Hillary's Lackey Just Ignored Multiple Motions, Adjourned, and FLED Out The Back...

[AzDar]

https://www.periscope.tv/GRForSanders/1vOGwBLmVObKB


Leaving Us With This:
?1





ILLEGITIMATE. LIE, CHEAT AND STEAL!

[lumberjack_jeff]

1. I hope they take up this conversation in Philadelphia. The street outside if necessary.

We need to come up with a new name for this party.

[AzDar]

2. They are begging for that, apparently... The corruption is so BLATANT!

[Dragonfli]

8. Unfortunately, they will be using "free speech zones" chained off areas far from where any

in the convention will have to look at or even be able to hear us mere serfs.
They have thought of everything.

[lumberjack_jeff]

13. This country was based on the consent of the governed.

If we consent to this... I really don't know why tptb bother with the charade.

[Dragonfli]

15. We have never consented to it but they have been doing it since the Bush years anyway, unfair I know

[cantbeserious]

41. Not Any More - The Country Is Now Run By The Oligarchs, Corporations And Banks

eom

[senz]

3. More information would really help.

Looks like something happened, but there's no context, no back story, no explanation. The link doesn't lead to anything; the video is gone.

[bvf]

5. Hope there's more on this soon.

The stench is awful.

Bookmarked.

[senz]

6. Okay, there's more info in adjacent OPs.

Can start to piece together the story.

[AzDar]

7. Video works for me... you have to hit the 'play' button, as LiveStream ended...

[senz]

10. Well of course. But it didn't work. It's okay, I'm putting it together

from all the threads around us here.

[senz]

23. It finally kicked in, AzDar, and I saw it.

So outrageous.

There must be action on this.

[Fairgo]

4. Oh look, Brown shirts

That's a nice color on the Democratic stage. Thanks Hillary

[AzDar]

9. This Video @ 11:45... Roberta Adjourns And Flees, Despite Multiple Legitimate Motions...

https://www.periscope.tv/_luvlei_zaynah/1OyKAnmXrkaGb

[grasswire]

11. this

[NewImproved Deal]

30. The face of the Clinton Machine. The face of Fascism...

[link:|

[wundermaus]

33. I must hand it to her, the lady has guts, but....

No integrity.
No honor.
No ethics.
No respect.
No shame.
No morality.
No justice.
No peace.

Not a wise thing to fuck with democracy.

[Corporate666]

14. The beef is with the procedural issues, right? Everyone agrees with Clinton winning more delegates

She won the state, so the beef here is the procedural issues surrounding the voting, right? Nobody is arguing the outcome - just how it was handled from an administrative side?

Yes, it could have been handled much better... but it appears the arguing and animosity is because the BS supporters wanted to get more delegates despite losing the state.

So of course this is going to cause a naturally heated situation and they are going to be unhappy that the attempt to illegitimately steal the election was stopped in it's tracks.

[jfern]

16. Bernie had 58 delegates disqualified, which made the difference

[joshcryer]

18. 1%

It would not surprise me in the least if Clinton had 1% disqualified as well but they didn't complain.

[jfern]

22. Nope, all 58 were Bernie

[cui bono]

67. Even if that were true, which someone already said it is not, why would anyone complain

when 99% of the disqualified delegates belonged to their opponent. That would be stupid, wouldn't it? Especially coming from people who really don't care about election fraud as evidenced by the lack of concern and dismissiveness of all the election problems that have happened this primary.

.

[Corporate666]

21. And 6 who were originally DQ'ed were allowed in

Which proves that they were not just randomly DQ'ing people but rather were DQing people who did not qualify.

Why would you presume the 58 were legit and valid, given the evidence that they were allowing entry to valid delegates, even those who were initially flagged as ineligible?


But you're still focusing on the step in the middle.... answer the question about the macro view. Hillary won the state, so we agree she should get more delegates going to the national convention, right? I mean - you want the voice of the people to be respected at the convention, right? So the issue is a procedural one, but the end result is representative of the original primary results, right?

[delrem]

26. You are getting sleepy, Corporate666. Mesmerized by your own words.

O.K.
Just a little pin prick
There'll be no more aaaaaaaah!
But you may feel a little sick

[Corporate666]

34. Just pointing out truth

and being amused by the staunch rejection of facts.

End of the day - HRC won the primary, HRC won the most delegates.

All is right with the universe.

[Fawke Em]

29. 64 delegates.

[joshcryer]

17. People are pissed they couldn't flip the result gaming the caucus system.

There was a 33 delegate lead by Clinton but only after 64 of Sanders' delegates were challenged and 58 couldn't confirm their credentials. If those delegates weren't challenged and taken out then Sanders people would've flipped the vote to be in Sanders' favor, stealing the state's delegate allocation for the convention using shitty caucus rules.

