• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump Campaign Responds to Frivolous DNC Lawsuit

trouble13 said:
Already been on your merry go round once today, no yhanks to a 2nd spin
Click to expand...
So I ask legitimate questions and you deflect with nonsense. That clearly is your merry-go-round.
 
Redress said:
Which makes it no less a diversion. And you fell for it hook, line and sinker.
Click to expand...
Wrong as usual.
Part and parcel, is not a diversion. It is the norm of what occurred.

And there is no falling for anything here as that is what was stated in response.
Your claims are just nonsensical bs.
 
Excon said:
Wrong as usual.
Part and parcel, is not a diversion. It is the norm of what occurred.

And there is no falling for anything here as that is what was stated in response.
Your claims are just nonsensical bs.
Click to expand...

When your response to claims is misdeeds is to point at others, that is a diversion. Well done falling for it.
 
NeverTrumpGOP said:
I do think this sets a bad precedent and gives more power to people who really shouldn't. Why the DNC thought to sue the GOP is beyond me. Probably the last bitter remnants of the Clinton camp still clinging to power. It's only going to embolden the Trump team who can run with this until Nov. Bad move on Dems part, and they just shot themselves in the foot. People have been warning Democrats for months not to give GOP red meat, and they fall into that trap time and time again and often shooting themselves in the foot in the process.

This is why for the last time: I AM NOT A LIBERAL
Click to expand...

Actually, this is exactly how Watergate started. In 1972, after the bungled burglary, the DNC Chairman O'Brian instantly claimed it was not a burglary, it was an illegal snoop by the RNC to extract confidential campaign information. The DNC subsequently sued the RNC, naming individuals involved, for a million dollars. As each tip of the Watergate iceberg broke off, exposing another tip, the DNC amended their civil lawsuit, which made the amendment public and the press reported on it. That gave the DNC lawyers the opportunity to subpoena documents and more importantly, to depose all the key players, which were "All The President's Men".

We know the ending. What the entire country snickered at and called a yawn when the suit was filed, turned into the downfall of a president and years in prison for all those involved. On the day Nixon resigned, the RNC quietly settled the suit for 3/4 million bucks.

So this DNC lawsuit does not SET precedent; it FOLLOWS precedent, lol! And lots of names are included, ripe for depositions and subpoenas!

Take a look at today's Rachel Maddow show on MSNBC. The first 20 minutes of it, supported by her solid gold research team, knocked my socks off, because I did not know or remember anything about the "little lawsuit that could...and did..." take down a president. :lol:
 
Last edited:
Excon said:
Trump Campaign Responds to Frivolous DNC Lawsuit


[...]

If this lawsuit proceeds, the Trump Campaign will be prepared to leverage the discovery process and explore the DNC’s now-secret records about the actual corruption they perpetrated to influence the outcome of the 2016 presidential election. Everything will be on the table, including:

  • How the DNC contributed to the fake dossier, using Fusion GPS along with the Clinton Campaign as the basis for the launch of a phony investigation.
  • Why the FBI was never allowed access to the DNC servers in the course of their investigation into the Clinton e-mail scandal.
  • How the DNC conspired to hand Hillary Clinton the nomination over Bernie Sanders.
  • How officials at the highest levels of the DNC colluded with the news media to influence the outcome of the DNC nomination.
  • Management decisions by Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Donna Brazile, Tom Perez, and John Podesta; their e-mails, personnel decisions, budgets, opposition research, and more.

Trump Campaign Responds to Frivolous DNC Lawsuit​



I don't think the DNC thought this through.
Click to expand...

They should file for bankruptcy.
 
Redress said:
When your response to claims is misdeeds is to point at others, that is a diversion. Well done falling for it.
Click to expand...

The only one failing here is you.
You are taking something that is the norm and stupidly claiming that; 1. it is a diversion which it isn't. It is a statement of what they intend to do, and 2. Claioming someone fell for a statement of intent.
That would be like someone claiming you fell for the DNC's filing of the suit. It is a stupid claim, but in this case you are the one making it.


