“Yes, that is his argument. I specifically addressed it in the article to which you are responding. This conversation is getting surreal.”
No What’s his face’s out context critique is still valid, because you spend half your article treating his theoretical statement as if this amounted to a shocking admission of guilt on the DNC’s part that they rigged the primaries against Bernie. At no point does anything of the sort occur, the lawyer is simply making a legal argument to point out that this lawsuit has no legal standing and you’re willfully manipulating it to fit your false narrative. I’m sorry but a leaked town hall question from a single individual wasn’t what lost the primaries for Bernie and it’s also not a sign of a institutional wide conspiracy.
Let’s not forget that at the 11th hour Bernie was actively seeking to win the primaries by convincing Superdelegates to upending the democratic process and support him because he was polling better against trump. I don’t recall bernie supporters getting outraged by this plan and calling on bernie to respect the democratic process. I do recall bernie supporters posting superdelegate contact information and encouraging bernie supporters to aid Bernie in this undemocratic strategy. But it’s cool I get that this isn’t about logic or reason it’s about you being bitter and wanting someone to blame. I get it when Trump won, for a month I wanted to blame and lash out at bernie supporters or Jill Stein supporters. But then I realized that wasn’t productive and I moved on to try to focus on resisting trump. Hopefully you’ll reach that point too someday and will join us. We could always use the help.