DNC sues Russia, Trump campaign and WikiLeaks over alleged election interference

By what powers is your judge going to gather forth the storm necessary to meet the demand suggested by the DNC? Spell it out, because that power isn't expressed in the Constitution.

Pro tip: "if you're going to strike at a King (The People) you must kill him". These aren't faint words Mr. Emerson wrote, and our founders and most knowledgeable men understand this very point, it's life and death. Our Constitution recognizes that only Congress as assembled, a body of 535 elected representatives, has the authority and natural power to kill a King.

Nothing else can work and survive. Political power expressed, only rightly, is derived from the People. The Judiciary cannot make this claim, nor can any unelected organ of our governmental system. If the system is to be taken down it must be done by the people, by the people's Congress, nothing else is or will be judged authentic by The People.

 

No more than this political stunt by Perez.

 

How did the SCOTUS pick Bush, can you cite me the ruling where they stated Bush was now President?

 

Except one is based on an actual lawsuit filed by a multi-million dollar organization who can afford attorneys to draft and file the appropriate document and the other is the vapid imaginations of anonymous dude with zero credibility.

 

If it's not impeachment by Congress it's by definition rebellion. Eat your tomatoes Andrew, grow up to be a big by.

 

Would be a part of discovery. I would think Wikileaks would undoubtedly request it as they claim they(the DNC) weren’t hacked by outsiders but leaked from within.

 

https://goo.gl/images/dbpVze

 

Setting aside that obtaining the physical server to prove that the server was hacked two years ago does not seem like a very successful line of reasoning.

I think the DNI/CIA/FBI report and the Crowdstrike report, along with the testimony of several who conducted and/or have reviewed the investigation (including the highly confidential aspects of that investigation) would suffice.

 

Courts are loaded with cases where party A asserts a wrong and party B defends itself. A filing means nothing at all. It means a case might make it to a verdict. The verdict then may be appealed. All the way to the Supreme Court in some cases.

 

Considering those DNI/CIA/NSA reports were based off the crowd strike report, seems very obvious they would want to have it examined by someone other than paid DNC people(crowdstrike). You’re just not going to take the opposition at their word.

 

No, they don't have to prove any votes were changed. They have to prove the Trump campaign, Russia, and Wikileaks made a specific effort to meddle in the election in an attempt to affect the outcome in favor of Trump. They don't have to prove any votes were specifically affected only that they meddled, that the attempt was made. Ha ha....

"The complaint, filed in federal district court in Manhattan, alleges that top Trump campaign officials conspired with the Russian government and its military spy agency to hurt Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton and help Trump by hacking the computer networks of the Democratic Party and disseminating stolen material found there."

"This constituted an act of unprecedented treachery: the campaign of a nominee for President of the United States in league with a hostile foreign power to bolster its own chance to win the presidency."

"The case asserts that the Russian hacking campaign — combined with Trump associates’ contacts with Russia and the campaign’s public cheerleading of the hacks — amounted to an illegal conspiracy to interfere in the election that caused serious damage to the Democratic Party."

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...2016-campaign/ar-AAw6YTh?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp

 

Hopefully, assange will step up and just once break his pledge to never reveal sources, as Ambassador Murray will step up and prove his source for the DNC emails was not russia but an insider within the DNC and we can get the truth out there, finally.

MSM will have a hard time this time blacking out Murray, and will have to at least acknowledge that he exists. ha ha.

I love it that this suit is being brought. When it turns around and bites the tail off of the jackass, once again the democrats will have blown off both feet. And yes I believe Murray, given who he is and his record of integrity and honesty. As I believe Assange, and the fact that he basically told us by word choice and the actions of wilkileaks offering a reward, that his source was Rich. And I would trust these two men over what our CIA told us, given the track record of the CIA in regards to lying to the People.

Not saying that russia did not hack the DNC. Not at all. And I believe they also hacked hillary's private server and got classifed info in the process. I just do not believe russia gave them to assange, but kept them for intel purposes. As they generally do. And as we do. I also think russian criminals, not in bed with the russian state, hack us all of the time. For their own purposes. I think this kind of criminal activity is prolific.

So, good news! We may finally get to the truth, by the back door, and unintentionally. This deserves to be watched.

 

A multi-million dollar organization that is in debt and trying to pull a political stunt.

Discovery goes both ways you know and if the RNC files a countersuit katy bar the door.

 

Discovery works both ways.

 

Yea and had someone last week predicted the DNC would file such as suit the same would have applied.

