Donna Brazile Dedicates Book To "Patriot" Seth Rich

After a leaked excerpt from her new book “Hacks: The Inside Story of the Break-ins and Breakdowns That Put Donald Trump in the White House” revealed that Donna Brazile feared for her life after the murder of former DNC employee Seth Rich, Axios has reported that Brazile provides more grist for what her former political allies have dismissed as “right wing conspiracy theories” in the book’s introduction.

Nestled among the usual platitudes about thanking friends and family, Brazile dedicates her book to Rich’s memory, describing him as a close colleague and “patriot”.

Rich was murdered in July 2016, two weeks before Wikileaks released a trove of emails stolen from the DNC’s servers that, among other embarrassing details, suggested that the DNC was engaged in widespread rigging of the 2016 Democratic primary to favor “front-runner” Hillary Clinton.

“In loving memory of my father, Lionel Brazile Sr.; my beloved sister, Sheila Brazioutlanle; my fearless uncles Nat, Floyd, and Douglas; Harlem’s finest, my aunt Lucille; my friend and mentor, David Kaufmann; my DNC colleague and patriot, Seth Rich; and my beloved Pomeranian, Chip Joshua Marvin Brazile (Booty Wipes). I miss y’all."

Rich, 27, a former data analyst at the DNC, was fatally shot while walking home late at night in Washington, D.C. The police believe the shooting was a robbery gone wrong. But Brazile says in her book that she was “haunted” by Rich’s death because she feared shadowy elements associated with the Clinton campaign may have played a role in his death as retribution for leaking the emails.

As Newsweek points out, media reports had characterized Rich as a low-level staffer, and his parents wrote in an opinion piece for The Washington Post in May claiming the idea that their son leaked the emails to Wikileaks was ridiculous because his position didn’t grant him access to sensitive data.

Brazile mentioned Rich during a Sunday appearance on ABC News’s This Week with George Stephanopouloson Sunday. She told the host about her critics: “They don’t know what it was like to be over the DNC during this hacking. They don’t know what it’s like to bury a child. I did: Seth Rich."

During the interview, Brazile softened her claims that the DNC rigged the primary (though, tellingly, party leaders have said they will reexamine the role of “joint-fundraising agreements” which Brazile alleged helped the Clinton campaign assert financial dominance over the DNC). She also said that her critics in the party can “go to hell."

"I"m not on the payroll, George. I care about my country. I care about our democracy," Brazile said. "And I say go to hell, because why am I supposed to be the only person that is unable to tell my story?"

Through spokesman Brad Bauman, the Rich family said in a statement, “Since Seth was murdered, Donna Brazile has been a great friend to the Rich family and has been extremely supportive of the family’s efforts to find Seth’s killers."

Of course, Democrats have lined up to rebut Brazile’s claims. More than 100 former Clinton campaign aids signed an open letter accusing Brazile of falling for “Russia-fueled propaganda” in what appears to be a feeble attempt to discredit her.

Already, a trove of bombshell allegations included in the book have been widely reported thanks to leaked excerpts, and a teaser chapter that Brazile published as an essay in Politico. For example, Brazile revealed that she considered replacing Clinton and running mate Tim Kaine with Joe Biden and Corey Booker after Clinton fainted at the 9/11 memorial. She also levied accusations of sexism and racism at former Clinton staffers, and - most shockingly of all - revealed that the Clinton campaign took advantage of Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s absentee leadership of the party to make the DNC financially dependent on Clinton.

Court Confirms DNC And Wasserman Schultz Showed "Palpable Bias" Against Bernie Sanders

A federal judge this week dismissed a class action lawsuit brought against the Democratic National Committee and its former chairwoman, Debbie Wasserman Schultz. But not before confirming what was already widely suspected: That the DNC rigged the 2016 primary to favor the eventual nominee, Hillary Clinton.

Amazingly, the DNC’s attorneys never bothered refuting the lawsuit’s claim that the primary process was biased against Clinton’s rival, Bernie Sanders.

Instead, they argued that the DNC has a right to conduct primaries however it chooses, and, furthermore, that Sanders supporters knew the primaries were rigged, therefore relieving the DNC of any responsibility it might’ve had.

Here’s more from the New York Observer:

“DNC attorneys claim Article V, Section 4 of the DNC Charter—stipulating that the DNC chair and their staff must ensure neutrality in the Democratic presidential primaries—is “a discretionary rule that it didn’t need to adopt to begin with.” Based on this assumption, DNC attorneys assert that the court cannot interpret, claim, or rule on anything associated with whether the DNC remains neutral in their presidential primaries.”

And…

“The Court would have to find that people who fervently supported Bernie Sanders and who purportedly didn’t know that this favoritism was going on would have not given to Mr. Sanders, to Senator Sanders, if they had known that there was this purported favoritism.”

