DNC files lawsuit against Russia, Trump, and Wikileaks

[Opoponax]

It's to get the orange powdered fool under oath. I think that's the ultimate endgame.

And any offer of settlement isn't going to come with an NDA. It's the complete opposite of the goal of a non-Bizarro World civil suit, which is usually to get people to the table to settle in order to avoid going to trial. Here though, they want this thing tried in open court.

The only way the GOP can hope to avoid that is by paying whatever the Dems demand in damages. I don't know how it works at the federal level, but in California, if you're made an offer in a civil suit and you refuse it, and then subsequently are awarded less at trial than what was offered prior to trial, you can be made to pay the offeror's attorney fees. But I think the Dems are willing to take that risk because they have that kind of money. Also, the primary goal isn't to be awarded money damages. The primary goal is to get Trump under oath.

So maybe there'll be two primary demands: one for money, and one demanding no NDA, with the latter being the sticking point that gets the thing to trial. I have no clue if that works though.

But whatever the case, it'll take years for this thing to bear fruit. And really, there are so many things that can throw a wrench into this particular machine that it's probably not worth following very closely until something actually happens.

 

[Coleman Smith]

I believe Pectal is correct in that it is about Discovery.

Keeping the issue in the press including watching who may take the fifth may also be an issue.

A lot of the discovery will become a part of the next election cycle.

 

[Trausti]

It's a civil RICO case. Very likely that most of it will be dismissed early on - so much conjecture in that complaint. And it's civil discovery not a criminal warrant. Plaintiff doesn't get to just go through defendant's office in the hope of finding something to support it's case. If the DNC makes a discovery request and the Trump Campaign / Wikileaks / Assange responds that no such document exists, that's that. And Trump is not a party to this lawsuit. Quite improbable he would be deposed. It wouldn't surprise me if the DNC gets hit with sanctions for filing a frivolous lawsuit.

 

[Coleman Smith]

It's a civil RICO case. Very likely that most of it will be dismissed early on - so much conjecture in that complaint. And it's civil discovery not a criminal warrant. Plaintiff doesn't get to just go through defendant's office in the hope of finding something to support it's case. If the DNC makes a discovery request and the Trump Campaign / Wikileaks / Assange responds that no such document exists, that's that. And Trump is not a party to this lawsuit. Quite improbable he would be deposed. It wouldn't surprise me if the DNC gets hit with sanctions for filing a frivolous lawsuit.

True.

Here's a copy for any one who wants to wade through 66 pages.

 

[Angry Floof]

The assigned judge was a Watergate prosecutor.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It's a civil RICO case. Very likely that most of it will be dismissed early on - so much conjecture in that complaint. And it's civil discovery not a criminal warrant. Plaintiff doesn't get to just go through defendant's office in the hope of finding something to support it's case. If the DNC makes a discovery request and the Trump Campaign / Wikileaks / Assange responds that no such document exists, that's that. And Trump is not a party to this lawsuit. Quite improbable he would be deposed. It wouldn't surprise me if the DNC gets hit with sanctions for filing a frivolous lawsuit.

I do agree they don't get to go searching. However, if His Flatulence says no such document exists but the DNC finds it...

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

It's a civil RICO case. Very likely that most of it will be dismissed early on - so much conjecture in that complaint. And it's civil discovery not a criminal warrant. Plaintiff doesn't get to just go through defendant's office in the hope of finding something to support it's case. If the DNC makes a discovery request and the Trump Campaign / Wikileaks / Assange responds that no such document exists, that's that. And Trump is not a party to this lawsuit. Quite improbable he would be deposed. It wouldn't surprise me if the DNC gets hit with sanctions for filing a frivolous lawsuit.

I have heard people point out that the suit names quite a few John Does, and one of them could be Trump. And before anyone says it, I heard it more than once from people on various sides of the spectrum.

 

[Trausti]

It's a civil RICO case. Very likely that most of it will be dismissed early on - so much conjecture in that complaint. And it's civil discovery not a criminal warrant. Plaintiff doesn't get to just go through defendant's office in the hope of finding something to support it's case. If the DNC makes a discovery request and the Trump Campaign / Wikileaks / Assange responds that no such document exists, that's that. And Trump is not a party to this lawsuit. Quite improbable he would be deposed. It wouldn't surprise me if the DNC gets hit with sanctions for filing a frivolous lawsuit.

