Taking the above under consideration to analyze and discuss its validity in part or in its entirety, several individuals come to mind whose objectivity can still help alter the trajectory of this election. Or if Bernie's fate is impenetrably cast, at least bring Progressives en masse to support Jill Stein and Dr. Cornel West. Assuming a viable plan of action can be constructed in the short time remaining before the general election, getting in touch directly with Jeffrey Weaver and Bernie Sanders, which to date has been impossible, would be essential.
Rob Hager; a public-interest litigator who filed a Supreme Court amicus brief in the 2012 Montana sequel to the Citizens United case, American Tradition Partnership, Inc. v. Bullock, and has worked as an international consultant on legal development and anti-corruption issues. Hager talks about two important plans of attack to expose the vulnerability of the current Democratic party and the Washington establishment in general. First is the conflict of interest Recusal Rule as it pertains to the superdelegates and second is how Buckley v Valeo supercedes Citizens United in importance.
Conflict of interest Recusal Rule: Bernie supporters can reach out to superdelegates to ask them to disclose any benefits they have received or expect to receive from the Clintons if they refuse to vote for the candidate most likely to win the general election, as the superdelegate mechanism was originally intended to do. Had the Clinton political machine not undermined Bernie's campaign from the get-go, in all likelihood Bernie would be the winning primary candidate.
Buckley v Valeo: According to Rob Hager, this is the case that must be overturned because that would take down Citizens United and every other money is speech case that props up the plutocracy. An article on opednews by Hager details more of his ideas.
State Convention: Another Lesson in Strategic Failure by the Sanders Revolution, and How to Recover.
" Those Damn Emails:" Comey's Political Fix Unraveling
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/07/15/those-damn-emails-comeys-political-fix-unraveling/
Margaret Sullivan, was the public editor at the New York Times. She complained publicly in her reply when the New York Times, although denying influence of the Hillary political machine, completely altered the positive article they had written about Bernie by changing a couple of words and adding another paragraph.
Were Changes to Sanders Article Stealth Editing?
http://publiceditor.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/03/17/new-york-times-bernie-sanders-coverage-public-editor/
Sullivan is now employed by The Washington Post, as the Media Columnist, writing about digital media and how that transformation is affecting people's lives and work. If she is unable to speak freely, as the Washington Post is also guilty of maligning Sanders campaign, an alternate individual will be consulted. Matt Taibbi immediately comes to mind as someone who unabashedly writes the truth as he sees it.
How the 'New York Times' Sandbagged Bernie Sanders
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/how-the-new-york-times-sandbagged-bernie-sanders-20160315
Judith Wright-Gillett; a former government lawyer who knows that what Hillary did with the private server in the basement of her private home in upstate New York was completely inexcusable and negates the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Copied below is her eye-opener of a comment to Neal Gabler's June 10, 2016 article titled Did the Press Take Down Bernie Sanders?
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
1
1
1
