by WorldTribune Staff, July 2, 2017
Lawyers in a fraud suit against the Democratic National Committee (DNC) filed a motion for an order of protection in a Florida court that described three threatening incidents and cited the deaths of DNC employee Seth Rich and lawsuit process server Shawn Lucas.
The U.S. District Court denied the motion on June 15, the same day Seattle-based writer/activist Zach Haller penned an article for the Medium website detailing the incidents and blasting the silence and complicity of major U.S. media outlets.
Haller noted that the lawsuit names “disgraced” former DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz as a defendant.
“Following her resignation as DNC chair, Schultz has been the subject of intensifying scrutiny related to this lawsuit,” Haller wrote. “D.C. Capitol Police are also investigating a massive data breach committed by her former IT staffers, who have since fled the country.”
The lawsuit and the subsequent deaths last year of two men called potential witnesses in the lawsuit have not received significant coverage by the major Democrat media outlets.
Jared Beck tweeted on May 29: “If #DNCFraudLawsuit proceeds, DNC employee Seth Rich would’ve been potential witness. One reason why I’m so concerned what happened to him.”
“Rich [was] a potential witness in my case,” Elizabeth Lee Beck said. “All I’m saying is, two potential witnesses in my case – Shawn Lucas was my process server – they both died. Why they died, how they died, I don’t know. Mr. Lucas was about to provide evidence to the court in this case, on service of process, when he very, very suddenly passed away.
“Seth Rich, he was an employee of the DNC, and he was murdered. Nothing was taken from him. They first said it was a botched robbery, but nothing was taken from him. You can ask anybody that grew up in a large urban area – I’ve gotten robbed – they usually take something.”
The class action lawsuit against the DNC, filed by Jared Beck and Elizabeth Lee Beck last summer, seeks damages for Democratic Party donors and voters who say they were duped by the party’s “fraudulent” 2016 primary.
DNC lawyers sought to dismiss the suit, saying the Democratic Party has the right to choose its nominee behind closed doors, regardless of the results of primary contests.
Haller detailed the three potentially threatening incidents that led the lawyers to file for an order of protection:
“On June 1, approximately six weeks following the release of transcripts from the oral arguments, a staff member at Plaintiffs’ firm Beck & Lee received a mysterious call that was programmed to falsely identify on caller-ID as the contact number of Wasserman Schultz’s local office. The caller sought information related to the case using a voice-altering application, and would refuse to disclose his or her identity.
“Though the nature of the conversation seemed casual, the call was subsequently reported to the Court by Plaintiff’s attorney Elizabeth Lee Beck that day, in order to document potentially unsolicited contact from the Defendant. At that time, it would remain to be seen if Wasserman Schultz’ office would confirm or deny the call originated from their office as the number appearing on caller ID appeared to indicate.”
On June 2, “Wasserman Schultz’s office responded to the report promptly to advise the Court that the office number identified on the call was from a former office location no longer in use by the Congresswoman, and advised that the call ‘[did] not appear’ to have originated with ‘that office’. The Democrats and Wasserman Schultz’s counsel would advise that ‘no one on Congresswoman Wasserman-Schultz’s staff, including the Congresswoman herself, has any knowledge (emphasis added) of any such call being made, nor was any such call authorized.’ ”
Haller continued: “Over the course of June 2, attorney Cullin O’Brien, who represents the Plaintiffs along with the Becks, would himself receive three mysterious calls, each from an unidentified number. In the first, the caller introduced himself as ‘Chris’, before asking for O’Brien by name, and if O’Brien was working on the ‘DNC Fraud Lawsuit’. O’Brien requested the caller put all communication in writing, and the caller hung up.
O’Brien received another call 20 minutes later, “and identified the caller as ‘Chris’ again by voice. This time, a series of threatening rants ensued in which the anonymous caller made reference to the recent murder of Whisenant and threatened that ‘this is bigger than you and your family and your law partners,’ and he would ‘play the law firms off each other.’ ”
Haller continued: “A third call would come in that night from another unknown number that O’Brien would not answer. The caller, presumed the same as the two previous calls, left a 4-minute voice message. The message was sealed and submitted to the Court as evidence in connection with the Motion for Order of Protection.”
That evening, the Beck & Lee employee who answered the June 1 call “received a visit to her home by an unidentified, unknown visitor, asking for the employee by name. Her mother would answer the door to inform the visitor that the employee, who wishes to remain anonymous, was not at home. The visitor then left a Florida Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee Vote-By-Mail Application to be given to the employee, soliciting her name and contact information, despite the employee not having or seeking any affiliation to the Democratic Party. According to the employee’s mother, the visitor carried a stack of these flyers, but drove away without visiting any other residents on the street.”
The third “concerning event” took place on June 3 in the town of Dassel, Minnesota, Haller noted.
Angela Monson, one of the plaintiffs named in the lawsuit and an active member in her local Democratic Party, noticed her laptop had been “tampered with” and would not turn on.
“In examining the defective and misplaced device, Monson turned it over, and the back plate snapped off. Noticing the 10 screws holding the hardware together were missing, Monson checked with her sons to be sure neither tampered with the device. Upon hearing neither had, an alarmed Monson realized an intruder must have entered, presumably overnight,” Haller wrote.
“Monson would inspect her home to find a patio door left ajar approximately 3 inches, and another door mysteriously unlocked. Law enforcement who arrived on the scene discovered a third connecting door unlocked as well, unveiling the entry path of an intruder who appeared to have broken into the house, tampered with the laptop til it no longer functioned, and retreated without looting or damaging the home or property in any other way.”
The O’Brien calls, the employee’s visit and literature drop, and the plaintiff’s home invasion “are each alarming in and of themselves,” Haller wrote, “but the fact that each of these events took place less than 48 hours after the original mysterious June 1 call creates an even darker cloud over the ongoing litigation. While the threatening phone calls answered by O’Brien could have been coincidental harassment inflicted by any one of the millions of onlookers, the solicitation of the employee’s contact information via a Florida Democratic Party registration form and the breaking and entering of a plaintiff’s home and ruination of her personal computer appear calculated and highly suspicious.”
Haller concluded his report by condemning “the utter depravity of the Democratic Party” and its “constant badgering” on social media of attorneys Jared Beck, Elizabeth Lee Beck and Cullin O’Brien.
Meanwhile, Haller wrote, “the mainstream media continues to downplay and dismiss the massive implications of a lawsuit that will have profound consequences on the voting behavior” of millions of American voters.