The DNC Sues Russia, The Trump Campaign and WikiLeaks

If you prefer it, OK. You are dumb. In the spirit of, "you are dumb," I hope you enjoy just how stupid you will be looking when your hero and the house of cards he has constructed, with the help of his good buddy, Vladimir, comes tumbling down.

As for your "word count" comment, I have to laugh. I write what I feel like writing. I'm not writing for your pleasure, but rather for my own. If I didn't enjoy this place, I wouldn't be here. Keep ignoring the facts. It suits you.

For the sane people out there, I disagree with most of you over the lawsuit. I think it was something they needed to do, something they had to do. We can't agree about everything, folks, or it would be an awfully dull world.

 

I don't disagree materially, but this counter-argument which is often trotted out drives me crazy. We saw a big political pivot in 2016 that this argument fails to notice. A Trump Republican of 2018 is not a Bush Republican circa 2004. Mueller is a traditional Republican, not a alt-right populist numbnut. Trump is taking over that party and many formerly traditional Republicans choose to bow before him, but there are a minority of them (those willing to forsake their offices, apparently) who don't want to surrender the party to Trump's vision. So it is entirely credible that Republican Mueller, Republican Comey, Republican Rosenstein, Republican McCain, etc, would all look to undermine Trump for political advantage -- to take their party back.

 

This is a "face palm"moment to quote Dobro. OMG what is next Hillary or the DNC sue Trump personally for defamation or slander?
This reminds me so much of Trump with the daily stupid tweet just to dominate each days "new" cycle.

I guess Rachel Maddow has her material for the next week. It is hard to imagine I used to like her show.

 

I didn't vote for Trump (voted Johnson). Hes not 'my hero'. I also can't believe anyone would think Trump is in collusion with Russia. Hes attacked Syria twice, opened up the entire country for drilling, and put new sanctions on Russia. These are probably the top 3 things Russia would not want the US to do. This must all be some plot by Trump/Putin for some bigger end game right? If Putin had proof Trump was working with him, he would of shown it months ago. Your Russian collusion story is on par with 9/11 truthers or birthers.

 

^the tl;dr version is "Russia good!111!!!"

 

I can't wait until the midterms where I get to choose between the party that blames Russians for the country's problems or the party that blames Mexicans for them.

 

There is only one difference between Bush and Trump politically. Bush welcomed Hispanics. For that Bush should be commended, it's really his only plus as a Republican leader.

They are both trickle down economic war hawks.

You talk about taking the party back. Trump won by throwing red meat at the base. He knows the party

 

I don't know if Trump colluded or not. But his attacks on Syria were at most minor inconveniences to Russia considering he went out of his way to notify them ahead of time, not strike command centers, and make sure there was no damage done to anything belonging to Russia. The sanctions he canceled, withdrew from and didn't do far outweigh anything he actually did. They are far from demonstrating a willingness to confront Russia for their misdeeds.

 

Except that the idea that it's Republicans is brought up because Trump and his allies have put out the idea that it is a conspiracy by Democrats specifically and that is why there is a bias. They aren't arguing that old school Republicans are leading the bias against Trump.

The defense which points out the conservativeness and Republicanness of the investigators only exists because it has specifically charged that it is a Democrat bias against Trump.

 

You're right that Trump wrongly and illogically and a little ridiculously conflates his intraparty opponents with his interparty opponents. Which is probably smart messaging on Trump's part. Explaining the nuances of the schism in the Republican party is too complicated. Keep it simple. But just because Trump engages in rhetorical sleight of hand doesn't mean I'm going to do it, or give it a pass when other people do it.

 

It drives you crazy because it's okay for Trump and his network to point the finger at democrats/liberals as the investigating boogeymen, but not okay for liberals to point out that old school conservatives (meaning from, like, ten years ago) are actually doing more of the investigating. Okay.

I do get your point, and you're correct on the schism, but what's worth being driven crazy over is that millions of people are trying to carry water for Trump and obfuscate an important investigation. Even some of our well meaning conservatives around here dismiss the whole topic of Russian election meddling as a concoction of the deep state, as if all the evidence (and indictments and plea agreements) are some sort of dramatic, scripted, WWE production.

That's what drives me crazy, because it's so harmful to our ongoing and future dialogue. Just like some far left liberals drive me crazy because they are iron-coating their own bubbles to be impenetrable to reasoned discussion from any other type of mindset.

 

Absolutely true.

As to the topic, the DNC suit...this strikes me as purely political (as most things in politics are). The question then is whether it will be effective. I am skeptical. While it will certainly appeal to the DNC base, they are the base, they were going to vote Democrat anyway. Maybe it will open up the coffers some more. Likewise, it won't have any effect on the Republican base. For those in the middle, I can see the suit making fair game a whole slew of things the Republicans can bring up and make a part of the arguments, things which won't paint a good picture for the DNC. So, I could see this being a wash for the middle, or actually leaning more against, as it gives Republicans a legal venue in which to point out a variety of issues on the Democratic side.

Given this, I'm thinking it is more money related. Gives the DNC a chance to go after its donors: Look, we're suing them all! Please help with your donation!

 

Thanks for the reply, which is more of a reply than I typically get. I could give you chapter and verse about how wrong you are, but it's tiresome to repeat the same things over and over again, when the responses almost invariably read like they are coming from a rock with the density of uranium. Anyway, I won't make a habit of calling you stupid. I will continue my habit of disagreeing with you, though, since you continue to defend the fellow you claim not to have voted for. A fellow seemingly intent on destroying the country most of the rest of us love so much. Who knows? Perhaps someday you'll wake up.

 

bad news for lovers of liberty.

Democrats’ Lawsuit Alleging Trump-Russia Conspiracy Is Dismissed

By Sharon LaFraniere
July 30, 2019

WASHINGTON — A federal judge in Manhattan on Monday dismissed a lawsuit by the Democratic National Committee that had accused President Trump’s 2016 campaign, WikiLeaks and Russia of illegally conspiring to damage Hillary Clinton’s presidential run.

The Russian government was clearly “the primary wrongdoer” for hacking into Democratic computers and funneling purloined documents to WikiLeaks to disseminate, found Judge John G. Koeltl of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. But as a foreign sovereign, he wrote, Russia was immune from any liability.

Judge Koeltl ruled that the First Amendment protected the actions of WikiLeaks in publishing the documents. The same protections covered Trump campaign officials, who did not release any stolen documents but were eager to benefit from their publication, he found.

“There is a significant legal distinction between stealing documents and disclosing documents that someone else had stolen previously,” Judge Koeltl wrote. Like a news outlet, he said, WikiLeaks could not be held liable for releasing the documents so long as it did not “participate in any wrongdoing in obtaining the materials in the first place.”

The judge’s ruling came several months after the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, concluded his investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election. The inquiry did not find evidence to establish a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia’s effort to influence the election results.

Judge Koeltl said that the national committee’s accusations were “totally divorced” from the facts asserted in the organization’s own complaint — wording that Mr. Trump seized on in a Twitter post on Tuesday night. Nonetheless, the judge refused the Trump campaign’s request to penalize the national committee for filing the lawsuit last year. He said the complaint was not “so objectively unreasonable” that the plaintiffs should be disciplined for it.

A version of this article appears in print on July 31, 2019, Section A, Page 25 of the New York edition with the headline: D.N.C. Lawsuit About Election Is Dismissed.
​

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/30/us/politics/dnc-trump-russia-lawsuit-dismissed.html