Nevada Democratic Convention - Shut down by armed guards

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

Nevada Democratic Convention - This is what democracy looks like after you illegally adjourn a convention and try to silence the people's voices.

[dchill]

1. In your face, Democracy!

[cui bono]

16. omgz... that made me laugh.

But it's really sad that it's true. And sadder even that the Hillary fans don't even care, because...



.

[dchill]

21. They are somehow mesmerized...

By an idolized vision of the One. The person they support does not exist. What they fail to realize is that it's not an idealized version of her qualities, but an outright and complete fabrication. Or, they're all morally bankrupt Neocons.

[Hortensis]

28. Oh, can the lies for heavens' sake!

Everyone knows they are lies. Riot police had to be brought in to protect the safety of people at the convention and others in the hotel itself from many in Bernie's faction who were out of control. Party officials were actually taken out under guard for their protection.

In the end, the hotel told the convention it was time to shut down, so it did. Except that troublemakers in the Bernie delegation refused to leave and ultimately had to be removed by security guards and police.

You guys should be ashamed of the picture in the OP. Observers spoke of the marked difference in behavior between the Hillary and Bernie sides of the hall, one mostly digniified and come to get things done, the other mostly determined to disrupt and obstruct.

It is past time for Bernie to control his supporters. No excuses.

[dchill]

32. I got your lies right here...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1967397

[Hortensis]

33. There's no new, reliable information in this thing.

Lots of news outlets have filed stories about this mess now, but not most of the big ones that can still afford investigative journalism, which are undoubtedly still learning and confirming details before filing their coverage.

I repeat: Bernie needs to get his people under control.

This is from Charles Pierce of Esquire Magazine:

That being said, this whole mess was over four freaking delegates, and the Sanders people should know better than to conclude what has been a brilliant and important campaign by turning it into an extended temper tantrum.

I voted for Bernie Sanders. I even wrote about why I did here at this very shebeen. But if anybody thinks that, somehow, he is having the nomination "stolen" from him, they are idiots.

And, no, I don't want to talk about it.

[cui bono]

35. So it's okay if you steal an election a little bit. mmkay...

So how many delegates would make it not okay? 5? 7?



The process is broken. The entire election system in this country is broken. It's long past time for EVERYONE to realize this and to understand that that is the first thing we need to fix. Three immediate things to change are campaign finance, no electronic voting and get rid of these embarrassingly mishandled and voter participation limiting caucuses.

.

[Hortensis]

39. Absolutely NOT, which brings us to the Sanders in NV.

NEVADA

Hillary wins the caucus.

A Sanders sympathizer at Democratic headquarters passes the names and email addresses of Clinton delegates to the Sanders camp.

Claims follow of a fraudulent email telling Clinton delegates they don't have to show up the first morning of the convention.

That first morning convention some Clinton delegates, who just happen to be on the stolen email list, don't show.

Bernie supporters who had been told to show up in case there are vacancies for delegates do and take the Clinton places.

Bernie comes away with more delegates than Hillary, even though he lost in the caucuses.

The woman at Democratic headquarters is fired from her committee.

NO, IT'S NOT OKAY TO STEAL DELEGATES, OR ELECTIONS! All this for four crappy delegates when Sanders is hundreds behind? Why? What else could come down?

[riversedge]

47. Charles Pierce: " if anybody thinks ---Sanders-he is having the nomination "stolen" they R idiots"

Last edited Thu May 19, 2016, 11:23 PM - Edit history (1)

Spot on!

[cui bono]

34. What a bunch of bullshit. You should be ashamed of defending the stealing of an election.

It's past time for Hillary supporters to stop demonizing Bernie supporters at the expense of our very democracy. No excuses.

[Hortensis]

46. The judge who dismissed the Sanders camp's suit

against the Nevada Democratic Party out of hand and in its entirety found no problem at all with the rules.

Sanders has now established a pattern of objecting to all rules that won't help him overset the popular vote and somehow win in spite of it.

