Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
RavenHawk

Democratic Party files lawsuit

137 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

RavenHawk

The non=crime of collusion, which there was none is not going anywhere, yet the longer the investigation goes on, the deeper the Progressive involvement becomes evident.  Now enters the DNC to distract from the crap they are in:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/democratic-party-files-lawsuit-alleging-russia-the-trump-campaign-and-wikileaks-conspired-to-disrupt-the-2016-campaign/2018/04/20/befe8364-4418-11e8-8569-26fda6b404c7_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.f026c984902b

A few words come to mind.  Imminent ruage and self inflicted.  They are going to directly take on Trump and will lose.  Trump's instincts are great.  Now I understand why he has been lawyering up.  It wasn't to defend himself against wrong doing.  It is to take the fight to the Progressives.  This is Trump's element and the Progressives are amateurs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
4 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

The non=crime of collusion, which there was none is not going anywhere, yet the longer the investigation goes on, the deeper the Progressive involvement becomes evident.  Now enters the DNC to distract from the crap they are in:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/democratic-party-files-lawsuit-alleging-russia-the-trump-campaign-and-wikileaks-conspired-to-disrupt-the-2016-campaign/2018/04/20/befe8364-4418-11e8-8569-26fda6b404c7_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.f026c984902b

A few words come to mind.  Imminent ruage and self inflicted.  They are going to directly take on Trump and will lose.  Trump's instincts are great.  Now I understand why he has been lawyering up.  It wasn't to defend himself against wrong doing.  It is to take the fight to the Progressives.  This is Trump's element and the Progressives are amateurs.

Good Stuff. 

I'm curious if this is because they know something the general public doesn't or if they're just taking a que from the Nunes playbook of making something sound official and legal to create an impression for the general public. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ExpandMyMind
Quote

The Democratic National Committee filed a multimillion-dollar lawsuit Friday against the Russian government, the Trump campaign and the WikiLeaks organizationalleging a far-reaching conspiracy to disrupt the 2016 campaign and tilt the election to Donald Trump.

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.

Link.

Also from the article:

Quote
The lawsuit echoes a similar legal tactic that the Democratic Party used during the Watergate scandal. In 1972, the DNC filed suit against then-President Richard Nixon’s reelection committee seeking $1 million in damages for the break-in at Democratic headquarters in the Watergate building.

The suit was denounced at the time by Nixon’s attorney general, John Mitchell, who called it a case of “sheer demagoguery” by the DNC. But the civil action brought by the DNC’s then-chairman, Lawrence F. O’Brien, was ultimately successful, yielding a $750,000 settlement from the Nixon campaign that was reached on the day in 1974 that Nixon left office.

When you think about it, this is pretty much an electronic Watergate. It has the same motives and the same crimes, only in digital format.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ExpandMyMind

More "demagoguery", no doubt :lol:

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
acidhead

Just curious.... Is this the same DNC that rigged the primaries to ensure a Hillary Clinton win over Bernie Sanders???

Lol

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ExpandMyMind

They lay it out pretty well. DNC is hacked, four days later Papadopoulos is offered the emails, Trump Jr meets with Russian government officials (after which Sr starts with all the email Russia talk at rallies)...

You have to be blind to ignore what we already know.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ExpandMyMind

Another point worth noting: say Mueller charges these same people with similar crimes, but Trump pardons them. Well, accepting a pardon is an admission of guilt. This means that in the Dem's civil lawsuit they could not claim innocence, and would likely end up down millions.

  • Like 4
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.ZZ.

Why wouldn't the DNC agree to let the FBI examine the servers?

 
 
 
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ExpandMyMind
4 minutes ago, .ZZ. said:

Why wouldn't the DNC agree to let the FBI examine the servers?

 
 
 

Maybe Seth Rich is hiding inside them.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, .ZZ. said:

Why wouldn't the DNC agree to let the FBI examine the servers?

 Ah life in the post factual age :

Quote

"The DNC had several meetings with representatives of the FBI's Cyber Division and its Washington Field Office, the Department of Justice's National Security Division, and US Attorney's Offices, and it responded to a variety of requests for cooperation, but the FBI never requested access to the DNC's computer servers," Eric Walker, the DNC's deputy communications director, told BuzzFeed News.

Not even saying I believe it ........... LMAO do any of us have a grasp on whats true and what isn't anymore? 

Edited by Farmer77
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dark_Grey
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, .ZZ. said:

Why wouldn't the DNC agree to let the FBI examine the servers?

Why did Obama lie about the servers when he was well aware of their existence? There are too many coverups to count on both sides. 

9 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

 Ah life in the post factual age :

Not even saying I believe it ........... LMAO do any of us have a grasp on whats true and what isn't anymore? 

The takeaway for us commoners is that the Gov is corrupt from the top to the bottom. All that's changed is we now have the pleasure of watching each side try and expose the other before they themselves are exposed. 

Edited by Dark_Grey
Pre-coffee grammar
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.ZZ.
5 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

 Ah life in the post factual age :

Not even saying I believe it ........... LMAO do any of us have a grasp on whats true and what isn't anymore? 

Quote

The FBI has spent months trying to persuade people that Russia was behind the DNC hack, but we're now learning that it didn't get much help from the DNC itself. The Bureau tells Buzzfeed News that the Democrats' organization reportedly "rebuffed" multiple requests for physical access to the hacked servers, forcing investigators to depend on the findings of the third-party security firm CrowdStrike (which the DNC contacted after the hack). The FBI would have tackled the breach earlier if the DNC hadn't "inhibited" the investigation, according to its statement.

Continuing the quote:

Quote

The claims directly contradict earlier claims from the DNC, which maintained that the FBI had never asked for access. The DNC says it handed over CrowdStrike info "without any limits," but that's not very reassuring when the committee wouldn't let FBI agents skip the middleman. It doesn't look good, even if there were innocuous reasons.

I'm wasting my time but Source

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aquila King
5 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

LMAO do any of us truly have a grasp on whats true and what isn't anymore? 

So long as you attach a political ideology to the concept of 2+2=4, then even something as basic as that can become partisan.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
1 minute ago, .ZZ. said:

I'm wasting my time but Source

Not wasting your time at all, I'm no fan of the dems.

Your question made me do some googling for the answer and I thought it was rather comical that even a basic set of facts like whether the FBI requested data is debatable in the 21st century. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
4 minutes ago, Aquila King said:

So long as you attach a political ideology to the concept of 2+2=4, then even something as basic as that can become partisan.

Its insane isn't it? At this point I'm pretty sure that 95% of the partisans are only arguing because they don't want the partisans on the other side to experience joy. It has next to nothing to do with the actual issues. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aquila King
1 minute ago, Farmer77 said:

Its insane isn't it? At this point I'm pretty sure that 95% of the partisans are only arguing because they don't want the partisans on the other side to experience joy. It has next to nothing to do with the actual issues. 

There's a certain degree of sadism in simply wanting 'the other side' to suffer and lose.

People are welcome to disagree with me politically, but I hope they know that whether they agree with me or not, my political views are shaped by what I personally find to be best for the general well-being of everyone, including my political opponents. I wish them no ill will.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OverSword

I may have typed this about the republicans a few years ago but......The democratic party is finished. 

  • Like 5
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RAyMO
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, OverSword said:

I may have typed this about the republicans a few years ago but......The democratic party is finished. 

The sooner we get rid of parties, not just in the states, and replace them with elected representatives, the better.

Edited by RAyMO
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
24 minutes ago, Aquila King said:

Say what you want about me and my views, but my intentions are pure. Can you honestly say the same?

This has nothing to do with intention.  It’s about recognizing Bull-****.  This lawsuit signals a retreat by the Progressives and all the idiots that have been fallowing the party line are trying to cover their butts with conciliatory sounding language because they are going to try to avoid the backlash that is coming.  The Progressives have had their fun and joy and by their own hand they will pay for it.  And it’ll all be based on the issues.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aquila King
1 minute ago, RavenHawk said:

This has nothing to do with intention.  It’s about recognizing Bull-****.  This lawsuit signals a retreat by the Progressives and all the idiots that have been fallowing the party line are trying to cover their butts with conciliatory sounding language because they are going to try to avoid the backlash that is coming.  The Progressives have had their fun and joy and by their own hand they will pay for it.  And it’ll all be based on the issues.

I find it hilarious that you think the DNC is 'progressive'. :lol: They're a center-right organization at best.

The democratic party is about as strong against the Trump administration as a wet napkin. I wouldn't worry about them if I were you.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
1 minute ago, Aquila King said:

I find it hilarious that you think the DNC is 'progressive'. :lol: They're a center-right organization at best.

I'm continually blown away by this basic lack of understanding. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aquila King
7 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

I'm continually blown away by this basic lack of understanding. 

I just read about 30 mins or so ago how 78 democrats voted to weaken Wall Street regulations, and 92% didn't oppose Trump's Syria bombing. Yet republicans want to call democrats 'progressive'. :rolleyes: Just because someone is to the left of you does not make them 'progressive'.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paranormal Panther
5 hours ago, acidhead said:

Just curious.... Is this the same DNC that rigged the primaries to ensure a Hillary Clinton win over Bernie Sanders???

Lol

It's the same one with individuals who are or were defenders or supporters of Farrakhan. Obama took a photograph with him. Ellison, second-in-command of the DNC, was a fan of the NOI. The BCC visited the anti-White demagogue just recently.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Wearer of Hats

I would NOT want to be a juror or judge on this one. Whichever side loses will tar and feather you, you’ll have plenty every one of your secrets exposed, your past raked over for muck, your name tarnished by slander and innuendo and worst case you’ll have a mystery “heart attack”.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hankenhunter
1 hour ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

I would NOT want to be a juror or judge on this one. Whichever side loses will tar and feather you, you’ll have plenty every one of your secrets exposed, your past raked over for muck, your name tarnished by slander and innuendo and worst case you’ll have a mystery “heart attack”.

Can you imagine what the discovery will be like? This could possibly damage the GOP beyond repair. At the very least it will open the field for other younger idealistic parties to show their stuff after Republican skeletons are dragged kicking and screaming into the light. I predict this lawsuit will cause more damage than Mueller, or the NYDA. The best part? Trump and company won't be able to do diddly about it. It's about time.

Hank

  • Like 3
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.