Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: dontreadthis

The defense is essentially saying the DNC does not control the state parties and, in fact, some states do not have formal party organizations.

The plaintiff has a really flakey theory based upon consumer legislation in DC. Carrying the plaintiff’s notion forward, the Bernie bots essentially expected pay-to-play for their donations.

This case will go no where, IMHO.

Hope the lawyers collected a very large retainer at the front-end. The performance and delivery looks remarkably mediocre.


2 posted on 06/01/2017 5:46:57 PM PDT by ptsal ( Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please. - M. Twain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: ptsal

Once again, certain democrats are not accountable to anyone.


6 posted on 06/01/2017 6:02:41 PM PDT by Texas Songwriter (proawakileftist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: ptsal
You are misrepresenting what was argued to the detriment of the rule of law.

The first defense is that the bylaws of the DNC are the DNC's internal affair not enforceable by a court of law. But an association's bylaws constitute a contract between its members and is enforceable as are all written contracts in a court of law.

12 posted on 06/01/2017 7:39:41 PM PDT by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson