If you are like me, you probably thought the DNC fraud lawsuit was over last August when a Florida judge dismissed the class-action suit.

It turns out that last month the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals "found jurisdiction sufficient for the case to proceed on appeal".

On Friday DNC lawyers submitted their arguments to the court, and they were, to put it mildly, enlightening.



The document, provided by the law offices of the Attorneys for the Plaintiffs in the case, Jared and Elizabeth Beck, and appears to argue that if the Democratic Party did cheat Sanders in the 2016 Presidential primary race, then that action was protected under the first amendment

That is certainly an unusual use of the first amendment.

The DNC lawyers also noted that they took offense to Plaintiffs’ counsel Jared Beck "repeatedly referring to the DNC as “shi*bags”. I'm not sure why they take offense to this accurate description.

But let's get back to the lawsuit.



The DNC defense lawyers then argued: There is no legitimate basis for this litigation, which is, at its most basic, an improper attempt to forge the federal courts into a political weapon to be used by individuals who are unhappy with how a political party selected its candidate in a presidential campaign.” The brief continued: …To recognize any of the causes of action that Plaintiffs allege based on their animating theory would run directly contrary to long-standing Supreme Court precedent recognizing the central and critical First Amendment rights enjoyed by political parties, especially when it comes to selecting the party’s nominee for public office.”

And what is this long-standing procedure for selecting a party's nominee?



If all that weren’t enough, DNC representatives argued that the Democratic National Committee had no established fiduciary duty “to the Plaintiffs or the classes of donors and registered voters they seek to represent.”

No fiduciary duty to represent the voters.

That's what the DNC thinks of Democrats.

By the way, the DNC needs your money.