Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Connect with us

Big League National Security

Office of Debbie Wasserman Schultz Uses Voice Changer to Call Law Office Suing DNC

Published

on

In a shocking court filing, the law firm representing a class action suit by Bernie Sanders supporters against the Democratic National Committee and former chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz alleged that someone from the congresswoman’s office used a voice changer to call and dig for information.

Worst of all, the individual remembered to change their voice — but forgot to block their phone number from appearing on the firm’s caller ID.

In Thursday’s filing, the Beck & Lee firm alleged that “at 4:54 p.m. today, an individual called our law office from ‘305-936-5724.’”

“The caller refused to identify himself/herself, but asked my secretary about the Wilding et al. v. DNC et al. lawsuit. My secretary stated that it sounded like the caller was using a voice changer, because the voice sounded robotic and genderless — along the lines of the voice changers used when television show interviews are kept anonymous. The caller concluded with ‘Okey dokey,’ after my secretary gave the caller public information about the case,” the filing continued.

Trending: EMAILS Reveal Obama Admin’s Push To Create Russia Scandal Hours Before Trump’s Inauguration

At the end of the call, the firm conducted a Google search of the phone number and found that it belongs to Wasserman Schultz’ office in Aventura.

The law firm provided a photo of the caller ID as well as a screenshot of the phone number listed on the congresswoman’s office website.

“What just occurred is highly irregular and we will be filing the instant e-mail with the court forthwith,” the filing concluded.

The lawsuit, being heard in Florida, is using the leaked internal documents from the DNC in an attempt to prove that the party defrauded voters as they were seeking to undermine Senator Bernie Sanders throughout the primaries.

The DNC has argued that they have no obligation to be fair and impartial towards candidates.

“We could have voluntarily decided that, ‘Look, we’re gonna go into back rooms like they used to and smoke cigars and pick the candidate that way.’ That’s not the way it was done. But they could have. And that would have also been their right,” Bruce Spiva, a lawyer for the DNC, argued in a motion to dismiss.

The Democratic Party charter says that the party will exercise total neutrality during primaries — but Spiva has claimed that the rules are non-binding.

Have a hot tip for Big League Politics?

Got a hot news tip for us? Photos or video of a breaking story? Send your tips, photos and videos to tips@bigleaguepolitics.com. All hot tips are immediately forwarded to BLP Staff.

Have something to say? Send your own guest column or original reporting to submissions@bigleaguepolitics.com.

Bypass Tech Censorship!

Facebook, Twitter and Google are actively restricting conservative content through biased algorithms. Silicon Valley doesn't want you to read our articles. Bypass the censorship, sign up for our newsletter now!

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.



Thanks for sharing!

We invite you to become a Big League Politics insider. Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

Send this to a friend