I have heard people point out that the suit names quite a few John Does, and one of them could be Trump. And before anyone says it, I heard it more than once from people on various sides of the spectrum.

The Complaint specifically alleges that John Doe 1-10 are "other Russian intelligence officers or agencies." So nothing to do with the Donald.

 

[Trausti]

It's a civil RICO case. Very likely that most of it will be dismissed early on - so much conjecture in that complaint. And it's civil discovery not a criminal warrant. Plaintiff doesn't get to just go through defendant's office in the hope of finding something to support it's case. If the DNC makes a discovery request and the Trump Campaign / Wikileaks / Assange responds that no such document exists, that's that. And Trump is not a party to this lawsuit. Quite improbable he would be deposed. It wouldn't surprise me if the DNC gets hit with sanctions for filing a frivolous lawsuit.

I do agree they don't get to go searching. However, if His Flatulence says no such document exists but the DNC finds it...

Trump Sr. is not a party. But if a party in a civil action intentionally withholds evidence, that party could face an evidentiary or monetary sanction. Sorry to disappoint the braying mob, but no jail time.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It's a civil RICO case. Very likely that most of it will be dismissed early on - so much conjecture in that complaint. And it's civil discovery not a criminal warrant. Plaintiff doesn't get to just go through defendant's office in the hope of finding something to support it's case. If the DNC makes a discovery request and the Trump Campaign / Wikileaks / Assange responds that no such document exists, that's that. And Trump is not a party to this lawsuit. Quite improbable he would be deposed. It wouldn't surprise me if the DNC gets hit with sanctions for filing a frivolous lawsuit.

I do agree they don't get to go searching. However, if His Flatulence says no such document exists but the DNC finds it...

Trump Sr. is not a party. But if a party in a civil action intentionally withholds evidence, that party could face an evidentiary or monetary sanction. Sorry to disappoint the braying mob, but no jail time.

The point is it would hurt them.

 

[Copernicus]

President Trump is not listed as a plaintiff, but his campaign organizations, the Russian Federation, Jared Kushner, Donald Trump Jr, the Russian military (GRU), and a host of others are. That avoids the complication of having to drag the President into it for the time being.

 

[Angry Floof]

Does he know yet that the assigned judge was a Watergate prosecutor?

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Is this glee I see in the discovery that this judge was a Watergate prosecutor? If so, it makes me wonder if people anticipate partisan bias on the part of the judge.

Or maybe he will be like the judge in Kitzmiller vs. Dover, Judge Jone, who even though he was a Bush appointee and a conservative Christian, ruled on the facts and the law. Creationists felt betrayed by his ruling - not just disappointed but betrayed.

 

[Trausti]

Russia will probably be dismissed from the suit. It has sovereign immunity and the claim that it engaged in commercial activity is embarrassingly weak. Conjecture does not jurisdiction make. This is nothing more than a publicity stunt to keep the partisan faithful in the pews. (See this thread.) The Mueller investigation hasn't produced the goods so file a lawsuit to keep it in the news for the November election.

 

[Copernicus]

Russia will probably be dismissed from the suit. It has sovereign immunity and the claim that it engaged in commercial activity is embarrassingly weak. Conjecture does not jurisdiction make. This is nothing more than a publicity stunt to keep the partisan faithful in the pews. (See this thread.) The Mueller investigation hasn't produced the goods so file a lawsuit to keep it in the news for the November election.

OK, but maybe we should wait for the court to make a ruling on such matters. As you point out, "conjecture does not jurisdiction make". You are presenting us with conjecture. This suit is completely separate from the criminal investigation, and it may well be delayed until that investigation has run its course. The reason why the DNC is filing now is that there is this thing called "statute of limitations". The DNC cannot afford to wait too long before bringing a suit, and it has every right to bring this lawsuit, given what has already been made public in this matter.

 

[Angry Floof]

Is this glee I see in the discovery that this judge was a Watergate prosecutor? If so, it makes me wonder if people anticipate partisan bias on the part of the judge.

Or maybe he will be like the judge in Kitzmiller vs. Dover, Judge Jone, who even though he was a Bush appointee and a conservative Christian, ruled on the facts and the law. Creationists felt betrayed by his ruling - not just disappointed but betrayed.

