Bernie Sanders Backers Battle DNC in 11th Circuit

[Gothmog]

There were oral arguments in the amusing lawsuit brought by some JPR types against the DNC. This lawsuit claimed that donors are consumers under the DC consumer protection statute and some other amusing claims. The District judge dismissed this case for a number of reasons and the plaintiffs appealed. https://www.courthousenews.com/bernie-sanders-backers-battle-dnc-in-11th-circuit/

During oral arguments, U.S. Circuit Judge Adalberto Jordan seemed skeptical that certain counts in the lawsuit could proceed with respect to the Sanders donors’ alleged damages. The judge said it would be a stretch to show causation between those damages and the actions of the DNC, given that the DNC is an entity separate from the organization that accepted the donations – the Sanders campaign.

Judge Jordan further expressed reservations about the Sanders backers asking the court to hold that a political party has a fiduciary duty to its donors.

“You don’t have any precedent [in relevant jurisdictions] that goes anywhere close to what you’re asking us to do,” Jordan told Beck.....

In that August 2017 dismissal order, Senior U.S. District Judge William Zloch appeared reluctant to grant relief on matters concerning the internal workings of the Democratic Party.

“Grave questions regarding the DNC’s right of association would undoubtedly arise if this Court were to enjoin the DNC to a particular manner of governance,” the ruling states. “And those same concerns would arise with respect to any award of damages, which would impose liability for the DNC’s alleged decision to associate with a particular standard-bearer in a manner not otherwise prohibited by law.”

I read the briefs in this case and I was not impressed by the amusing claims of the plaintiffs. https://upload.democraticunderground.com/100210544462

[Me.]

1. What Can You Say About Sander's Backers Using Russian Hacked Emails As Their Proof

Should the DNC sue because of the hack by the Sander's campaign?

[Gothmog]

2. There is a separate lawsuit brought by the DNC about use of hacked materials

I guess that the DNC could add these idiots to that lawsuit if the case is remanded back for trial. The DNC lawsuit against Russia, the RNC, Trump and Wikileakes is moving along and will be fun to follow

This fraud case is so weak that it was funny. Hopefully this bogus lawsuit will not be sent back for a trial

[Me.]

3. Fingers Crossed

both ways

[George II]

4. Correct. People forget about that hack (they call it a "breach") way back in December 2015....

Looking at the logs, it was a lot more extensive than anyone wants to remember or admit.

There were four separate hacks that night, a total of four hours 36 minutes - that's a LOT of time to be nosing around a computer database.

One lasted from 10:59 to 11:25 PM (26 minutes)
One lasted from 10:46 to 11:41 PM (55 minutes)
One lasted from 10:40 to 12:14 PM (1 hour 34 minutes)
One lasted from 10:43 to 12:24 PM (1 hour 41 minutes)

The logs can be found here:

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2015/images/12/18/merged_document.pdf

The DNC had my personal information (name, address, email address) Not coincidentally, the day after the hack I began receiving emails from the Sanders campaign which continued for about six months - beginning with at least one a day, increasing to several a day until they suddenly stopped in late June 2016.

[Me.]

5. ...

[Gothmog]

6. I saw that the attorneys pushing this lawsuit are trying to sell some books

Good luck because this case is a loser.

[R B Garr]

7. Wouldn't this be a forfeit anyway since he went back to

Independent? Looks like the “harm” is the other way around considering the abandonment of the short/lived Democrat status.

[Gothmog]

9. This lawsuit evidently includes a number of JPR posters who claim to be damaged

The plaintiffs in this case which may include a number of JPR posters are claiming to be damaged. sanders is not a party to this lawsuit. These plaintiffs claim to be consumers under the District of Columbia consumer protection act because that this the only way to show standing. That law does not apply to donors.

[betsuni]

8. K&R