Judge Throws Out Trump’s RICO Lawsuit Against Hillary Clinton:...Hyperbole...no legal merit

Judge Donald Middlebrook's ruling, the long and short of it is that Trump's suit, let alone being disqualified on statute of limitations grounds, amounted to a hyperbolic rant lacking legal merit on a number of levels, too many for me to go into detail, but the judge slammed it with strong language--the frivolity was so egregious he is considering sanctions against the lawyers, for filing a 'shotgun' suit. Dismissed with prejudice (meaning it cannot be refiled).

Moreover, what this judge did was shoot down many ot the typical allegations the right, in general, make against the investigations into Trump, that they were a 'hoax', a 'deep state out-to-get Trump conspiracy' etc., with articulated precision far better than I could ever do. So, the next time I hear 'TDS' or 'Fake news" or 'deep state' 'Russia, Russia, Russia' or 'hoax' or any such bullpucky along the usual right wing talking points, I'm just going to point them to this document, below.


Judge Throws Out Trump’s RICO Lawsuit Against Hillary Clinton: ‘Length, Hyperbole, and the Settling of Scores and Grievances’ Have No Legal Merit
https://lawandcrime.com/trump/judge...of-scores-and-grievances-have-no-legal-merit/

A federal judge has dismissed the sprawling archlawsuit filed by Donald Trump against his perceived political enemies during the 2016 election, including Hillary Clinton, opponents, including the Democratic National Committee, James Comey, Lisa Page, Peter Strzok, and Fusion GPS.

From the court document (embedded in the article), judge's ruling:

More troubling, the claims presented in the Amended Complaint are not warranted under existing law. In fact, they are foreclosed by existing precedent, including decisions of the Supreme Court. To illustrate, I highlight here just two glaring problems with the Amended Complaint. There are many others. But these are emblematic of the audacity of Plaintiff’s legal theories and the manner in which they clearly contravene binding case law.

 

Good. I was never a fan of using the legal system against political opponents. I never chanted with the "lock her up" lemmings.

 

Yeah we didn't see this coming.

I wonder if Trump supporters are still tired of winning.

 

The Defendants effectuated this alleged conspiracy through two core efforts.

Alleged? Dear god who has denied it?

Judge Middlebrooks, a Bill Clinton appointee

Shocking i tell you.. Shocking..

 

So, you are alluding that only a Republican appointee can exact justice?

Your logic wanes. Why am I not surprised?

 

The issue it would appear is less on the substantial claims, but rather that they are too large, extensive and were shoddily put together. Basically, the court did not rule whether or not the claims were true(the court foreclosed that possibility in judging without prejudice.) but rather the court has decided that it couldn't proceed with this case due to a variety of reasons that best can be summarized as frivolous.

What this means is effectively, even if everything the FBI did was deceptive, that deception cannot be challenged in a court of law. Or at least, if it could be challenged it'd have to be done in a much more concise and narrow manner.

 

I get that the industry of misleading voters to influence elections is as American as apple pie.
But is there ever a point at which it is too much? Apparently not according to this judge.

 

So you are putting words in my mouth? Why am I not surprised? Have you not heard of conflict of interest Mr Pretend Lawyer?

FFS Come on man! ( yes i said that on purpose)

Hilary Clinton was one of the lead defendents and her Husband nominated the very Judge you are lauding?

 

Back in the day: GOP Argued to Tamp Down on Frivolous Lawsuits. No longer.

 

To be honest when I read this thread title, I did bust out laughing. POS45 will do anything to project his crimes onto others and to get attention. It's pathetic and sad but it really works on those who subconscious is easily permeated.

Here is the thing, those very people are handing him their money through his corrupt super PAC and he is not even going to pay the lawyers that brought this sham to the court.

 

We know Trump's not paying these blithering idiot lawyers out of his pocket.


"the frivolity was so egregious he is considering sanctions against the lawyers, for filing a 'shotgun' suit."

 

And if Middlebrooks was a Trump appointee he'd be a Rino.

 

Dont you think people would demand he be recused from the case if that was so?

Unlike Progressives i am consistent.

Oh i know discussing a topic is so damn hard for some.. Much better to type some cheap shot and then run away and count your "likes" like they matter.....

 

A most excellent - not to mention epic - benchslap for the Grifter in Chief...

 

Didn't take long for someone to pull out the "appointed by a leftist."

I guess it's fine though if a judge who was appointed by the defendant oversees their case.

 

"Judge Middlebrooks, a Bill Clinton appointee

Shocking i tell you.. Shocking.. "

Last edited: Today at 4:32 PM
RP12, Today at 4:31 PM Report

 

Why would he demand to be recused from the case. What connection does Bill Clinton have to Trump? Would a judge who was appointed by Bush be any better?

 

I think Cannon and her boy Trump are in for a big surprise.
She is way out of her league with the DOJ's lawyers.

 

Of course. This judge did not want to be the next victim of Clintoncide.

 

so who would be fair? Not a Clinton appointee, not a trump one, I assume Obama is out….We got find some Bush appointee still hanging around?

 

Always a conspiracy theory to explain away trumps failures and lies.

 

No theory here. Clintoncide is an actual term that means death by Clinton.

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Clintoncide

It is common knowledge. What judge would want to be involved with that?

 

One who isn’t a conspiratorial moron?

 

I am surprised it took four posts for the (to paraphrase) "Dem judge" excuse to be trotted out.

 

You mentioned he was a Clinton appointee, which implies the judge is biased.

That's not even logical because to make that assertion also implies that only a republican appointed judge is impartial, which is no more logical.

In other words, it's a meaningless reference.