 

If a judge adjudicates for the DNC, finding that Trump acted politically, that Putin acted in furtherance of the Russian Federation or that WikiLeaks leaked stuff to pump it's own brand; what's going to happen?

You guys are like the little boy in daycare that runs to teacher.

GROW A PAIR!

 

Your entire argument is built on a false premise.

The meddling wasn't aimed at diehard Trump Chumps like you who were going to vote for Trump even if he shot someone on Fifth Avenue. And it was not aimed at getting Clinton supporters to switch their votes.

The meddling was about attrition. It was about getting Clinton supporters to stay home on election day. It was not about getting them to vote for Trump.

And in that respect, the meddling was extremely successful: New poll: 34 percent 'less likely' to vote for Clinton after new email revelations

 

That's the point, though. It wasn't a 'fair and square' election. What was done is similar to what Nixon's boys did in '72.

 

The REAL Collusion:

As Mueller’s investigation winds down, evidence is building that the Obama administration colluded to help elect Hillary Clinton.

As the likelihood that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia seems headed toward zero, the likelihood of proof of a different form of collusion seems headed upward toward certainty.

The Russia-collusion charge had some initial credibility because of businessman Donald Trump’s dealings in Russia and candidate Trump’s off-putting praise of Vladimir Putin.

It was fueled by breathless media coverage of such trivial events as Jeff Sessions’s conversation with the Russian ambassador at a Washington reception — and, of course, by the appointment of former FBI director Robert Mueller as special counsel. But Mueller’s prosecutions of Trump campaign operatives were for misdeeds long before the campaign, and his indictment of 13 Russians specified that no American was a “knowing participant” in their work.​

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018...igation-real-collusion-obama-hillary-clinton/

 

It cracks me up when the Rube Herd claims there was no collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia when there are already indictments and a pile of evidence.

 

They ate the evidence? Sounds like a drug deal.

Jeff Spicoli: [driving and stoned] People on 'ludes should not drive.

 

Fair and Square is an election where the citizens who choose to vote, vote; and that's what happened in 2016. An unfair voting process would be where the actual votes of the citizens were somehow fraudulently or erroneously recorded, whether it be from internal or externals sources; and there is no evidence of that occurring in in 2016. Even the Democrats themselves chose not to do a recount in any of the close states that Trump won.

If we have had unfair elections, we'd probably have to go back to 1960 to find one, when the results in Texas and Illinois were highly suspect. But even then, Nixon accepted the results gracefully, something we can obviously not expect from the DNC.

 

LOL ... too funny...

 

It's no wonder that an ideological cohort that is comprised of belligerent, arrogant, sanctimonious, provoking, harassing, violent, riotous, seditious, treasonous scumbags would also want to disarm everyone.

 

Fact 1: Junior is informed the Russian government has some dirt on Clinton and wants to meddle in our election to help his father:

On Jun 3, 2016, at 10:36 AM, Rob Goldstone wrote:

Good morning

Emin just called and asked me to contact you with something very interesting.

The Crown prosecutor of Russia met with his father Aras this morning and in their meeting offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father.

This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump - helped along by Aras and Emin.

What do you think is the best way to handle this information and would you be able to speak to Emin about it directly?

I can also send this info to your father via Rhona, but it is ultra sensitive so wanted to send to you first.

Best

Rob Goldstone





Fact 2: Junior gleefully accepts the Russian government's offer to meddle in our election:

On Jun 3, 2016, at 10:53, Donald Trump Jr. wrote:

Thanks Rob I appreciate that. I am on the road at the moment but perhaps I just speak to Emin first. Seems we have some time and if it's what you say I love it especially later in the summer. Could we do a call first thing next week when I am back?

Best,

Don




Fact 3: A meeting is suggested at which Junior can discuss the Clinton dirt with the Russian government via a cutout:

Don

Hope all is well

Emin asked that I schedule a meeting with you and The Russian government attorney who is flying over from Moscow for this Thursday.

I believe you are aware of the meeting - and so wondered if 3pm or later on Thursday works for you?

I assume it would be at your office.

Best

Rob Goldstone


Fact 4: Junior agrees to the meeting with the Russian government cutout to discuss the Clinton dirt at Trump Tower, thereby colluding with Russia in their efforts to meddle in our election:


On Jun 7, 2016, at 5:16 PM, Donald Trump Jr. wrote:

How about 3 at our offices? Thanks rob appreciate you helping set it up.

D


Fact 5: Junior actually meets with the Russian government cutout.