Assuming the case survives a motion to dismiss for failure to state a valid legal claim, the DNC has just opened itself up to civil discovery by the defendants, who can now compel the production of documents and other physical things, and take the depositions of DNC officials, employees, associates, candidates, operatives, and others.
Their notice states, "One purpose of this letter is to advise the DNC we intend to test the basic underlying claims that 'Russians' hacked, stole, and disseminated DNC data, rather than the various other plausible scenarios, including internal theft."
On June 15, 2016, CrowdStrike, a private computer security company the DNC hired, announced it had detected Russian malware on the DNC's computer server.
Why did Comey and the FBI agree to such an impotent, absurd, and self-defeating arrangement? Did the DNC, Hillary Clinton, or others collude with the Obama administration to prohibit such an examination? This would appear to be a fertile area for discovery by defense counsel.
Defense counsel should also investigate whether the DNC files were stolen by someone who had direct physical access to the DNC server.
Plus, since the FBI used the dossier to obtain a warrant to spy on the Trump campaign and possibly administration, the role of the DNC, Clinton, Comey, and others in that undertaking would also be relevant to discrediting the collusion theory that underlies the DNC's complaint.
By filing its ill-conceived lawsuit, the DNC has laid itself bare to a painful and potentially disastrous discovery process that stands a better than even chance of exposing the Russia-hacking and collusion stories as carefully orchestrated falsehoods by Clinton and the DNC. The great irony here is that the president and some of the other defendants have been calling for a special counsel investigation.
http://thefederalist.com/2018/04/26/trump-conspiracy-lawsuit-democrats-sicced-equivalent-special-counsel/
Their notice states, "One purpose of this letter is to advise the DNC we intend to test the basic underlying claims that 'Russians' hacked, stole, and disseminated DNC data, rather than the various other plausible scenarios, including internal theft."
On June 15, 2016, CrowdStrike, a private computer security company the DNC hired, announced it had detected Russian malware on the DNC's computer server.
Why did Comey and the FBI agree to such an impotent, absurd, and self-defeating arrangement? Did the DNC, Hillary Clinton, or others collude with the Obama administration to prohibit such an examination? This would appear to be a fertile area for discovery by defense counsel.
Defense counsel should also investigate whether the DNC files were stolen by someone who had direct physical access to the DNC server.
Plus, since the FBI used the dossier to obtain a warrant to spy on the Trump campaign and possibly administration, the role of the DNC, Clinton, Comey, and others in that undertaking would also be relevant to discrediting the collusion theory that underlies the DNC's complaint.
By filing its ill-conceived lawsuit, the DNC has laid itself bare to a painful and potentially disastrous discovery process that stands a better than even chance of exposing the Russia-hacking and collusion stories as carefully orchestrated falsehoods by Clinton and the DNC. The great irony here is that the president and some of the other defendants have been calling for a special counsel investigation.
http://thefederalist.com/2018/04/26/trump-conspiracy-lawsuit-democrats-sicced-equivalent-special-counsel/
No comments:
Post a Comment