Lawyer in DNC - Wasserman-Schultz Lawsuit Declares He Is "Not Suicidal"
After a number of unusual deaths near the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign last summer, the attorney for the plaintiffs in a lawsuit filed by supporters of Bernie Sanders against Debbie Wasserman-Schultz and the DNC said in a tweet last week that he is: "not suicidal. If my body washes up somewhere, it was not a suicide."
The lawsuit is the same one in which a process server, Shawn Lucas, was found dead of an overdose of an atypical drug combination, with no known history of drug use that could be ascertained by the attorney. The attorney's firm had hired Lucas to serve papers on Wasserman-Schultz and the DNC.
The lawsuit alleges that the DNC, of which Wasserman-Schultz was then chairwoman, went all out to ensure the victory of Hillary Clinton as the Democratic nominee over Bernie Sanders, rather than hold impartial primaries, as its bylaws require.
Last month, in an interview with Tim Black of the Tim Black Show, when asked if he has ever felt afraid of the forces arrayed against him in the lawsuit, the attorney, Jared Beck, answered "yes," and brought up the deaths of Lucas and also of Seth Rich. Rich was the victim in an unsolved murder in Washington, DC, which was ruled a botched robbery by Washington DC police.
Rich was a data expert at the DNC, who is thought by some to be the source of the leaked DNC emails which rocked the Clinton campaign last summer. Without comment, Wikileaks posted a $20,000 reward for information leading to his killers.
Beck is a graduate of Harvard Law School, where he was editor of the Harvard Law Review, as well as Phi Beta Kappa and a summa cum laude graduate of Harvard College. Beck has spoken or written on legal matters for CBS News, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and many other news outlets.
The DNC lawsuit is moving forward despite motions to dismiss by the defendants.
This content reflects the personal opinions of the author. It is accurate and true to the best of the author’s knowledge and should not be substituted for impartial fact or advice in legal, political, or personal matters.