Jared Beck, one of the attorneys who filed the lawsuit, argued that DNC effectively defrauded Sanders’s donors and supporters by acting against its charter’s imperative to conduct a neutral primary.  

In his ruling, Federal Judge William Zloch, dismissed the lawsuit after siding with the DNC’s attorneys – but not before confirming the plaintiff’s allegation that the DNC demonstrated a “palpable bias” against Sanders during the primary, according to the NYO.

“In evaluating Plaintiffs’ claims at this stage, the Court assumes their allegations are true - that the DNC and Wasserman Schultz held a palpable bias in favor Clinton and sought to propel her ahead of her Democratic opponent,” the court order dismissing the lawsuit stated.”

Zloch explained that the plaintiffs’ attorneys were unable to prove that Sanders supporters suffered a “concrete injury” because of the DNC’s actions. He added that the scope of the case fell beyond his court’s jurisdiction.

“The Court must now decide whether Plaintiffs have suffered a concrete injury particularized to them, or one certainly impending, that is traceable to the DNC and its former chair’s conduct—the keys to entering federal court. The Court holds that they have not.” The court added that it did not consider this within its jurisdiction. “Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction, possessing ‘only that power authorized by Constitution and statute."”

Florida attorneys Jared and Elizabeth Beck filed the initial civil complaint on July 28, 2016, alleging that a cache of hacked DNC emails published by Wikileaks had revealed a DNC that was plotting to swing the primary in Clinton’s favor. Democrats responded with a motion to dismiss, which has now been sustained.

The dismissal has probably spared both the DNC and Wasserman Schultz from embarrassing scrutiny. But the former DNC head isn’t out of the woods yet. Now that former DWS staffer Imran Awan has been arrested while attempting to flee the US and charged with four counts of fraud, there’s a possibility that DWS might be called to testify about why she kept Awan and several of his family members on her publicly funded payroll even after learning that they were under federal investigation.

We"re very curious to hear her explanation.

DNC Lawsuit Exposes Corruption, Data Breaches, Raises Questions About Death Of Shawn Lucas

Via Disobedient Media

In June of last year, attorneys Jared Beck and Elizabeth Beck of law firm Beck and Lee filed a class action law suit against the DNC and former chairwomen Debbie Wasserman Schultz. The suit claims that the DNC acted against its charter when it showed demonstrable favoritism towards  Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primary, and failed to secure the data of DNC donors. The suit could have massive significance for the Democratic Party and could have an even wider impact if the origin of the DNC leaks are disclosed in the proceedings.

Attorney Elizabeth Beck described the lawsuit to US Uncut:“We think that the DNC has been running absolutely out of control and completely disregarding their responsibilities, rights, and duties to the public.”

The DNC lawsuit has so far received very little press coverage, despite revealing blatant corruption in the Democratic establishment. The death of Shawn Lucas, a process server who would have been a federal witness for the Becks, added further fuel to speculations of corruption surrounding the case. Jared Beck has also stated that Seth Rich would have been a potential witness in their case.

The lawsuit has so far revealed an absolutely unabashed level of corruption in the Democratic Party establishment. Attorney Bruce Spiva stunningly argued in defense of the DNC during the latest April 25th hearing on the case: "There"s no right to not have your candidate disadvantaged or have another candidate advantaged. There"s no contractual obligation here,” Spiva further stated that the party had the right to select its candidate in any way it chooses and was "not bound by pledges of fairness."

Spiva"s defense has proved controversial, as it effectively admits the DNC primary process was rigged, but argues that this was not illegal. Jared Beck told US Uncut that he believed their suit would prove successful based on Article 5, Section 4 of the DNC charter which explicitly requires the chair of the DNC to remain impartial during the primary.

The New York Times reported that the DNC leaks  that formed the impetus for the DNC lawsuit had suggested the DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida, and other officials "favored Hillary Clinton over Mr. Sanders." The DNC leaks have also raised serious questions regarding DNC funding methods.

Debbie Wasserman Schultz is a defendant in the DNC lawsuit. (AP Photo/Keith Srakocic)

Disobedient Media spoke with Jared Beck, who said that the initial momentum for the case stemmed from the rigging of the primary, but added: "There"s another aspect to this case that deals with why information leaked into the public domain, and that"s also part of this very intense mystery... that a lot of us are very concerned about right now."

Beck told Disobedient Media that in addition to the claims based on donations made to the Bernie Sanders campaign, and to the DNC, he also believed that there is a claim based on the DNC"s negligent failure to secure the data of its donors. This may be an important claim in terms of establishing why that data was released into the public (due to DNC negligence, in Beck"s view). Beck stated that he thought his team might be able to get discovery on this issue and specifically how it came to be that the data was released. Beck said that he believed the topic to currently be a very important issue right now given public interest about who leaked the DNC documents.