Now, if you are not going to actually address the substance of the OP's information, push on, as all you are doing is diverting from the topic.
 
Redress said:
When your response to claims is misdeeds is to point at others, that is a diversion. Well done falling for it.
Click to expand...
There's a sweet irony in how Exon will accuse someone of committing a logical fallacy, then go on to commit the fallacy within one or two thread pages himself.
 
DiAnna said:
Actually, this is exactly how Watergate started. In 1972, after the bungled burglary, the DNC Chairman O'Brian instantly claimed it was not a burglary, it was an illegal snoop by the RNC to extract confidential campaign information. The DNC subsequently sued the RNC, naming individuals involved, for a million dollars. As each tip of the Watergate iceberg broke off, exposing another tip, the DNC amended their civil lawsuit, which made the amendment public and the press reported on it. That gave the DNC lawyers the opportunity to subpoena documents and more importantly, to depose all the key players, which were "All The President's Men".

We know the ending. What the entire country snickered at and called a yawn when the suit was filed, turned into the downfall of a president and years in prison for all those involved. On the day Nixon resigned, the RNC quietly settled the suit for 3/4 million bucks.

So this DNC lawsuit does not SET precedent; it FOLLOWS precedent, lol! And lots of names are included, ripe for depositions and subpoenas!

Take a look at today's Rachel Maddow show on MSNBC. The first 20 minutes of it, supported by her solid gold research team, knocked my socks off, because I did not know or remember anything about the "little lawsuit that could...and did..." take down a president. :lol:
Click to expand...
The problem is that everything thus far that links the Trump campaign and Russian operatives is circumstantial, with nothing on record having proven a conspiracy.

Don't get me wrong, I think it's pretty obvious to anyone with an ounce of a insight that the Trump campaign was "in" on Russia's game to some extent, but proving it is not going to be any easy task for Mueller.
 
MovingPictures said:
The problem is that everything thus far that links the Trump campaign and Russian operatives is circumstantial, with nothing on record having proven a conspiracy.

Don't get me wrong, I think it's pretty obvious to anyone with an ounce of a insight that the Trump campaign was "in" on Russia's game to some extent, but proving it is not going to be any easy task for Mueller.
Click to expand...

Well, they filed 35 pages of detail, and they are also suing the Russians! Civil law is different than federal law. The test will come in a court, where lawyers for Trump and the RNC will ask to have the suit quashed. If that happens, that's the end of it... but if it doesn't, it means that reams of people around the campaign, including Trump Jr., lol, may end up being deposed, and those depositions may find their way into the two current federal investigations... and possibly be made public.

It was a gutsy move that paid off 46 years ago, and it's a gutsy move today. Whether it will pay off, time will tell. But it should be amusing either way!
 
jimbo said:
And the other half got President Trump elected.

This is a dumb move. The DNC will not make any new friends by suing.
Click to expand...

They are not trying to make friends, they are trying to expose Trump's corruption.
 
DiAnna said:
Well, they filed 35 pages of detail, and they are also suing the Russians! Civil law is different than federal law. The test will come in a court, where lawyers for Trump and the RNC will ask to have the suit quashed. If that happens, that's the end of it... but if it doesn't, it means that reams of people around the campaign, including Trump Jr., lol, may end up being deposed, and those depositions may find their way into the two current federal investigations... and possibly be made public.

It was a gutsy move that paid off 46 years ago, and it's a gutsy move today. Whether it will pay off, time will tell. But it should be amusing either way!
Click to expand...

A well spoken and light hearted take.
 
Fiddytree said:
I'd go further than that. It means that the DNC is accusing the sitting President of the United States of a crime unthinkable for any of his 44 predecessors.

When it is more likely that is not the case, it's a deplorable accusation to make without ample evidence, and it will backfire on them if it is shown to be a charge without much credibility.

