Florida judge dismisses fraud lawsuit against DNC

[ehrnst]

71. But the plantiffs said they hadn't read the DNC charter.

What does that say about the plantiff's motivation for a lawsuit stating that they made decisions based on a statement in the charter?

“Consistent with our precedent and First Amendment, states may maintain fraud actions when fundraisers make false or misleading representations designed to deceive donors about how their donations are used.”


https://www.commdiginews.com/politics-2/the-dnc-fighting-democratic-donors-in-court-88933/

Sounds like the fraud allegations are pretty much based on the donors saying the DNC charter decieved them - when they actually didn't read the charter. Of course stating that money was involved was a way to get a fraud charge - despite the fact that they weren't informed enough to be "defrauded."

The thing is - yes, you want to focus on DNC not following it's charter. You've made that clear. But these "plantiffs" were not the victims of fraud, as per their lawsuit claimed. So the lawsuit makes attempts to hammer on that look foolish now.

Yes, there is the nuisance about data security with the server being hacked, which was likely to further the conspiracy theories about DNC information being leaked deliberately. Well, I suppose that as someone who got a security clearance, I should sue our government for the security clearance database being hacked, but I'm not someone who feels like misusing the legal system simply to hammer on those tasked with keeping that data safe.

The point of this lawsuit was to drain the DNC coffers and further conspiracy theories, which clearly benefit others. But they failed, and trying to eke a moral victory out of the court not finding the DNC to be spotless is desperate at this point.