As for "stealing the election," the Sanders delegates were happy UNTIL they discovered they were the minority, then they went up in flames and set out to block all votes. And their behavior became an international embarrassment.

As it happens, cui bono, some media can still afford to investigate stories. Given the reputation Sanders has established already in other states, it's almost certainly going to turn out that the NV Democratic Party (of course!) carefully consulted their attorneys on everything, that everything was done properly, and that everything caught on camera was (of course!) according to the rules.

With the enormous exception of the attempts of the Sanders block to block the business of the convention from proceeding (of course!).

As for being ashamed, cui bono, you may want to be the good guys here, but you are not.

[Gavile]

81. We are not Bernie's robot army

He does not "control" us, and we won't be silent in the face of such blatant corruption.

[Hortensis]

92. Gavile, these claims of "blatant corruption"

happen every time an event doesn't go Bernie's way, and every time--so far--there was no corruption found on investigation, although sometimes irregularities due to bad organization and/or sloppiness on the part of the locals are identified.

Instead, it has always turned out that people assumed corruption because they did not understand the procedures and misinterpreted what they saw and heard.

Of course you are not part of a "robot army," so why not wait to find out what happened with those delegates, in both camps, who were turned away?

Keep in mind also that, except for the very beginning, Hillary Clinton has been well ahead overall all through the primaries. She has large leads in pledged delegates, unpledged delegates, and the popular vote. She has been expected to win for months.

She would have little to nothing to gain by cheating and everything to lose as it would likely cost her the presidency.

[TexasTowelie]

2. Once again, I see the use of the word "illegal",

which begs the question, "What law was broken?"

There are no laws that govern how a convention is supposed to conclude so how could it have been illegal?

[bobbobbins01]

6. Maybe not illegal, but definitely immoral, undemocratic and corrupt.

I don't know if any laws were actually broken, but that business is unacceptable and the people in charge of that fiasco need to be held accountable somehow.

[TexasTowelie]

10. Okay.

However, are you concerned about holding the people that are using the word "illegal" accountable? In essence, they are slandering the chair of the Nevada Democratic Party when that word is used.

I can understand why the use of words such as "immoral" or "corrupt" as legitimate. However, the use of the word undemocratic is definitely questionable. The responsibility of the chair is to take a voice vote to end the convention. She has the subjective opinion of determining whether there are more aye votes than nay votes. When you listen to the video all that is heard is noise and it is difficult to discern anyone saying either yes or no. Those observations are made on a recorder near the back of the room while she is at front so it is quite possible that she heard more people agreeing to close the convention than disagreeing.

As for holding the chair of the party accountable that will be something left to the discretion of the delegates the next time that the state convention is convened. Until that time occurs though it is undemocratic to remove her from her elected position.

BTW, they have held voice votes in Congress where the louder party has won but the leaders of Congress were partisan and sided with the minority. Winning chairmanships and support means showing up to vote for every election rather than at the most opportune times.

[bobbobbins01]

11. I'm much more concerned with holding a person in power accountable

than I am a few anonymous internet people. Why go after the powerless who are angry and frustrated when the people in charge are engaging in such activities? They steal votes but we should turn our attention to the people who's votes are being stolen because they're using the wrong terminology? No.

And the yay/nay votes were part of the corruption, usually a 2/3s vote is required, but they circumvented that with their crooked 9:30 vote on rules changes, then chose yay on several occasions when it was clear that the nays won. That is clearly undemocratic and underhanded.

[TexasTowelie]

12. Thanks for expressing your concerns.

Slandering someone is obviously not important to you as long as the slanderous remarks are made by someone anonymously on the Internet.

[bobbobbins01]

13. Priorities matter.

Protecting democracy and making sure everyone's vote is counted fairly is obviously not important to you as long as the people committing said acts are in power and on your team. Lets go after the anonymous people with no power!

This is a tactic used by the establishment, and you're perpetuating it and propping them up. You are part of the problem.