[delrem]

27. Sounds like a damn good reason for taking out those Sanders delegates.

They bothered joshcryer

[joshcryer]

31. Sounds like a damn good reason to get rid of caucuses.

[delrem]

39. Perhaps, but your argument was that this move, which happened in a "caucus",

was good because it advantaged Hillary.

If you really do think that there's a procedural problem where "dirty/clean politics" gets unnecessary play, it's best to address and fix these issues between elections, when names like in this case "Clinton" and "Sanders" and the emotions revved up in the heat of an election don't muddy the waters.

In the meantime, these antics don't look good, regardless of whose "candidate" won out, in this case.

[joshcryer]

44. What? I think this is bullshit across the board.

I just think it's "by the book" because caucuses are by their nature corrupt.

[delrem]

61. You seem unaware of what you wrote in posts just a few minutes ago.

You sure the fuck didn't say that!

You said - now read this and try to remember, joshcryer:
"People are pissed they couldn't flip the result gaming the caucus system.
There was a 33 delegate lead by Clinton but only after 64 of Sanders' delegates were challenged and 58 couldn't confirm their credentials. If those delegates weren't challenged and taken out then Sanders people would've flipped the vote to be in Sanders' favor, stealing the state's delegate allocation for the convention using shitty caucus rules."

[joshcryer]

62. I don't see an inconsistency.

I even said the caucus rules were shitty.

[delrem]

63. No, you said that caucus rules won the day against crooked Sanders delegates,

who were actually not even Democrats.
Somehow their registration had been changed. So they were shitcanned and your incorruptible candidate won, and you applaud the method.
You're totally fine with that.

You rock, joshcryer. You totally rock.

[joshcryer]

65. Well yeah, the shitty caucus rules managed to represent the will of the people.

Rather than being used to not represent the will of the people.

I'm OK with that.

I mean, if we're going to be against superdelegates who don't represent the will of the people, which I am, we should be consistent and be against undemocratic caucuses that don't represent the will of the people.

This is really easy stuff.

[delrem]

66. That's quite some pretzel, joshcryer. You rock.

[Dem2]

69. The caucus system is corrupt and undemocratic

When I see people whining that they should have won by using underhanded techniques that are somewhat allowed by this horrible system, then I know that they would stop at nothing to win this election. Who are the brown shirts?

[HerbChestnut]

19. Oh no, people are definitely arguing the outcome

There was nothing illegitimate with how Bernie ended up with more state delegates despite Hillary winning the popular vote in the state. Everything was done according to the rules. What happened today, however, appears to be outright thievery. There's threads everywhere on here and on Reddit outlining what happened so I won't go into much detail. All I'll say is that the initial count of delegates at the convention was done hastily when people were still in line waiting to get in, which resulted in a lopsided number of delegates for Hillary. By the end of the convention, after a number of shady decisions by the committee running everything, a motion to recount the number of delegates was ignored and the convention adjourned.

[Corporate666]

25. Are you saying the rules don't allow delegates to be verified?

You can't accept a delegate count that does not match the original primary results under the flag of "sorry, them's the rules" and then call it theft under the same rules when things go against your will.

I am guessing the rules allow the party to verify delegate eligibility. So it isn't apparent that any rules were broken.

But you would agree that Hillary should have more delegates since she won the primary, right?

You can't have your cake and eat it too.. either the will of the people should be respected, in which case the final outcome is just and fair. Or "rules are what they are and it's OK to use the them to win even regardless of the vote", in which case the final outcome is just and fair.

[HerbChestnut]

32. I'm not talking about delegate eligibility

I'm talking about the actual number of people in the room. We'll never know what the real delegate count is because the motion for a recount was ignored. As for delegates being awarded proportionally via the popular vote, the fact is they were...at the county conventions. But Hillary's people didn't show up to those, so Bernie ended up winning more to the state convention. Then when it looked like she was going to lose the state convention, the chairwoman (a self identified Hillary supporter) shut it down. Turns out Nevada's national delegates broke down 20-15 in Hillary's favor, which is a greater margin than the 52-48 popular vote.

[Corporate666]

37. RCP has had her ahead 20-15 for some time

As for HRC supporters "not showing up" to the intermediate meetings... well, there was reports of letters being sent out telling them they don't need to attend. It's not reasonable to look at BS delegates being denied entry tonight and saying "that's proof of fraud" but not to look at HRC delegates not showing up and saying "totally legit". One would assume the absentee rate would be roughly equal.

Anyway, the delegates that were denied entry appear (at least at this point) to have been legitimately denied entry.

