The DNC must have been high when it filed a lawsuit on April 20th against the "Russian government, the Trump campaign and the WikiLeaks organization alleging a far-reaching conspiracy to disrupt the 2016 campaign and tilt the election to Donald Trump."
Well certainly the Trump campaign was part of a very open conspiracy to tilt the election to Donald Trump.
That's called an election campaign, amiright?
And what are they suing WikiLeaks for?
Engaging in journalism?
After all this talk from Democrats about Donald Trump's unprecedented hostility toward journalism and a free press?
DNC Chairman Tom Perez said in a statement:
“During the 2016 presidential campaign, Russia launched an all-out assault on our democracy, and it found a willing and active partner in Donald Trump’s campaign."
Okay so if the DNC has any compelling evidence that Trump's campaign conspired with the military of a foreign government to win a U.S. election, why is it filing a lawsuit instead of calling the FBI?
(Biggest Scandal Since Watergate!!! Nothing.)
Perez continues:
"This constituted an act of unprecedented treachery: the campaign of a nominee for President of the United States in league with a hostile foreign power to bolster its own chance to win the presidency."
Wait is he talking about Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton?
This is from the Washington Post in Feb 2015:
"The Clinton Foundation accepted millions of dollars from seven foreign governments during Hillary Rodham Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state, including one donation that violated its ethics agreement with the Obama administration...
Rarely, if ever, has a potential commander in chief been so closely associated with an organization that has solicited financial support from foreign governments."
In yesterday's report about the DNC lawsuit against Trump, Wikileaks, and Russia, the Washington Post continues:
"The suit asserts that the Russian hacking campaign — combined with Trump associates’ contacts with Russia and the campaign’s public cheerleading of the hacks — amounted to an illegal conspiracy to interfere in the election and caused serious damage to the Democratic Party."
An illegal conspiracy to interfere in the election sounds a lot more like what the Democratic National Committee did to steal the nomination from Bernie Sanders and hand it to Clinton.
Although I guess it's not technically illegal.
Since the DNC won the lawsuit filed by Bernie Sanders supporters last year, by amazingly arguing that it has no obligation to keep any of its promises to its members; that the primary and nomination process is basically just for show; and that it would even have been technically legal to "go into back rooms like they used to and smoke cigars and pick the candidate that way."
Maybe it was technically legal, but it was definitely a conspiracy, at this point confirmed by none other than life long Democratic Party operative and leader, and the interim DNC Chair at the time, Donna Brazile, in stunningly frank revelations last November.
And it was a massive breach of trust.
How anyone can go on being a Democrat after all we learned about the DNC in 2016 is beyond all comprehension.
Maybe the DNC should sue itself.
