[comex]

You accuse others of using misleading language, then proceed to use misleading language yourself. Calling the primary "fraudulent" makes it sound like primary votes were miscounted, but of course there is no evidence of that either. (Unless you count the controversy over a voter roll 'purge' in NY, but that (a) didn't cover enough voters to make a significant difference, (b) probably benefitted Sanders anyway, and (c) was not the subject of any revelations from the leaks.)

[nextstep]

The DNC colluded with the Clinton campaign in numerous ways. There's an ongoing lawsuit about this: http://www.newsweek.com/dnc-fraud-lawsuit-claims-bernie-sand...

http://www.theroot.com/dnc-fraud-lawsuit-is-the-biggest-stor...

[comex]

The lawsuit does not allege that votes were miscounted.

[nextstep]

You’re right, it alleges that the DNC defrauded donors by failing to run a fair primary.

[unityByFreedom]

ongoing lawsuit != guilt

It wouldn't surprise me if there are a number of campaign-inspired lawsuits. That doesn't mean any of their claims are found to be true by a court.

You're suggesting that the DNC colluded with Clinton against Sanders, yet Sanders is not a part of this lawsuit. Sounds more like spin from the right to me.