DNC Chair STILL Denies 2016 Primary Rigged Against Sanders

DNC Chair STILL Denies 2016 Primary Rigged Against Sanders

No longer is it just uncontroversial to suggest the 2016 Democratic Primary was rigged, now it’s a national scandal to deny the obvious: The DNC rigged the electoral process under the control of The Hillary Clinton campaign.

Last week, former Democratic National Committee leader Donna Brazile released one bombshell of an article. Titled “Inside Hillary Clinton’s Secret Takeover of the DNC,” it went into specific detail as to how the electoral process, since 2015, was rigged against Vermont candidate Senator Bernie Sanders and how much influence, socially and financially, his rival Hillary Clinton had over both the party and the committee itself.

“The agreement — signed by Amy Dacey, the former CEO of the DNC, and [Clinton campaign manager] Robby Mook with a copy to [Clinton campaign counsel] Marc Elias — specified that in exchange for raising money and investing in the DNC, Hillary would control the party’s finances, strategy, and all the money raised,” Brazile expressed openly.

“Her campaign had the right of refusal of who would be the party communications director, and it would make final decisions on all the other staff. The DNC also was required to consult with the campaign about all other staffing, budgeting, data, analytics, and mailings.

I had been wondering why it was that I couldn’t write a press release without passing it by Brooklyn [Clinton’s head office]. Well, here was the answer.”

This leaves current DNC chair Tom Perez, who was viewed as the establishment candidate compared to competitors Keith Ellison and Samuel Ronan, in a rather uncomfortable position.

With the committee in its worst fundraising years since the Tea Party congressional take over in 2010, Perez spoke to CNBC to try and smear lipstick over the corrupt pig that is his organization.

“Hey, we’re moving forward,” he immediately deflected disingenuously. “I’ve been asked that question a number of times since I’ve started. One of my goals here as DNC chair is to make sure the nominating process for 2020 is a process that is totally fair and transparent for everyone. That’s what we’re fighting for.”

The last sentence being somewhat of a Freudian slip, in a sense. Who needs to be “fighting for” a free and fair election? Shouldn’t that be the default? Why do Democrats have to give him a pat on the back for doing what’s expected?

Assuming, of course, that is what he’s fighting for.

It was only this week that TrigTent covered news of Tom Perez purging the DNC of members who supported Bernie Sanders, Keith Ellison and real reforms to the Democratic Party’s process.

They may hide behind the veil of identity politics and “diversity,” saying they removed the only Arab American member of the DNC to replace him with some random pro-Hillary transgender, but it’s all a ruse. An obviously corruption-interested ruse that’s left lipstick smudges over their pig faces.

This ruse was called out recently by former DNC vice chair Tulsi Gabbard, a military veteran and congresswoman who left the committee to endorse Sen. Sanders.

In her video, she argues that you can’t fight for a fair system when you appoint the same lobbyists, consultants, donors and rule breakers who hold daggers behind their back.

People like Donna Brazile, who was just recently appointed to the Rules Committee despite leaking debate questions to the Hillary Clinton campaign. CNN fired her for doing this. She was too unethical for CNN. And the DNC thought it best to hire her back.

Talk about throwing Donald J. Trump one mighty softball.

This is not the first time Tom Perez has admitted to the DNC rigging its electoral primary against Bernie Sanders.

When he originally spoke to CNBC, then-candidate Tom Perez said quite clearly: “We heard loudly and clearly yesterday from Bernie supporters that the process was rigged and it was was. And you’ve got to be honest about it. That’s why we need a chair who is transparent.”

The very next day, Perez walked back those comments entirely, saying on Twitter that he “misspoke” and that Hillary Clinton “won fair and square.”

So much for transparency and integrity, it seems, considering we can’t get a clear answer from the leadership besides “when we put hope on the ballot, we win” and “we lead with our values.”

Why Democrats accept such deception is beyond me.