Lawsuit Against DNC Resumes Today Unreported by US Mainstream Media
On August 25, 2017, Federal Judge William Zloch dismissed the original lawsuit in the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida on the basis of a technicality of standing. In his opinion he stated the following:
“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.”
Justice Zloch also opined, “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 publicly proclaiming they were completely neutral, fair, and impartial. This Order therefore concerns only technical matters of pleading and subject-matter jurisdiction.”
During the hearings of the initial filing the DNC lawyers argued that the Democratic Party, if it choose, could pick its candidate in a cigar-filled back room. What’s incredible, and telling, is the fact that none of the main media dissected any of the proceedings. Unless one followed alternative media they would have little to no idea the trial even existed.
So the mainstream media never reported on this lawsuit. The Washington Post only reported on the judge’s dismissal without delving deeply into how the judge’s decision actually agreed with the Plaintiffs.
Today, was the first hearing on the appeal as Plaintiff’s believe they have corrected the technical issue of standing. Of course, none of this is mentioned in today’s mainstream media.
Sadly, America’s media thinks it has developed sufficient political cover for its lies, distortions, omissions and perversions of truth given that it has assigned Donald Trump the ‘official’ spokesperson on matters concerning “fake news,” thus deflecting otherwise serious criticism of the media on the issue.
