken place to provide Secretary Clinton with an exaggerated margin of support.”
Since these stunning reveals, the DNC and mainstream media have remained mute on the situation — and it’s infuriating some Sanders supporters.
A major lawsuit exposing the alleged electoral fraud in eleven states could still alter the landscape of the presidential race.
Slated to be filed by the Institute for American Democracy and Election Integrity, the lawsuit presents evidence of statistically impossible differences between exit polls and electronic vote totals.
“We are going to be filing a racketeering lawsuit under the Ohio racketeering law, the strongest in the country and we can bring in every state, our RICO statute is coextensive with the federal RICO statute … So they’re nailed,” explained Cliff Arnebeck, an election attorney who chairs the Legal Affairs Committee of Common Cause Ohio and is national co-chair for the Alliance of Democracy.
According to computer security expert Stephen Spoonamore, when differences between exit polls and vote totals surpass 2 percent, it’s an indication the integrity of the election needs to be investigated. In fact, the U.S. government uses that margin for analysing potentially rigged elections in other nations.
For this lawsuit, results of Democratic primaries in several states far exceed the 2 percent margin — discrepancies in favor of Hillary Clinton exceed 5 percent in Arkansas, Ohio, Texas, and Oklahoma. Massachusetts and Tennessee show discrepancies in Clinton’s favor in excess of 8 percent — and in Georgia the difference is 11.9 percent. In Alabama, that discrepancy in the former Secretary of State is an astronomical 13.9 percent.
Dark money, the banks, the media, and illegal foreign donors
A super PAC is a modern breed of political-action committee that is allowed to raise and spend unlimited amounts of money from corporations, unions, individuals and associations to influence the outcome of state and federal elections. All very well, you might think. But what happens when one candidate his backed by the hugely influential financial sector, the major players in the mainstream media, and powerful foreign countries?
Clinton has taken huge amounts of dark money from all of these sources, raising the question of what a Clinton presidency will be serving – the people or her creditors?