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I know a poltician's word in this day isn't worth a wooden nickel.. but, there is this quote(year old) from ranking House Intelligence Comm't member Adam Schiff:

Rep. Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said Wednesday that there is “more than circumstantial evidence now” to suggest that President Donald Trump’s campaign may have colluded with Russia’s attempts to disrupt the election, but he would not offer details.
Click to expand...

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/schiff-russia-trump-collusion-236386

If what he says has fangs then it may play out in the Democrats favor.
 
I don't think there is anything frivolous about the suit. For the poster that pointed to the suit brought in Watergate you are absolutely correct and for those that do not know, the early responses from CREEP, (committee to reelect) were exactly what they were today from the Trump Campaign.

The burden of proof is not as high in Civil Law yet discovery and the deposition process can be just as daunting. Plus the DNC does not want the trump gang to get away with what they are doing in and around these cases.
- The playmate case v AMI suddenly has been settled with her gaining access to her life again. Clearly as is the case in these other cases, the trump gang is afraid of being deposed and quite willing to see cases either folded up or delayed to avoid deposition or discovery. In this case, they had AMI settle to end it. However, before I forget, there will likely be another criminal charge brought against Cohen because the playmate's previous attorney, Davidson has apparently flipped on Cohen in a charge that they both conspired against Davidson clients.
- Cohen folded his tent on the Buzzfeed case, something Trump dearly wanted to pursue. But again....the trump gang does not want to be deposed and is willing to give up even cases that are important to them as opposed to having to take the 5th
- Cohen is trying to get the Stormy Daniels case held over for very same reason. Today the judge in that case decided to give Cohen lawyers one more chance to come up with a reasonable argument for having that case held over delaying a decision so they get one more at bat

All of it is to avoid either discovery or deposition and taking the 5th. So its perfect sense for the DNC to hang this case out there so as to make sure the trump gang does not think it can just roll up the criminal prosecutions and make this go away. Another Saturday Night massacre won't do that now. Regardless of what happens in the criminal trials, as long as this Civil case is deemed to be on firm footing it will be out there waiting for them. Based on history, I suspect it will be out there waiting for them.
 
DiAnna said:
Actually, this is exactly how Watergate started. In 1972, after the bungled burglary, the DNC Chairman O'Brian instantly claimed it was not a burglary, it was an illegal snoop by the RNC to extract confidential campaign information. The DNC subsequently sued the RNC, naming individuals involved, for a million dollars. As each tip of the Watergate iceberg broke off, exposing another tip, the DNC amended their civil lawsuit, which made the amendment public and the press reported on it. That gave the DNC lawyers the opportunity to subpoena documents and more importantly, to depose all the key players, which were "All The President's Men".

We know the ending. What the entire country snickered at and called a yawn when the suit was filed, turned into the downfall of a president and years in prison for all those involved. On the day Nixon resigned, the RNC quietly settled the suit for 3/4 million bucks.

So this DNC lawsuit does not SET precedent; it FOLLOWS precedent, lol! And lots of names are included, ripe for depositions and subpoenas!

Take a look at today's Rachel Maddow show on MSNBC. The first 20 minutes of it, supported by her solid gold research team, knocked my socks off, because I did not know or remember anything about the "little lawsuit that could...and did..." take down a president. :lol:
Click to expand...

I'll have to find the clip, although I generally do not like Maddow's screeching. Back in Nixon's time however, you had facts on your side. These days, not so much. It's the loudest voices in the room who wins. That's why many people don't trust the intelligence services, or the mainstream media. They hear over and over again how bad they are and grow tired of defending them to people who won't listen.