[TexasTowelie]

17. Thanks for making me laugh.

If you are so concerned about protecting democracy then you would be concerned about what the voters said in the February caucus rather than a floor fight at the convention. That is obviously not important to you as long as the people committing said acts are on your team. Nevada will have 20 delegates for Clinton and 15 delegates for Sanders just as determined by the voters when the caucus was held. Thumbs up for democracy!

However, despite the personal attack thank you for conceding the point that nothing illegal was done by the chair of the party--life isn't always fair. Nothing is going to happen to the chair despite what is said on DU and that's one problem that you will have to deal with until the next convention convenes.

[99th_Monkey]

22. There is an important distinction to be made between criminal and civil law

"illegal" suggests criminal activity, whereas it may also refer to violations of civil law.

i suspect the Nevada kerfuffle involves possible violations of civil law, if the State Party
violated its own charter, i.e. by laws & articles of incorporation, or any other organizational
rules that may apply.

[TexasTowelie]

26. If the Sanders campaign believes that there has been a violation of the bylaws

then they have every right to challenge it in court--that is if they can afford the attorney to do it. Considering that they need to concentrate on advertising in the few remaining states and deal the issues with their campaign finance reports they may decide that it wouldn't be a wise decision to utilize their resources in that manner.

I'm not an attorney, but I have served as a treasurer and a president of an organization that has a far friendlier atmosphere than any political party can hope to achieve. When we had our annual convention there was an attorney present at all of the sessions to advise on procedural questions and issues related to bylaws. I really doubt that there wasn't legal counsel attending and advising the chair due to how contentious they knew the convention would be.

I've only watched the brief excerpt of the voice vote at the end of the convention. There was plenty of noise on the recording, but when the chair asked for a yea or nay vote to close the convention I heard more "yeas" than "nays". If that is the evidence that is going to be used to prove that they acted outside the bylaws then I doubt that will meet the challenge.

[Hortensis]

30. "legal counsel attending and advising the chair"

Absolutely. Even the cooperative at our vacation place has an attorney present for significant meetings.

As for taking proper vote counts, Bernie's faction behaved fine UNTIL they realized they were in the minority. THEN they started shouting over speakers and vote counts in what clearly appears to have been a concerted and continual attempt to obstruct the process, including to avoid having votes recorded.

[bobbobbins01]

23. I didn't say anything to you about February.

So you don't know my thoughts on it, but yet you put words into my mouth anyway. That shows where you stand. You are part of the problem and you are purposefully deceitful. I have nothing left to say to you.

[TexasTowelie]

25. Well thank you for giving me the last word then.

Am I supposed to be hurt and offended when you inform me that you are going to put me on ignore next?

[eridani]

27. Fuck February. If caucusing was only at one level, why bother with the other levles? n/t

[TexasTowelie]

31. Really? So much for democracy.

What you are saying is that the voters don't matter at all. Delegates don't matter either. Just let the party bosses crown the nominee like it occurred before primaries were held. With all of the whining about the establishment from some, this would only serve to reinforce the establishment.

I never thought that I would read a suggestion like this on DU.

[Hortensis]

50. Democracy has been thrown under the bus

so often that we've been forced to move into permanent protective mode.

[eridani]

62. Correct. In caucus states, voters don't matter. Caucus attendees matter n/t

[TexasTowelie]

63. So when the caucus attendees showed up in February

the allocation of delegates was 20 delegates for Clinton and 15 delegates for Sanders. The result at the end of the state convention was the same. It appears that the convention was fair despite the actions of the Sanders supporters that were at the convention despite all of the protestations otherwise.

[eridani]

64. Conveneintly skipping over the second step. But expected n/t

[TexasTowelie]

65. Conveniently ignoring the first step, but expected. n/t

[eridani]

66. The third step was a farce. But you know that

Unless you think that contravening voice votes is acceptable party chair behavior.

