- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
DNC case against Trump, Russia, & Wikileaks was dismissed. Q /Seth Rich related
Posted on 12/12/19 at 6:59 pm
Posted on 12/12/19 at 6:59 pm
DNC sued Russia, Trump, & others over wikileaks
I've just found this and about to read it. Wanted to share so others can too.
Look at Q drops 1226, 1200, 1199, 1195. It is implied that DNC took the bait to file this lawsuit and that was how Seth Rich info could legally be introduced to the court.
Lawsuit was dismissed July 2019. About to read the court docs and judge's findings.
It seems pretty timely now that we have Horowitz info and the previous Mueller report.
You can search and find the 66 page court filing PDF. It won't let me post it.
I've just found this and about to read it. Wanted to share so others can too.
Look at Q drops 1226, 1200, 1199, 1195. It is implied that DNC took the bait to file this lawsuit and that was how Seth Rich info could legally be introduced to the court.
Lawsuit was dismissed July 2019. About to read the court docs and judge's findings.
It seems pretty timely now that we have Horowitz info and the previous Mueller report.
You can search and find the 66 page court filing PDF. It won't let me post it.
This post was edited on 12/13/19 at 7:17 am
4
Posted on 12/12/19 at 7:50 pm to BeNotDeceivedGal6_7
This is the update:
The suit was dismissed with prejudice on July 30, 2019, meaning it had a substantive legal defect and could not be refiled. In his judgement, Judge John Koeltl said that although he believed the Russian government was involved in the hacking, US federal law generally prohibits suits against foreign governments. As for the various other defendants, the judge wrote that they "did not participate in any wrongdoing in obtaining the materials in the first place" and therefore had the First Amendment right to publish the information.[7] He also said that the DNC's argument was "entirely divorced from the facts" and that even if agents of the Russian government had directly provided the hacked documents to the Trump team, it would not be criminal for the campaign itself to publish them, as long as they did not contribute to the hack. As such, Koeltl denied the defendants motion for sanctions.[8]
The suit was dismissed with prejudice on July 30, 2019, meaning it had a substantive legal defect and could not be refiled. In his judgement, Judge John Koeltl said that although he believed the Russian government was involved in the hacking, US federal law generally prohibits suits against foreign governments. As for the various other defendants, the judge wrote that they "did not participate in any wrongdoing in obtaining the materials in the first place" and therefore had the First Amendment right to publish the information.[7] He also said that the DNC's argument was "entirely divorced from the facts" and that even if agents of the Russian government had directly provided the hacked documents to the Trump team, it would not be criminal for the campaign itself to publish them, as long as they did not contribute to the hack. As such, Koeltl denied the defendants motion for sanctions.[8]
Posted on 12/12/19 at 8:28 pm to BeNotDeceivedGal6_7
quote:
The suit was dismissed with prejudice on July 30, 2019, meaning it had a substantive legal defect and could not be refiled. In his judgement, Judge John Koeltl said that although he believed the Russian government was involved in the hacking, US federal law generally prohibits suits against foreign governments. As for the various other defendants, the judge wrote that they "did not participate in any wrongdoing in obtaining the materials in the first place" and therefore had the First Amendment right to publish the information.[7] He also said that the DNC's argument was "entirely divorced from the facts" and that even if agents of the Russian government had directly provided the hacked documents to the Trump team, it would not be criminal for the campaign itself to publish them, as long as they did not contribute to the hack. As such, Koeltl denied the defendants motion for sanctions.[8]
BOOM.gif
Posted on 12/12/19 at 8:31 pm to BeNotDeceivedGal6_7
quote:
entirely divorced from the facts
Sounds familiar
Posted on 12/12/19 at 8:35 pm to TerryDawg03
Some of us been telling y'all this shite for 3 years.
Posted on 12/12/19 at 9:29 pm to bamarep
quote:
Some of us been telling y'all this shite for 3 years.
I’ve never disagreed with you on this. It’s a much bigger deal when a judge dismisses a lawsuit with prejudice and puts those statements in his opinion.
Posted on 12/13/19 at 6:00 am to TerryDawg03
Yes correct. I've been following Q since early on.
After reading this I believe it proves the FBI had no "predicate" to spy on George Papa or anyone else.
The threshold for civil is LOWER than criminal. And this civil judge said they have a 1st Amendment right to publish this material even if they KNOW it's stolen as long as they didn't steal it.
The DNC was hacked in 2015 according to this lawsuit!!!!!
They were hacked 4 TIMES!!!!
Meaning Trump's people didn't hack the DNC. The FBI spied on them WITHOUT PROBABLE CAUSE. They weren't breaking the law.
This blows the proper predicate finding out the window!!
After reading this I believe it proves the FBI had no "predicate" to spy on George Papa or anyone else.
The threshold for civil is LOWER than criminal. And this civil judge said they have a 1st Amendment right to publish this material even if they KNOW it's stolen as long as they didn't steal it.
The DNC was hacked in 2015 according to this lawsuit!!!!!
They were hacked 4 TIMES!!!!
Meaning Trump's people didn't hack the DNC. The FBI spied on them WITHOUT PROBABLE CAUSE. They weren't breaking the law.
This blows the proper predicate finding out the window!!
Posted on 12/13/19 at 6:11 am to LeroooyJenkins
quote:
entirely divorced from the facts
quote:
Sounds familiar
Yeah it's like the Dems have a new motto "We're devoid of any facts but we're fun to laugh at"
Posted on 12/13/19 at 7:15 am to BeNotDeceivedGal6_7
And this judge told the DNC to BTFO at the end of his ruling. Says he gave them all opportunities to present evidence and does not want them coming back again saying they have something else they didnt previously present.
His whole ruling was a major criticism of their lawyering. Basically every reference they provided was incorrect application of the law.
His whole ruling was a major criticism of their lawyering. Basically every reference they provided was incorrect application of the law.
Posted on 12/13/19 at 7:35 am to BeNotDeceivedGal6_7
quote:
dismissed July 2019
That the only important fact here because it further proves that nothing will be done.
Posted on 12/13/19 at 7:37 am to BeNotDeceivedGal6_7
Let me save you some time. If there was anything even slightly interesting in there the record would have been placed under seal. Q is fake.
Page 1 of 1
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News