Beck also discussed how the DNC lawsuit"s claims regarding DNC negligence with donor data may be especially important as it relates to the unsolved murder of Seth Rich. Rich was a staffer for the DNC who died in an unsolved murder last July. In August last year Fox News reported that Wikileaks founder Julian Assange had strongly hinted that Seth Rich was the source for the DNC leaks. The Washington Post also reported that Wikileaks  had offered a reward for information leading to a conviction in Seth Rich"s murder. Jared Beck has stated via twitter that Seth Rich would have been a potential witness in the DNC lawsuit.

If the Becks successfully gain the right to discovery on the origin of the DNC documents, the mystery regarding whether Seth Rich leaked the information might potentially be resolved. If Rich did indeed leak the DNC emails to Wikileaks, the "Russian hacking" narrative would be utterly negated.

The Becks based their lawsuit on Guccifer2.0"s release of the information, which occurred in June last year, before Wikileaks had announced they would be releasing DNC documents. Guccifer2.0"s role in the DNC leaks was discussed in a previous report by Disobedient Media. There has been speculation that Guccifer2.0"s early release of the information was intended to smear Wikileaks and potentially Seth Rich as the leaker, by intentionally fabricating evidence of "Russian hacking" in the earliest available version of the data.

Adding further questions surrounding the lawsuit was the unexpected death of Shawn Lucas, who was filmed serving defendants in the suit last July. Police reports describe how Luca"s girlfriend found him unconcious on the bathroom floor  in early August. Paramedics were unable to revive him. The Becks have indicated Shawn Lucas was to be a Federal witness in the proceedings.

Jared Beck told Disobedient Media that Lucas would have served as a witness in order to rebut the defendant"s contention that process was incorrectly served. This would have included a sworn declaration from Lucas; Beck stated that footage of Lucas serving process had been introduced as evidence in the case in his stead, due to the unexpected death.

  

The Becks have provided Disobedient Media with copies of their communications with Washington D.C. police that include discussion regarding the body cameras worn by police as well as Shawn Lucas" death report. Lucas" cause of death was described by the Office of Chief Medical Examiner of Washington D.C as "Combined adverse effects of fentanyl, cyclobenzaprine, and mitragynine," with the manner of death listed as "accident." Fentanyl is a strong opioid pain medication, sometimes used as part of anaesthesia. Cyclobenzaprine is a muscle relaxant, while mitradynine is a substance found in Kratom.

As the case continues to be a developing story, Disobedient Media will provide further coverage of the DNC lawsuit should new facts emerge.

The Real Reason Hillary Lost: Black People Just Don't Like Her

Back in September 2016 we noted that unprecedented black voter turnout was a huge component of Obama"s victories in both 2008 and 2012.  After running in the low-to-mid 50% range for decades, black voter participation surged to over 60% for Obama in 2008 and 2012, the highest levels ever recorded.

As we noted then, the key question for Hillary in 2016 was whether she should expect the same level of unprecedented black voter turnout that Obama was able to garner in his two elections?  Now, courtesy of new 2016 voter data published today by the U.S. Census Bureau, we now know definitively that the answer to that question is a resounding "NO".

After surging to 62% in 2012, an all-time record high, Black voter turnout once again dipped back to its historical range in 2016 with only 56% of Black voters turning up to support Hillary.  Just doing some simple math, there are roughly 245 million voting age people in the United States and just over 13% of them, or 32.5 million, are Black.  Therefore, a 6% decline in turnout equates to roughly 2 million votes, the overwhelming majority of which would have undoubtedly gone to Hillary.

Of course, despite the "Russian Hacking" blame game still being played by Clinton, as we noted back in September she and her team were acutely aware of their small "enthusiasm" issue among African American voters.

 And, at least according to the president of the Democratic African-American Women Caucus, this math has the Clinton campaign in "full panic mode."  Per Politico:

"Hillary Clinton"s campaign is in panic mode. Full panic mode," said Leslie Wimes, a South Florida-based president of the Democratic African-American Women Caucus.

"They have a big problem because they thought Obama and Michelle saying, "Hey, go vote for Hillary" would do it. But it"s not enough," Wimes said, explaining that too much of the black vote in Florida is anti-Trump, rather than pro-Clinton. "In the end, we don"t vote against somebody. We vote for somebody."

Meanwhile, the lack of excitement is "worrying" Henry Crespo, president of the Miami-based Florida Democratic Black Caucus, who said that “No one is writing songs for Hillary. Obama had will.i.am. Hillary has nobody.”

That said, it wasn"t just Black voters who decided not to show up for Hillary...Female voters stayed home too...

...as did Obama"s trusty millennials...

Yeah, but Russia.