As others have noted in this thread, (while I do think there have been same shady dealings and collaborations between Wikileaks, Fox News, Sean Hannity, and the Trump campaign), right now the lawsuit seems like the DNC trying to extend an investigation that has gone on way too long according to the right's POV. They will laugh at this until November and if Mueller doesn't come out with anything. Trump will continue to echo that wonderful, "No collusion. No collusion," catch phrase. The DNC has to tread very carefully here, otherwise whatever message they come out with in the next year will be laughed out the door even moreso than it has been by conservatives.
 
NeverTrumpGOP said:
I'll have to find the clip, although I generally do not like Maddow's screeching. Back in Nixon's time however, you had facts on your side. These days, not so much. It's the loudest voices in the room who wins. That's why many people don't trust the intelligence services, or the mainstream media. They hear over and over again how bad they are and grow tired of defending them to people who won't listen.

As others have noted in this thread, (while I do think there have been same shady dealings and collaborations between Wikileaks, Fox News, Sean Hannity, and the Trump campaign), right now the lawsuit seems like the DNC trying to extend an investigation that has gone on way too long according to the right's POV. They will laugh at this until November and if Mueller doesn't come out with anything. Trump will continue to echo that wonderful, "No collusion. No collusion," catch phrase. The DNC has to tread very carefully here, otherwise whatever message they come out with in the next year will be laughed out the door even moreso than it has been by conservatives.
Click to expand...

It's amazing what can be learned by deposing witnesses in a civil suit and having subpoenas issued (that can't be blocked by partisan congressional committee chairs). Where do you think the Watergate prosecutors discovered so much information? Why, by depositions and documents subpoenaed by the civil suit!

I would be stunned if the DNC hadn't gone to Rosenstein, Mueller or both to make certain the lawsuit wouldn't hinder any ongoing investigation, because what the democrats want more than anything is for all these federal investigations to be protected until they are completed. Even if the reports are completed, the wrong person in Rosenstein's (or Sessions') seat could prevent them from ever being released. However, a civil subpoena for these reports in response to civil litigation could be an end run around it.

Like I said, it might be quashed out of the gate, but either way it is amusing! :)

Oh, and Rachel doesn't screech; she giggles. Now Katy Tur, also on MSNBC, she screeches... as does Erin Burnett on CNN. But I digress, lol.
 
Excon said:
Trump Campaign Responds to Frivolous DNC Lawsuit


[...]

If this lawsuit proceeds, the Trump Campaign will be prepared to leverage the discovery process and explore the DNC’s now-secret records about the actual corruption they perpetrated to influence the outcome of the 2016 presidential election. Everything will be on the table, including:

  • How the DNC contributed to the fake dossier, using Fusion GPS along with the Clinton Campaign as the basis for the launch of a phony investigation.
  • Why the FBI was never allowed access to the DNC servers in the course of their investigation into the Clinton e-mail scandal.
  • How the DNC conspired to hand Hillary Clinton the nomination over Bernie Sanders.
  • How officials at the highest levels of the DNC colluded with the news media to influence the outcome of the DNC nomination.
  • Management decisions by Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Donna Brazile, Tom Perez, and John Podesta; their e-mails, personnel decisions, budgets, opposition research, and more.

Trump Campaign Responds to Frivolous DNC Lawsuit​



I don't think the DNC thought this through.
Click to expand...

Actually it is the same thing that the DNC did when they found out about the break in at the Watergate that eventually led to the ouster of Nixon. And the judge that is hearing this case was a Federal prosecutor in the Watergate case. Interesting isn't it?
 
independentusa said:
Actually it is the same thing that the DNC did when they found out about the break in at the Watergate that eventually led to the ouster of Nixon. And the judge that is hearing this case was a Federal prosecutor in the Watergate case. Interesting isn't it?
Click to expand...
No, not the same.
Then the DNC actually had an actionable cause (damage caused by an actual break-in), they do not have one against Trump's campaign at this time.

Supporting a cause of action against Russia and Wiki Leaks is a different matter, if that happens I am sure it will be a topic for discussion.
 
Excon said:
Trump Campaign Responds to Frivolous DNC Lawsuit


[...]

