WWTBAM Bored

A home for the weary.
It is currently Mon Jul 23, 2018 1:33 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 11:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:52 pm
Posts: 3952
Location: Merion, Pa.
Democrats Sue Russia, WikiLeaks And Trump Campaign Over Election 'Conspiracy'

I expected the New York State Attorney General to go after the Trump campaign, after Mueller's agents dug up all the evidence. Instead the Democratic National Committee is suing everyone they can think of now. Though Trump is known for paying to make lawsuits go away, there's no way the DNC will accept a confidential settlement. It's also unlikely they can win in court. Maybe they hope discovery will uncover something politically embarrassing.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 11:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:07 pm
Posts: 3798
Location: Olympia, Washington
jarnon wrote:
Democrats Sue Russia, WikiLeaks And Trump Campaign Over Election 'Conspiracy'

I expected the New York State Attorney General to go after the Trump campaign, after Mueller's agents dug up all the evidence. Instead the Democratic National Committee is suing everyone they can think of now. Though Trump is known for paying to make lawsuits go away, there's no way the DNC will accept a confidential settlement. It's also unlikely they can win in court. Maybe they hope discovery will uncover something politically embarrassing.


They need to sue themselves. bob-tel can do it.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:36 pm 
Offline
Bored Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Posts: 16845
Location: By the phone
jarnon wrote:
Democrats Sue Russia, WikiLeaks And Trump Campaign Over Election 'Conspiracy'

I expected the New York State Attorney General to go after the Trump campaign, after Mueller's agents dug up all the evidence. Instead the Democratic National Committee is suing everyone they can think of now. Though Trump is known for paying to make lawsuits go away, there's no way the DNC will accept a confidential settlement. It's also unlikely they can win in court. Maybe they hope discovery will uncover something politically embarrassing.
What makes you think it's unlikely they can win in court? The facts as they're coming out certainly support an inference that there was a conspiracy to violate the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. --Bob

_________________
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 2:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:21 pm
Posts: 14924
Bob78164 wrote:
jarnon wrote:
Democrats Sue Russia, WikiLeaks And Trump Campaign Over Election 'Conspiracy'

I expected the New York State Attorney General to go after the Trump campaign, after Mueller's agents dug up all the evidence. Instead the Democratic National Committee is suing everyone they can think of now. Though Trump is known for paying to make lawsuits go away, there's no way the DNC will accept a confidential settlement. It's also unlikely they can win in court. Maybe they hope discovery will uncover something politically embarrassing.
What makes you think it's unlikely they can win in court? The facts as they're coming out certainly support an inference that there was a conspiracy to violate the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. --Bob


Whether they can "win" or not seems beside the point. Other than possibly getting some default judgments against judgment-proof defendants, this seems to be the sort of lawsuit that's going to drag through the courts on procedural points until well after Trump leaves office. As a practical matter, this will feed into the standard Republican narrative that the Democrats just can't get over the fact they lost the election.

What we should be focusing our efforts on is the 2018 elections. I'm interested in seeing just how this Arizona election next week plays out, but practically every development on the electoral front has been positive for the Democrats. Amazing as it sounds, Republicans may be on the verge of nominating some Roy Moore/Todd Akin like candidates in Arizona (and possibly a second Arizona race if John McCain retires), Mississippi, and West Virginia, and the governor of Missouri may drag down other candidates there as well. The Democrats don't need distractions like this lawsuit at this time.

_________________
Check out our website: http://www.silverscreenvideos.com


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 3:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:58 am
Posts: 21523
Location: Oro Valley, Arizona
silverscreenselect wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
jarnon wrote:
Democrats Sue Russia, WikiLeaks And Trump Campaign Over Election 'Conspiracy'

I expected the New York State Attorney General to go after the Trump campaign, after Mueller's agents dug up all the evidence. Instead the Democratic National Committee is suing everyone they can think of now. Though Trump is known for paying to make lawsuits go away, there's no way the DNC will accept a confidential settlement. It's also unlikely they can win in court. Maybe they hope discovery will uncover something politically embarrassing.
What makes you think it's unlikely they can win in court? The facts as they're coming out certainly support an inference that there was a conspiracy to violate the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. --Bob


Whether they can "win" or not seems beside the point. Other than possibly getting some default judgments against judgment-proof defendants, this seems to be the sort of lawsuit that's going to drag through the courts on procedural points until well after Trump leaves office. As a practical matter, this will feed into the standard Republican narrative that the Democrats just can't get over the fact they lost the election.