[TexasTowelie]

67. It depends which narrative you wish to believe.

From the accounts that I've read the Sanders delegates were in the minority, lacked the supermajority to change the rules at the convention, were physically and verbally abusive, refusing to disperse to the point that they were considered to be trespassing and then threatening members of the state Democratic party and their families. Do you believe that is something to be proud of?

[eridani]

69. OK, so now Coffee Cat is a liar.

She had her voter registration changed sometime between the Iowa caucus on February 1st and the third round. And you insist that this could never have happened to 60+ Sanders delegates in Nevada. Never mind all the involuntary party switching that has been clearly documented in other states. Why should they disperse if every attempt to play by the rules to change this resulted in being blown off?

2008 was highly contested, but I don't remember a single instance of problems with involuntary party switching. Any explanation?

[TexasTowelie]

70. Deflect much?

I didn't mention anything about Coffee Cat and now you are accusing me of calling her a liar. I also did not insist on anything regarding what happened to the Sanders delegates in Nevada so quit putting words in my mouth. Your conduct by making these false allegations is reprehensible.

I am not going to participate in your pathetic games by responding to your questions.

It's time to face facts. The delegate allocation for Nevada is 20 delegates for Clinton and 15 delegates for Sanders. It's time to accept that reality.

[eridani]

71. What happened to the Sanders delegates have everything to do with subsequent events

So, what do you think of all this involuntary party switching? And why didn't it happen in 2008?

[barrow-wight]

73. How interesting you should ask that.

Hillary ran in '08. If she's all about switching parties, why didn't she do so then? Nah. This is more a case of people lying about it.

[eridani]

74. I was talking about VOTERS having their party of registration changed involuntarily n/t

[barrow-wight]

75. And I don't believe them.

This has never been a thing before and suddenly one person says it happens and then the affliction spreads like wildfire. How convenient.

[eridani]

78. Thanks for calling long time poster from Iowa a liar n/t

[barrow-wight]

79. You choose to make this personal.

I am curious how the duration of someone's posting on a message board contributes to either their capacity for honesty or their trustworthiness.

[eridani]

80. Not just Coffee Cat. If you refuse google the many instances of issues with

--changed party registration, that is on you.

[barrow-wight]

83. more lies I'm sure.

Someone said to me on this site that being a Hillary supporter automatically makes one's honesty suspect. Should I therefore shall say the same about her opponent's supporters?

[eridani]

84. I see. Hiillary really did have to dodge sniper fire n/t

[barrow-wight]

85. She sure did

Most of it comes from this board.

[eridani]

86. Independents now make up 42% of the electorate. Thanks for helping to suppress GE election turnout

[barrow-wight]

88. how have surpressed anything?

Have I thrown a bottle or a chair?

[eridani]

89. Post the video of someone throwing a bottle or a chair n/t

[barrow-wight]

90. Why don't you post it?

[eridani]

91. Not possible, because no such thing ever happened. n/t

[cui bono]

99. One person? So in NYC, 120,000 people is now one person? Or actually none since that one person

you mentioned was probably not from Brooklyn.

There's no point in you posting if you are going to blatantly disregard facts that have been widely reported.

.

[barrow-wight]

102. I'm not disregarding facts.

I'm saying that I have no problem believing that 120,000 people would lie about their registration out of their devotion to the Bernie cause.

[TexasTowelie]

94. So because you believe that since the Sanders delegates were not properly credentialed

it is okay for people to harass and threaten the chair of the state party and her family? It is also okay in your opinion for the delegates to hamper votes on virtually every matter of business or for their despicable behavior at the convention?

The Sanders team lost in Nevada because their delegates could not verify their credentials (their name, age, date of birth, address or party affiliation). That seems like one of the simplest things to do because I managed to do all of those tasks within a two month period after a suicide attempt, hospitalization, release to a homeless shelter and relocation to a new town on the opposite side of the state a couple of years ago. Therefore, allegations of massive party switching don't hold water with me, particularly since I haven't seen any proof from any of the Nevada delegates that substantiate their claims. I suspect many of the Nevada delegates were never Democrats or were improperly elected as delegates at county conventions where they did not reside; therefore, they were denied from participating in the state convention. With all of the attention on the Internet regarding allegations of party switching over the past few months one would think that the delegates would have been prepared to provide proof of their identity, residence and party affiliation at the convention; however, only a handful were able to do so.