Ultimately, you have to either accept that the national delegate allocation should match the primary results, or you have to believe in a convoluted rules system which trumps the actual vote. If the former, then HRC is the rightful winner. If the latter, then "rules are rules" applies tonight as well, just as it did at the county level.

[.99center]

53. Yeah, it's completely reasonable to refuse entry

To people that showed up because of speculation about Hillary delegates not showing up. Is that really her defense, that she denied entry to Bernie delegates because Hillary delegate's didn't show up. I guess Bernie should demand that other elections be adjusted, based on his predictions on how many of his supporters didn't show up. Well just throw out votes that went to Hillary to make up for them, seems reasonable.

[joshcryer]

38. Sanders supporters tried changing the rules without 2/3rds vote.

The majority rules only required a 1/2 vote which obviously the Clinton people had.

In other words, the "recount" that they wanted required 2/3rds vote.

[kiva]

40. We had the 2/3 vote by voice vote.

Roberta Lange refused to accept the fact the voice vote supported the rule change and also refused to call for a physical vote count.

[joshcryer]

43. Nope.

Just because some people are louder doesn't magically mean that the vote existed. The Clinton people voted it down, obviously and unambiguously.

[kiva]

46. Actually loud was exactly how the voice votes were determined for the convention.

It was how the platform was amended this evening. Those in favor of changing the rules were louder, period.

Were there twice as many? Probably not, but we'll never know because Lange didn't call for a physical vote.

[joshcryer]

48. They weren't 2/3rds louder.

[kiva]

54. According to several people manning tables

on a wall on the Hillary side, they were.

[w4rma]

42. No, it's not "obvious" that the Clintonites had a majority. Remember that they refused to count the

room, over and over again. Anyway, 2/3s of the room was needed for the rules change.

[joshcryer]

45. A room count requires a 2/3rds vote.

Hey I don't agree with it, it's how the rules are set up, they're set up to maintain the status quo. You're not going to be able to come in off the street and change the rules.

Anything that isn't already on the agenda requires a 2/3rds vote.

[w4rma]

58. Exactly. But, the Nevada establishment did just that and dared everyone to do something about it. nt

[HerbChestnut]

47. First of all...

The Hillary people didn't "obviously" have a majority. The final "official" count had something around a 30 delegate difference between the two camps out of over 3000 people. How you can tell using a voice vote which side has more people is beyond my hearing capability, personally. As for the recount thing, I don't know enough about NV Dems rules to know whether that's true or not, but you can't deny that Barbera flat out ignored the motion and just ended the convention. Apparently, at the end she even passed her own motion giving her authority to override something (again, not 100% familiar with NVs rules). She didn't even wait for the 'Nay's'. She just passed it and went home.

[joshcryer]

50. 2/3rds of the vote would've been distinguishable.

Therefore the vote did not pass.

[HerbChestnut]

51. But there was no vote

That's the point. She never let people vote on the motion to recount the delegates.

[northernsouthern]

20. So you are fine with states where the superdelegates stole it?

You know the ones where we voted in favor of Bernie, but the superdelegates pushed it over in her favor, or the break down of districts allowed her to score far more than she should have (Wyoming)...but the second the rules go the other way it is illegitimately stealing? The superdelegates are not supposed to vote until the convention, yet they have all voted and their tallies are counted in every news source. The mark of a cheater is changing the rules when they don't favor them.

[Corporate666]

28. We keep hearing super delegates are uncommitted and can vote for whoever they want

is that no longer the case? Because if it's not, then Bernie is excluded from winning the nomination since so many have come out to support HRC.

On the other hand, if delegates ARE allowed to vote the way they want regardless of the vote, then they don't need to vote with the state results.

Can't have your cake and eat it too either. Either SD's vote with primary results, in which case Bernie loses. Or they can vote for whom they like, in which case Bernie loses.

It seems you're looking to create a third option, where they are uncommitted until the convention but then they should vote the way the states voted. That's specifically NOT what super delegates are designed for and supposed to do.

[northernsouthern]

56. you are you lying or misinformed?

Because nothing you said was true...

We keep hearing super delegates are uncommitted and can vote for whoever they want is that no longer the case? Because if it's not, then Bernie is excluded from winning the nomination since so many have come out to support HRC.

On the other hand, if delegates ARE allowed to vote the way they want regardless of the vote, then they don't need to vote with the state results.

Can't have your cake and eat it too either. Either SD's vote with primary results, in which case Bernie loses. Or they can vote for whom they like, in which case Bernie loses.

It seems you're looking to create a third option, where they are uncommitted until the convention but then they should vote the way the states voted. That's specifically NOT what super delegates are designed for and supposed to do.

