Slashdot Mirror
Democratic Party Files Suit Alleging Russia, the Trump Campaign, and WikiLeaks Conspired To Disrupt the 2016 Election (cnbc.com)
The Democratic Party is suing Russia, the Trump campaign and the whistle-blowing website Wikileaks for conspiring to disrupt the 2016 presidential election. From a report: The multi-million-dollar lawsuit filed in Manhattan federal court says that "In the Trump campaign, Russia found a willing and active partner in this effort" to mount "a brazen attack on American Democracy," which included Russian infiltration of the Democratic Party computer network. The Trump campaign, according to the lawsuit, "gleefully welcomed Russia's help." The suit says that "preexisting relationships with Russia and Russian oligarchs" with Trump and Trump associates "provided fertile ground for [the] Russia-Trump conspiracy." The common purpose of the scheme, according to the Democratic National Committee, was to "bolster Trump and denigrate the Democratic Party nominee," Hillary Clinton, while boosting the candidacy of Trump, "whose policies would benefit the Kremlin." Tom Perez, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, said the party's suit "is not partisan, it's patriotic."
No mention of the SecureWorks analysis in the lawsuit..?
https://www.secureworks.com/re...
Was the most interesting assessment.
They're serving Wikileaks with discovery? Imagine what they'll find.
Discover will produce Nothing... Wikileaks has no presence in the USA so there is nothing within the jurisdiction of US law enforcement to discover. Same with the majority of the remaining defendants... There will be nothing to the court can do to force discovery.
Of course, that doesn't preclude Wikilieaks from providing information about this voluntarily. Assuage has already discussed how these E-mail's came into Wikileaks hands during a TV interview with Shawn Hannity, but I don't think the Democrats want that information out in the open because it pretty much ends this lawsuit.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Trump has a lot of investigations going, so it's easy to miss, but that wasn't the Mueller Russia probe. It was a whole different can of worms.
And more importantly Democratic Party got caught red handed by our Russian hackers conspiring to rig the primaries.
Time to stop publicly funding the partisan primary system. We shouldn't be publicly subsidizing secret cabals of rich well connected people conspiring to get "their people" into our government.
EVERYBODY rigs primaries: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
The guy won. Move on.
Whether Trump won or not isn't the question. The question is "Did he criminally collude with the Russians to interfere in a United States presidential election?" It's an important question, because that basically undermines the entire electoral process of the nation, and makes Trump an enemy of the state.
Neither of us knows the answer to that question though. If anyone can find out though, Robert Mueller can.
He's the Republican, war veteran, investigator who took down Sammy the Bull and Teflon Don. He's also very tricky. For instance, the thing where he subpoenaed a bunch of emails that were already in his posession, just to see which ones they would leave out was brilliant. It worked. They tried to hide evidence by omitting the ones that made them look guilty and saved Mueller the hassle of reading through thousands of emails. They pled guilty not long after they realized they'd been duped.
If Trumps guilty Mueller will prove it. If he's innocent then Mueller will prove that. Until he closes the investigation though there is zero chance that either of us know what the evidence actually says.
The question is "Did he criminally collude with the Russians to interfere in a United States presidential election?"
The answer is "No.". We have official word that he is not the target of a criminal investigation. We have official word that the entire dossier that started the whole thing was bought and paid for by HRC and the DNC. We have official word that the dossier was used to illegally obtain a warrant from a FISA court to spy on Trump and his campaign.
It's pretty fucking cut and dry.
No, it's the same "investigation" which has no morphed into a full-blown witch-hunt determined to overthrow an elected President by any means necessary.
No. It's not.
Mueller referred something he found that indicated Cohen had acted illegally to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, who asked the FBI to conduct the raid. The Deputy Attorney General, Rod Rosenstein, a Trump appointee, signed the warrant, so the either the evidence that Michael Cohen broke the law and was likely to destroy evidence if issued a subpoena was pretty convincing, or even people Trump has appointed to their positions are joining the "witch-hunt conspiracy" to overthrow him.
But that circus clown has inadvertently ripped the mask off the thoroughly corrupt establishment.
Are you sure it's not the clown who's thoroughly corrupt? Because Trump has a long, long history of corruption. I'm not sure why I should believe he's stopped being a corrupt, double-dealing, backstabber now that he's president.
Fanatically anti-fanatical
Err...what in the world is racist about asking ID to prove who you are?
Because they want to charge money for the IDs, even more money than they already do, making it a poll tax when required for voting. This is normally proposed in states that used poll taxes to prevent minorities from voting, make getting such IDs harder in minority areas, and are generally racist. If they really were just worried about identifying voters in their states, they could not charge for their IDs, but they don't because that's not really what they're after.
Mueller referred something he found that indicated Cohen had acted illegally to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, who asked the FBI to conduct the raid. The Deputy Attorney General, Rod Rosenstein, a Trump appointee, signed the warrant, so the either the evidence that Michael Cohen broke the law and was likely to destroy evidence if issued a subpoena was pretty convincing, or even people Trump has appointed to their positions are joining the "witch-hunt conspiracy" to overthrow him.
Also, the AG for the SD of NY is Geoffrey Berman, who was appointed to the position by Trump.
So Mueller (a Republican/GOPer), went to Rosenstein (a Trump-appointed GOPer), to referred it to Berman (a Trump-appointed GOPer).
A direct quote from the the article you link to...
To be clear: The FBI expressly says that there’s no proof that any attempted hack on Hillary Clinton’s personal email account was successful.
I agree, lack of proof doesn't mean it did not happen, and it certainly doesn't mean she was "in the right" but there really does need to be evidence if we're going to say her emails got pilfered from her server, even if sheer luck played a large role in it.
Nullius in verba
So - President Obama had a hard-line with Chia-Head in North Korea, antagonizing the munchkin until he finally threw a tantrum - and realized he really was a munchkin? That the tax break passed was an Obama push? That actual deportations of illegal immigrants (the Obama Administration used to count "prevention at the border" as a deportation - which it clearly is not) are up because of President Obama?
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!