As far as what happened in 2008 is concerned I don't see how it is pertinent to what happened this year. Voter registration in Nevada is handled by the Secretary of State, who is Barbara Cegavske, a Republican. Therefore, allegations that there is party switching should be directed at the SoS office rather than the Clinton campaign or the Nevada Democratic Party. Thus far I have not seen or heard of any evidence that there is anything happening at a national level where the Secretaries of State are acting in collusion with each other to switch party affiliations of voters. The SoS gets my party affiliation correct every time after I vote in a primary election and vote in subsequent runoff elections or special elections afterwards. I've moved among six different counties after seven relocations since I've been eligible to vote and I never been switched from not being a Democrat during the past 33 years.

I get that you are upset that your candidate lost when it came to the Nevada convention, but it is convenient for the delegates to not take responsibility for making certain that their credentials were in order and blame either the Clinton campaign or the Nevada Democratic Party instead.

The reality is that in Nevada Clinton gets 20 delegates and Sanders gets 15 delegates. Even if the Sanders delegates had been in the majority, then the tally would be Clinton with 18 delegates and Sanders with 17 delegates. A two delegate swing isn't going to change what happens at the national convention, while the narrative that Sanders supporters make about widespread cheating occurring is the last desperate vestige of a candidacy that had limited appeal.

[eridani]

95. No, I don't believe that the Sanders delegates weren't properly credentialed

It was the chair of the convention that hampered to votes, to the extent that one Clinton supporter tore up her ballot.

The people harassing the chair were just as likely to have been paid by Brock as to be actual Sanders delegates.

[TexasTowelie]

96. Another conspiracy theory?

[eridani]

97. Hillary suporter James Bilbray didn't think so.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511975215

[KelleyD]

57. Convention was to go from 7:30 am to 7 pm. After all the disruption of the Bernie people the Paris

Hotel came in and told the ex. commitee they had to shut it down at 10:00pm cause they could not guarentee their safety(Ex. comittee) That is the reason for the hasty conclusion and Security people in front of the stage because Bernhie people were storming the stage and throwing chair...Understand now? After this display of rioting, all NV Dems were kicked out of the Hotel. What a proud momrnt HUH????

[cui bono]

15. Is that more important to you than the fact that democracy was thwarted by TPTB?

I think our democracy is far more important than what some anonymous posters on the internet describe what happened, especially when armed law enforcement is brought in to squash the people's voice. But that's just me.

.

[TexasTowelie]

41. Do you mean the voice that called Senator Boxer

the "b" word? The people that threw chairs around the convention hall and turned the place into a chaotic mess? The people that tried to overturn the decisions made by the people that voted in the caucus? If democracy was being thwarted it was by the unruly delegates who acted like fools because they were upset that they were in the minority and pouted like petulant children. I have no sympathy for those delegates whatsoever.

[cui bono]

48. No, I mean the arbitrary rule changing and the denial of revote requests.

So you do think that a comment by an anonymous internet person is more important to comment on than thwarting democracy. Good to know.

.

[TexasTowelie]

49. Oh please.

[KelleyD]

58. The Executive committe was 50% Bernie people and 50% Clinton people. They all agreed well before.

[cui bono]

98. No, they did not. The rules were changed during the process with questionable voting count.

And no recount was allowed.

.

[jwirr]

38. Law? If Robert's Rules of Order were voted on at the beginning

of the convention (like they were at ours) then they are the laws that this particular convention has agreed to. No one is saying that these are government laws. None the less they were broken during this convention.

[TexasTowelie]

45. Really?

What bylaws were broken? I watched the video of the close of the convention and there were just as many aye votes to close the convention as there were nay votes. I have no sympathy for petulant children who behave like anarchists because they didn't get their way.