What we should be focusing our efforts on is the 2018 elections. I'm interested in seeing just how this Arizona election next week plays out, but practically every development on the electoral front has been positive for the Democrats. Amazing as it sounds, Republicans may be on the verge of nominating some Roy Moore/Todd Akin like candidates in Arizona (and possibly a second Arizona race if John McCain retires), Mississippi, and West Virginia, and the governor of Missouri may drag down other candidates there as well. The Democrats don't need distractions like this lawsuit at this time.

Felon Joe Arpaio is running for Senate but may not survive the primary.

_________________
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
- Douglas Adams (1952 - 2001)

Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere.

Teach a child to be polite and courteous in the home and, when he grows up, he'll never be able to drive in New Jersey.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 3:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:52 pm
Posts: 3952
Location: Merion, Pa.
Bob Juch wrote:
Felon Joe Arpaio is running for Senate but may not survive the primary.
But he was pardoned! Now he’ll sue BJ for defamation.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 4:02 pm 
Offline
Bored Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Posts: 16845
Location: By the phone
silverscreenselect wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
jarnon wrote:
Democrats Sue Russia, WikiLeaks And Trump Campaign Over Election 'Conspiracy'

I expected the New York State Attorney General to go after the Trump campaign, after Mueller's agents dug up all the evidence. Instead the Democratic National Committee is suing everyone they can think of now. Though Trump is known for paying to make lawsuits go away, there's no way the DNC will accept a confidential settlement. It's also unlikely they can win in court. Maybe they hope discovery will uncover something politically embarrassing.
What makes you think it's unlikely they can win in court? The facts as they're coming out certainly support an inference that there was a conspiracy to violate the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. --Bob


Whether they can "win" or not seems beside the point. Other than possibly getting some default judgments against judgment-proof defendants, this seems to be the sort of lawsuit that's going to drag through the courts on procedural points until well after Trump leaves office. As a practical matter, this will feed into the standard Republican narrative that the Democrats just can't get over the fact they lost the election.
They're suing the RNC and Donny's campaign as well as the Russians. I'm sure the RNC has assets.

This parallels the civil suit they filed after Watergate. It's a positive development because discovery will commence sooner rather than later, and their discovery requests won't be readily subject to obstruction or procedural games. --Bob

_________________
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 4:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:58 am
Posts: 21523
Location: Oro Valley, Arizona
jarnon wrote:
Bob Juch wrote:
Felon Joe Arpaio is running for Senate but may not survive the primary.
But he was pardoned! Now he’ll sue BJ for defamation.

Part of the process of being pardoned is admitting, in writing, that you committed the crime.

_________________
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
- Douglas Adams (1952 - 2001)

Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere.

Teach a child to be polite and courteous in the home and, when he grows up, he'll never be able to drive in New Jersey.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 6:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:07 pm
Posts: 3798
Location: Olympia, Washington
The repubs are saying this could be a very dumb move by the dems. They could now get their hands on stuff the dems have been hiding for years. Just reporting what I'm hearing. I have no opinion on it at this time.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 6:19 pm 
Offline
Bored Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Posts: 16845
Location: By the phone
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
The repubs are saying this could be a very dumb move by the dems. They could now get their hands on stuff the dems have been hiding for years. Just reporting what I'm hearing. I have no opinion on it at this time.
It doesn't seem likely. I'm sure they'll ask for it in discovery. But I have a hard time imagining what their relevance argument will be.

And even if they get information of that nature, there's very little doubt in my mind that most or all of it will be subject to an attorneys-eyes-only protective order, and the ground that defendants can't be trusted not to use the information in future elections if they get it. --Bob

_________________
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 8:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:21 pm
Posts: 14924
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
They could now get their hands on stuff the dems have been hiding for years.


So we're finally going to learn where Jimmy Hoffa is buried.

_________________
Check out our website: http://www.silverscreenvideos.com


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 21, 2018 1:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:07 pm
Posts: 3798
Location: Olympia, Washington
Bob78164 wrote:
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
The repubs are saying this could be a very dumb move by the dems. They could now get their hands on stuff the dems have been hiding for years. Just reporting what I'm hearing. I have no opinion on it at this time.
It doesn't seem likely. I'm sure they'll ask for it in discovery. But I have a hard time imagining what their relevance argument will be.

And even if they get information of that nature, there's very little doubt in my mind that most or all of it will be subject to an attorneys-eyes-only protective order, and the ground that defendants can't be trusted not to use the information in future elections if they get it. --Bob

And all this time I was so sure the democrats were pure as the driven snow.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 21, 2018 5:14 am 
Offline
Evil Genius
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 1:16 am
Posts: 8972
Location: Garden Grove, CA
Bob Juch wrote:
jarnon wrote:
Bob Juch wrote:
Felon Joe Arpaio is running for Senate but may not survive the primary.
But he was pardoned! Now he’ll sue BJ for defamation.
Part of the process of being pardoned is admitting, in writing, that you committed the crime.
Not according to the government.

_________________
A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five.
Groucho Marx


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 21, 2018 10:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:58 am
Posts: 21523
Location: Oro Valley, Arizona
Estonut wrote:
Bob Juch wrote:
jarnon wrote:
But he was pardoned! Now he’ll sue BJ for defamation.
Part of the process of being pardoned is admitting, in writing, that you committed the crime.
Not according to the government.

DoJ wrote:
A pardon is an expression of the President’s forgiveness and ordinarily is granted in recognition of the applicant’s acceptance of responsibility for the crime and established good conduct for a significant period of time after conviction or completion of sentence. It does not signify innocence. It does, however, remove civil disabilities – e.g., restrictions on the right to vote, hold state or local office, or sit on a jury – imposed because of the conviction for which pardon is sought, and should lessen the stigma arising from the conviction. It may also be helpful in obtaining licenses, bonding, or employment. Under some – but not all – circumstances, a pardon will eliminate the legal basis for removal or deportation from the United States. Pursuant to the Rules Governing Petitions for Executive Clemency, which are available on this website, a person is not eligible to apply for a presidential pardon until a minimum of five years has elapsed since his release from any form of confinement imposed upon him as part of a sentence for his most recent criminal conviction, whether or not that is the conviction for which he is seeking the pardon.

_________________
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
- Douglas Adams (1952 - 2001)

Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere.

Teach a child to be polite and courteous in the home and, when he grows up, he'll never be able to drive in New Jersey.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 21, 2018 5:05 pm 
Offline
Evil Genius
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 1:16 am
Posts: 8972
Location: Garden Grove, CA
Bob Juch wrote:
Estonut wrote:
Bob Juch wrote:
Part of the process of being pardoned is admitting, in writing, that you committed the crime.
Not according to the government.

DoJ wrote:
A pardon is an expression of the President’s forgiveness and ordinarily is granted in recognition of the applicant’s acceptance of responsibility for the crime and established good conduct for a significant period of time after conviction or completion of sentence. It does not signify innocence. It does, however, remove civil disabilities – e.g., restrictions on the right to vote, hold state or local office, or sit on a jury – imposed because of the conviction for which pardon is sought, and should lessen the stigma arising from the conviction. It may also be helpful in obtaining licenses, bonding, or employment. Under some – but not all – circumstances, a pardon will eliminate the legal basis for removal or deportation from the United States. Pursuant to the Rules Governing Petitions for Executive Clemency, which are available on this website, a person is not eligible to apply for a presidential pardon until a minimum of five years has elapsed since his release from any form of confinement imposed upon him as part of a sentence for his most recent criminal conviction, whether or not that is the conviction for which he is seeking the pardon.

Yes, I looked that up before responding.
DoJ NEVER wrote:
Part of the process of being pardoned is admitting, in writing, that you committed the crime.

_________________
A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five.
Groucho Marx


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 21, 2018 6:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:58 am
Posts: 21523
Location: Oro Valley, Arizona
Estonut wrote:
Bob Juch wrote:
Estonut wrote:
Not according to the government.

DoJ wrote:
A pardon is an expression of the President’s forgiveness and ordinarily is granted in recognition of the applicant’s acceptance of responsibility for the crime and established good conduct for a significant period of time after conviction or completion of sentence. It does not signify innocence. It does, however, remove civil disabilities – e.g., restrictions on the right to vote, hold state or local office, or sit on a jury – imposed because of the conviction for which pardon is sought, and should lessen the stigma arising from the conviction. It may also be helpful in obtaining licenses, bonding, or employment. Under some – but not all – circumstances, a pardon will eliminate the legal basis for removal or deportation from the United States. Pursuant to the Rules Governing Petitions for Executive Clemency, which are available on this website, a person is not eligible to apply for a presidential pardon until a minimum of five years has elapsed since his release from any form of confinement imposed upon him as part of a sentence for his most recent criminal conviction, whether or not that is the conviction for which he is seeking the pardon.

Yes, I looked that up before responding.
DoJ NEVER wrote:
Part of the process of being pardoned is admitting, in writing, that you committed the crime.

No, I did, based on the application form.

_________________
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
- Douglas Adams (1952 - 2001)

Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere.

Teach a child to be polite and courteous in the home and, when he grows up, he'll never be able to drive in New Jersey.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Americanized by Maël Soucaze.