No, I'm not anticipating partisan bias on the part of the judge. I'm anticipating the orange hobgoblin to shit his pants.

But I think the bigger soiled pants moment for President Buttercup will be when he finds out that his new legal team is the same one that wrote the letter to Rosenstein last year urging him to assign a special counsel to investigate Russian meddling.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

It's a civil RICO case. Very likely that most of it will be dismissed early on - so much conjecture in that complaint. And it's civil discovery not a criminal warrant. Plaintiff doesn't get to just go through defendant's office in the hope of finding something to support it's case. If the DNC makes a discovery request and the Trump Campaign / Wikileaks / Assange responds that no such document exists, that's that. And Trump is not a party to this lawsuit. Quite improbable he would be deposed. It wouldn't surprise me if the DNC gets hit with sanctions for filing a frivolous lawsuit.

It really does feel like cart before the horse. If there is a murder, you don't see people rushing to civil court first.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Is this glee I see in the discovery that this judge was a Watergate prosecutor? If so, it makes me wonder if people anticipate partisan bias on the part of the judge.

Or maybe he will be like the judge in Kitzmiller vs. Dover, Judge Jone, who even though he was a Bush appointee and a conservative Christian, ruled on the facts and the law. Creationists felt betrayed by his ruling - not just disappointed but betrayed.

No, I'm not anticipating partisan bias on the part of the judge. I'm anticipating the orange hobgoblin to shit his pants.

But I think the bigger soiled pants moment for President Buttercup will be when he finds out that his new legal team is the same one that wrote the letter to Rosenstein last year urging him to assign a special counsel to investigate Russian meddling.

People cheer for uniforms with R or D, or maybe L or C, but never policy. That much is fact. Something about Dr Seuss and Sneetches.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Is this glee I see in the discovery that this judge was a Watergate prosecutor? If so, it makes me wonder if people anticipate partisan bias on the part of the judge.

Or maybe he will be like the judge in Kitzmiller vs. Dover, Judge Jone, who even though he was a Bush appointee and a conservative Christian, ruled on the facts and the law. Creationists felt betrayed by his ruling - not just disappointed but betrayed.

No, I'm not anticipating partisan bias on the part of the judge. I'm anticipating the orange hobgoblin to shit his pants.

But I think the bigger soiled pants moment for President Buttercup will be when he finds out that his new legal team is the same one that wrote the letter to Rosenstein last year urging him to assign a special counsel to investigate Russian meddling.

People cheer for uniforms with R or D, or maybe L or C, but never policy. That much is fact. Something about Dr Seuss and Sneetches.

Most people are wired to be partisan. Unfortunately, that causes people to then cheer for policies that are against their best interests and to not be able to hold both sides with a similar level of accountability.

Of course, the Republicans make it a bit harder to judge evenly after all of the shit they have pulled, from pink slip Justice vetoes to the hijacking of the SCOTUS seat to abusing investigative powers with President Clinton and Secretary Clinton. The Dems are not saints, but the Red team... oh gosh.

 

[Angry Floof]

Is this glee I see in the discovery that this judge was a Watergate prosecutor? If so, it makes me wonder if people anticipate partisan bias on the part of the judge.

Or maybe he will be like the judge in Kitzmiller vs. Dover, Judge Jone, who even though he was a Bush appointee and a conservative Christian, ruled on the facts and the law. Creationists felt betrayed by his ruling - not just disappointed but betrayed.

No, I'm not anticipating partisan bias on the part of the judge. I'm anticipating the orange hobgoblin to shit his pants.

But I think the bigger soiled pants moment for President Buttercup will be when he finds out that his new legal team is the same one that wrote the letter to Rosenstein last year urging him to assign a special counsel to investigate Russian meddling.

People cheer for uniforms with R or D, or maybe L or C, but never policy. That much is fact. Something about Dr Seuss and Sneetches.

I have no doubt Trump's new legal team and the assigned judge will do their honest, objective duty. At least, I hope so. That Trump does get fair treatment under the law is how we know our justice system is worth fighting for.

Anyone thinking I'm just cheering for a side has seriously misconstrued my post. What I'm cheering for is Trump's pants-shitting marathon when he learns that his new team is the one that urged Rosenstein to investigate and that the judge assigned to the suit is a former Watergate prosecutor.