[spin]

3. I didn't hear anything about this on the network and cable news I ...

watched today.

I wonder why. Is it possible the media is in the bag for Hillary?

What ever happened to the "Democratic" Party? Has the Clinton Machine hijacked It?

Lots of questions but few answers.

[silvershadow]

4. I have been specifically scouring every online MSM source, all day.

I have found nothing to speak of about it. At all. The Oligarchs have tightened their grip it seems.

[spin]

7. I thought perhaps I merely missed it but this is such a big story ...

it should have been at least been mentioned on CNN. Of course, to be fair, on the weekends CNN loves to air endless repeat programs about some traveling chef. CNN becomes an odd combination of the Cooking Channel, the Travel Channel, the History Channel and the Discovery Channel.

CNN is a lot like MTV. MTV used to show music videos 24/7 but those days are long gone. CNN used to be a 24/7 news channel but I guess that is no longer its prime mission. Sad.

[silvershadow]

8. Oh I had the tv on all day, too. Not a mention. It's as if it

didn't even happen.

[spin]

14. Maybe the news media feels Bernie has lost so now they can ignore him. ...

I heard a lot about some dumb call Trump pretending to be someone else made to a reporter 25 years ago.

For some reason I don't understand why the story about the convention was considered less important. But then I am just one of the "little people" and probably shouldn't try to understand things like that.

After all, you can always trust our media to be responsible and report important events to us as the media has our best interests at heart.

[Hortensis]

51. 1. It's extremely embarrassing to Sanders.

If cable news is not showing this, it is benefiting him.

2. The Bernster near riot, with a cordon of riot police protecting those on stage from physical harm, is being reported around the planet. Trump's not the only omigod what are the Americans doing now story.

3. No stories from the big journals, like NY Times, which means it's being investigated. You are not going to like what they report.

[spin]

60. Today I am actually starting to see reports about the incident on ...

24/7 cable news.

I don't put much faith in the New York Times. It is no longer the great newspaper it once was.

[Hortensis]

61. :)

[HarmonyRockets]

87. Why should it have been news?

The Nevada caucus results were 52% for Clinton and 47% for Sanders. The delegates were allocated so that Clinton got 20 and Sanders got 15. This isn't particularly newsworthy. There was a fight at the convention, but the outcome was the the only fair and non-controversial one to possibly result.

[Art_from_Ark]

68. Madeleine Albright got them spooked about going to that special place in hell

[Retrograde]

9. Are those guys

Nevada State Police, Clark County sheriff's people, Las Vegas police, or private casino security?

[oasis]

37. Metro. Local Las Vegas police. When incidents of trespass occur,

the casino's security supervisor calls them.

[synergie]

18. No, that's what it looks like when you illegally turn into a violent and unurly mob

when you fail to get your way because you don't understand the rules and think they don't apply to you.

That's when the facility's security team LEGALLY shut down the meeting because of the out of control mob.

http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/89ae8247abe8493fae24405546e9a1aa/Article_2016-05-15-US--DEM%202016-Nevada/id-c3b7ab9ad09a47ecae4ac614538a4915

The Nevada Democratic Convention turned into an unruly and unpredictable event, after tension with organizers led to some Bernie Sanders supporters throwing chairs and to security clearing the room, organizers said.

Friction between Bernie Sanders' supporters and state Democratic Party leaders had flared throughout the day on Saturday. The convention was scheduled to end by 7 p.m. and when it hadn't wrapped up by 10 p.m., authorities at the Paris Las Vegas casino informed party organizers they could no longer provide the security necessary to handle the crowd.

Sanders national communications director Michael Briggs didn't have immediate comment on the events in Nevada when reached by phone on Sunday morning.

The hostilities began when Sanders supporters accused state party leaders of putting them at a disadvantage, and they objected to procedural votes to approve the rules of the event on Saturday. They also questioned a credentials committee's disqualification of 58 would-be Sanders delegates. State party officials said the would-be delegates didn't provide acceptable identification and did not meet the May 1 deadline to register as Democrats.