If this lawsuit proceeds, the Trump Campaign will be prepared to leverage the discovery process and explore the DNC’s now-secret records about the actual corruption they perpetrated to influence the outcome of the 2016 presidential election. Everything will be on the table, including:

  • How the DNC contributed to the fake dossier, using Fusion GPS along with the Clinton Campaign as the basis for the launch of a phony investigation.
  • Why the FBI was never allowed access to the DNC servers in the course of their investigation into the Clinton e-mail scandal.
  • How the DNC conspired to hand Hillary Clinton the nomination over Bernie Sanders.
  • How officials at the highest levels of the DNC colluded with the news media to influence the outcome of the DNC nomination.
  • Management decisions by Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Donna Brazile, Tom Perez, and John Podesta; their e-mails, personnel decisions, budgets, opposition research, and more.

Trump Campaign Responds to Frivolous DNC Lawsuit​



I don't think the DNC thought this through.
Click to expand...

You don't think that they didn't take all that into consideration before filing that lawsuit? These aren't Trump's type of lawyers bringing this lawsuit.
 
Atomic Kid said:
You don't think that they didn't take all that into consideration before filing that lawsuit? These aren't Trump's type of lawyers bringing this lawsuit.
Click to expand...
No, this is far left kooks like Perez.
 
independentusa said:
Actually it is the same thing that the DNC did when they found out about the break in at the Watergate that eventually led to the ouster of Nixon. And the judge that is hearing this case was a Federal prosecutor in the Watergate case. Interesting isn't it?
Click to expand...

Y'know what this is? It's the left wing version of Birthirism. Perez is the Democrat version of Orly Taitz.
 
Atomic Kid said:
No, these are 'real' lawyers. Not TV lawyers.
Click to expand...
You have no point.
This is a lawsuit started by the far left kooks such as Perez, finding real lawyers when they are just as kooky isn't hard to do.
 
Last edited:
Excon said:
Trump Campaign Responds to Frivolous DNC Lawsuit


[...]

If this lawsuit proceeds, the Trump Campaign will be prepared to leverage the discovery process and explore the DNC’s now-secret records about the actual corruption they perpetrated to influence the outcome of the 2016 presidential election. Everything will be on the table, including:

  • How the DNC contributed to the fake dossier, using Fusion GPS along with the Clinton Campaign as the basis for the launch of a phony investigation.
  • Why the FBI was never allowed access to the DNC servers in the course of their investigation into the Clinton e-mail scandal.
  • How the DNC conspired to hand Hillary Clinton the nomination over Bernie Sanders.
  • How officials at the highest levels of the DNC colluded with the news media to influence the outcome of the DNC nomination.
  • Management decisions by Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Donna Brazile, Tom Perez, and John Podesta; their e-mails, personnel decisions, budgets, opposition research, and more.

Trump Campaign Responds to Frivolous DNC Lawsuit​



I don't think the DNC thought this through.
Click to expand...
I read the lawsuit at my office. It reads like the work of a crazy person.

NeverTrumpGOP said:
I do think this sets a bad precedent and gives more power to people who really shouldn't. Why the DNC thought to sue the GOP is beyond me. Probably the last bitter remnants of the Clinton camp still clinging to power. It's only going to embolden the Trump team who can run with this until Nov. Bad move on Dems part, and they just shot themselves in the foot. People have been warning Democrats for months not to give GOP red meat, and they fall into that trap time and time again and often shooting themselves in the foot in the process.

This is why for the last time: I AM NOT A LIBERAL
Click to expand...
I agree that it is frivilous and a bad move. And I am an extreme leftist. See Can One Be a Leftist or Liberal and Believe in Constitution and Deep-Rooted American Values for further discussion.
 
JBG said:
I read the lawsuit at my office. It reads like the work of a crazy person.
Click to expand...
I haven't been looking but do you have a link to it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom