What torts do the contracting out of services to Steele by Fusion GPS and having Fusion GPS draft an opposition research brief that was not intended for public dissemination (standard in many high profile or national campaigns) involve?
He/she determines that the DNC doesn’t have standing to sue. (Which, likely, would be part of the defendants’ argument anyway, so…like USCDiver said too.)
Well. they can hardly claim to be an aggrieved party simply because their property was stolen and used against their interests.
People of my age - and thus a lot of Trump voters - grew up with Russia as the enemy. Proof through this suit that Trump worked hand in hand with our enemies would still have a powerful impact.
Trump as a scammer has no impact. I’m not sure Trump as a mobster would. But Trump as a traitor. I think it will have a lot more impact than you think.
Wouldn’t the DNC have some choice as to where to file?
Some, dependent on where the defendants’ acts occurred. But then they can also ask for a change of venue.
Perceptions of Russia have changed, though. Americans may have a low opinion of Putin’s Russia but they don’t tend to regard Putin’s Russia as a threat to us directly. I’d say that they view China as a greater threat, and in any case, neither China nor Russia are on the same level as North Korea, Iran, or radical Islam in terms of being considered a global menace.
I think it could have that kind of impact, but I think the average American would need to perceive Russia as a life/death threat. Now if Russia begins behaving badly, invading NATO countries and threatening most of Europe, then perceptions could change rather quickly, particularly if economic markets have adverse reactions to such bellicosity.
But until Trump does real damage that the average American can taste, I don’t see any of these legal investigations moving the needle much, except in terms of making him more anxious and making life for those working for him a living hell. Now as I’ve said before, in that sense, his mounting legal problems are most likely having a very real impact that isn’t seen now but will be in time. When you’re left with people like John Bolton at your side as one of your advisers…sheesh!
Would all of the defendants have to move to dismiss. Or would such a motion from, say, trump’s attorneys also cover Russia and Wikileaks?
I heard an interesting analysis on this, compared to the DNCs lawsuit after the Watergate break in. I’m not enough of a lawyer to know how well this still holds up, but it has an interesting ring to it.
The case isn’t really about trying to win. It’s a way to keep the story in front of the public, in case the Mueller investigation gets shut down. If needed, amendments can be made to the case, to add information, available for the press and public to read, and to keep the news fresh.
An interesting tidbit. The judge assigned to litigate the case, Judge John G. Koeltl, worked in the Watergate office of special prosecutor, at the beginning of his career. I wonder if he’s feeling déjà vu?
One defendant would have to be enough, because crazy people often file lawsuits with ludicrous defendants added. You’re not going to be able to get the Holy Roman Emperor, the Dalai Lama, Queen Elizabeth, the Pope, and God to all agree on a motion to dismiss.
Yeah, but a joint motion to dismiss by Trump’s legal beagles and a Russian Consul Counsel would be priceless.
So, what you’re saying is: It’s the economy, stupid? 
All kidding aside, I agree. As Bill Maher’s quite liberal panel was saying last week: The Democrats need to look forward, not backward. Net-net, I see this as a negative. Luckily, though, this isn’t going anywhere and so it’ll be a minor, negative blip on the radar.
The DNC is going to regret this lawsuit. Why won’t the DNC allow the FBI to examine the hacked servers? As it is, the Mueller investigation is only in the direction of Trump. This lawsuit is going shine a light on the cockroaches of the DNC and it won’t be pretty.
“The DNC lawsuit opens the door of discovery. My lawyers and I want to examine the DNC servers to settle this bogus claim of Russian hacking once and for all,” Stone declared.
Does the FBI have a warrant for the servers?
Because when a server is hacked, the machines aren’t generally surrendered and examined. The DNC gave the FBI mirrors of their drives- why would they also give up the hardware?
It’s funny how the Right keeps trying to imply that the DNC not wanting to have to get all new equipment when their servers were hacked means that the DNC is somehow complicit in the hacking of those servers.
We know the FBI is partisan. So let’s have a third party examine the servers and everything on it. Everything. I’m pretty sure they’ll find emails that embarrass Obama and ones that will bring perjury changes to top level Democrats. I can hear the hammers breaking up those servers now. Obstruction of justice anyone? And to think that genius Perez brought it upon himself.
Isn’t it kinda funny how the FBI was considered to be incredibly right-wing until they started investigating a Republican President. I’m sure that’s just a coincidence, though.
Hoover changed all that, possibly due to his awakened concern with marginalized Americans, provoked by his transgender experience. Surely you saw that documentary about how the FBI crushed the KKK in Mississippi? His compassionate and warmly personal letters to MLK, when the latter was enduring marital problems?
Of course, the tenor of the times was such that he had to keep it on the down low and the QT. That was his number one problem, along with the fact that chiffon wrinkles so easily.
You want to examine the servers because they’ll embarrass a former president? What patriotism; what commitment to justice.
That’s not “obstruction of justice,” that’s “auditory hallucination.” Your imagination, whether healthy or medically concerning, is not cause to make accusations of criminal behavior.
With a shoe.