[northernsouthern]

20. Wow, I can make stuff up too!

Hillary supporter beat up a male and female couple in Atlanta today...oh wait that actually happened never mind, I guess it is harder to make stuff up about the HRC crew cheating and being violent when they are actually doing it.

[northernsouthern]

19. Made a quick new Hill poster!!!

What do you think? It captures the HRC tactics very well.

[Android3.14]

29. Thank you, Hillary, for sacrificing democracy on the altar of your ego

[riversedge]

43. Your making deceptive posters against a Democratic candidate is nothing to be proud of. It was the

obnoxious behaviors of Sanders fans who forced the Hotel security to call in reinforcements. Yet you blame Hillary for their inability to control themselves and act like adults. Shame on them-and on you for posting this poster.

[Hortensis]

54. That is outrageously dishonest.

Don't know if it's up to their professional standards, but the right wing's character assassination machine would probably take it as an indication that they're making satisfactory progress with the Bernsters.

[AzDar]

24. K & R

[oasis]

36. The Paris Hotel convention ballroom is private property. Trespassing

is illegal. When event is over, it's time to leave.

[riversedge]

42. I read that the Hotel security was concerned that they could not control the Sanders crowd so

reinforcements were called in.

This is the 3rd or 4th posted with the OP containing that pic. And they blame their obnoxious behavior on Hillary. I shake my head.

[scscholar]

55. But why were they doing this?

It was because of what she did so it is logical to blame the person at fault.

[FlatBaroque]

40. Can you imagine the wall to wall coverage if this had happened at a Repiggie convention???

[EndElectoral]

44. yeah...I can...boy, it comes to this.

[CobaltBlue]

52. WillYourVoteBCounted—Now more than ever, I am so inspired to vote Democrat this November.

[Jackie Wilson Said]

53. Drumpf will make this look like an afternoon on the beach.

[HooptieWagon]

56. Corporatists protected by brown shirts.

Looks like the 'elite' are scared to death of the people.

[Corporate666]

59. Or put another (more honest) way... the cops had to come after Bernie supporters behaved violently

and aggressively and refused to leave.

They aren't armed guards. They are police. And they are there because the Bernie crowd was so unruly, aggressive, threatening and out of control that hotel security were unable to control them and had to tell the party leadership that.

Pretty sad that Bernie's people are so out of control that police need to show up to prevent them from continuing violent outbursts.

[auntpurl]

76. +1000000

[barrow-wight]

72. Not true.

This is what happened when people throw bottles and chairs at other people.

[Lil Missy]

77. nothing illegal happened. Just some unhappy Sanders supporters acting like thugs.

[ucrdem]

82. Maybe not illegal, but dishonorable. From the complaint filed by the NV state party:

The people who fostered, encouraged, and gained from the unsettling scenes at the Nevada State Democratic Convention bring dishonor and discredit to our state and national parties.

Having seen up close the lack of conscience or concern for the ramifications of their actions—indeed, the glee with which they engaged in such destructive behavior—we expect similar tactics at the National Convention in July.

We therefore formally complain to the DNC regarding these unfortunate events, and warn the body that the goal of many of these individuals, sanctioned or encouraged by the Sanders Campaign, is not party-building but something more sinister and unproductive. Their tactics speak for themselves, and have no place in our political process as Democrats.

Thank you very much for your attention to this matter.
Yours sincerely,
Bradley S. Schrager, Esq.
General Counsel Nevada State Democratic Party

https://www.scribd.com/doc/312844982/160516-Letter-DNC-RBC-NVDemsConvention#

[B Calm]

93. THUGS, wow you really went there!

[pdsimdars]

100. The Hillary style of authoritarian government. . Is this really what you want? Authoritarianism?

[Purveyor]

101. Sure looks like "brown shirts" to me but sometimes my eyesight isn't what it used to be... eom