Super delegates are not supposed to have voted yet, not until the convention, but they have done so for months which is stealing the election, they have already poisoned this process, and they many were paid for in the money laundering scheme the Hillary Victory fund. They speak about the will of the people until we win a state then they fall back on the uncommitted line...they are the one's claiming both, that is why people started demanding they do what they claimed they would do. They refused to, then once the HRC crew realized that the could support Bernie instead they started to cry foul because they realized the rigged game could still hurt them. Superdelegates were created to stop the party from nominating a weak candidate that only spoke to the insiders...which is exactly who they are supporting. Every poll has shown she is the worst option, we are getting booing in our conventions and yet they still support the person that pays them, not the candidate that represents the people. Stop trying to call us out for the cheating your side has been doing. Nevada broke the rules, and now you are defending it? They are the rules, but hey I am sure breaking the rules will look great on tv and will bring us together as a party.

[BootinUp]

52. The role of superdelegates

as I have been able to discern is not to swing election results. They are expected to align in sufficient numbers to confirm the pledged delegate totals. They have the priviledge of attending the convention and expressing their preference as long as they don't overturn the pledged result.

[northernsouthern]

57. No that is incorrect.

They are there as a last resort to prevent a weak candidate from winning. They were designed to make sure we don't elect a person that only represents registered Democrats, but others as well (independents). In theory they should be voting for Bernie at this point based on this. But aside from that, they are not supposed to be prevoting over half a year before they vote...they vote at the convention, yet for some reason since before Iowa we have seen a vote the size of California already cast. This election they are basically the gilded coating to try and get people to by the brand name candidate.

[tokenlib]

49. Actually not everyone believes she won the state..n/t

[senz]

24. I do believe they're going to cheat all the way through.

[deepestblue]

35. Link

[Chezboo]

36. Video - This should help clear things up about the travesty in NV this evening

The "Roberta/Roberta's rules" that are referred to is Roberta Gustave Lange, a Clinton supporter and Chair of the Democratic State Party.

https://www.facebook.com/AdryennAshley/videos/10153761545822695/

[Chezboo]

59. How things went down in Nevada after 14 hours

Kevin McGee? to Bernie Sanders Activists

How things went down in Nevada after 14 hours:
1. Have a secret meeting to change the convention rules at the last minute to favour one candidate and give the chair unlimited power without appeal
2. "Pass" the rules even though you don't have a quorum.
3. At the convention make a motion to make those permanent and use the rules to blatantly override the voice vote with no division of the house and no appeal.
4. Use those rules to push through any motion you want while openly ignoring legitimate motions and petitions from the floor.
5. When you discover you've still lost the convention by over 30 delegates disqualify 64 delegates and declare your candidate the winner.
6. Once again use your specially created rules to ram through a motion to accept the count ignoring the no vote from the floor.
7. Ignore motions from the floor to remove the chair. Send the chair up to rapidly "pass" several items of business ignoring an overwhelming no vote.
8. Adjourn the meeting with no motion or vote.
9. Here's your police escort out!
Way to not even hide the corruption NevDems!

[highprincipleswork]

55. This is really bad. If Democrats stonewall Sanders and supporters, they are going to lose.

[stillwaiting]

68. They have been doing so in state after state this entire primary.

So sad and so infuriating.

[deepestblue]

60. Another link

[madokie]

64. By hook or by Crook

it matters not. what matters to Hillary and company is winning and winning only.

[pdsimdars]

70. What is wrong with these people?????

Seriously. . . .and not one of the Hillary supporters find anything alarming about this. They all think it's rosey and will knit pick any messenger who tries to bring this to their attention.
This stuff has to stop. Is American just going to give up because it's just too hard to think about?

I'd LOVE to hear Maddow mention this.

[MisterP]

72. shortsightedness, borrowed power, giddiness at defeating the Enemy, which is

how they think of Sanders

I'm reminded of the pro-Haditha Massacre protests they had in San Diego: "Killing the enemy is NOT murder"

[nadinbrzezinski]

74. 7 figure salary can blind you to this

[pdsimdars]

71. One thing came to mind though. . . . from the 60s. . .

They are able to cower the Republican base, and their base doesn't seem to be able or willing to buck them. But in the 60s it was the left who had had it. And they did something about it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

73. Look at that image folks

Forget the words. Look at that image carefully and tell me what that tells you. To me it says...police state. I mean that.

[AzDar]

75. Brought To Us By Hillary Clinton And The DNC...

[dchill]

76. Yes.

They would RATHER do it this way. It actually looks good to them.

[Duppers]

77. Yes. A pic of things to come.

GOP tactics!

[CobaltBlue]

78. AzDar—The message in all this: “F--- off, you Bernie voters—and vote for us Ds in November!”