Hey! Guess who is suddenly panicking they may not win congress this election cycle?!!?
[CNBC] The Democratic Party on Friday sued President Donald Trump's presidential campaign, the Russian government and the Wikileaks group, claiming a broad conspiracy to help Trump win the 2016 election.
The multi-million-dollar lawsuit filed in Manhattan federal court says that "In the Trump campaign, Russia found a willing and active partner in this effort" to mount "a brazen attack on American Democracy."
The suit says that "preexisting relationships with Russia and Russian oligarchs" with Trump and Trump associates "provided fertile ground for [the] Russia-Trump conspiracy." Mueller hasn't proved it. What makes you think you can? Oh yeah... judge shopping.
The common purpose of the scheme, according to the Democratic National Committee, was to "bolster Trump and denigrate the Democratic Party nominee," Hillary Clinton, while boosting the candidate of Trump, "whose policies would benefit the Kremlin." You did that all on your own, sweet cheeks
The named defendants include Trump's son Donald Trump Jr., his son-in-law Jared Kushner, former campaign chief Paul Manafort and campaign official Richard Gates, and Trump ally Roger Stone.
Also named is the Russian Federation, the general state of the Russian armed force, a Russian intelligence services hacker known as Guccifer 2.0., Wikileaks and its leader Julian Assange, and 10 unidentified people.
"No one is above the law," the suit says. Except Hillary and the Deep State
"In the run-up to the 2016 election, Russia mounted a brazen attack on American Democracy. The opening salvo was an attack on the DNC, carried out on American soil."
"In 2015 and 2016, Russian intelligence services hacked into the DNC's computers, penetrated its phone systems and exfiltrated tens of thousands of documents and emails," the suit says.
"Russia then used this stolen information to advance its own interests: destabilizing the U.S. political environment, denigrating Democratic presidential nominee, and supporting the campaign of Donald J. Trump ... whose policies would benefit the Kremlin," the suit charges.
The suit alleges claims that include conspiracy, computer fraud and abuse, misappropriation of trade secrets, trespass, and other violations of the law.
#2
Makes me think of that scene in 'The Russians are Coming, The Russians are Coming' when Brian Keith as the local sheriff staring down the Red sub at his local dock, pulls out his ticket book and starts writing.
#3
The only reason it is being filed is that the Mueller investigation is apparently running dry. This is a way to keep Russia-Trump in the headlines through the mid-terms.
#5
while boosting the candidate of Trump, "whose policies would benefit the Kremlin."
Kremlin-benefiting policies like loosening the rules on fracking and signing off on the oil pipeline, both of which keep oil prices considerably lower than the Russian economy needs; supporting cleaning up state voter rolls and installing other vote security measures that make it harder for Russia (as well as the Democratic party machines) to hack the vote; PNGing Russian diplomats and closing consulates, as well as encouraging other nations to do the same; increasing observance of security measures across the executive branch, making it harder for Russia to acquire information electronically... Yes, this is definitely the behaviour of a friend of Russia.
Nothing much to cling to these days.
Race and Russia, has to be something there to hang a campaign on. Even if they have to hire someone to make up some crap. Oh wait, they already did that....
The democratic base is so gullible, uneducated and full of rage.
The shear stupidity of their logic, or lack of, is frightening to watch.
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/20/2018 20:37 Comments ||
Top||
#11
I think discovery will be more than a little one-sided. Presumably Republican donors and volunteers will be deemed part of the conspiracy, and made available for harassment.
Posted by: james ||
04/20/2018 22:04 Comments ||
Top||
[Townhall] A pro-Trump political action committee has filed a complaint with the FEC alleging the Hillary Clinton campaign laundered $84 million in contributions from big-name donors, such as Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg, filmmaker Steven Spielberg, and designer Calvin Klein.
The complaint outlines a money laundering scheme that violated multiple campaign finance laws, specifically laws related to limits on contributions by independent donors. As of this week, the complaint has escalated with a lawsuit urging the FEC to take action on the complaint which appears to have been largely ignored by the FEC since being filed in December of 2017.
Using both civil and criminal laws, the US government limits how much money an individual can contribute to a particular candidate or political action committee in order to combat corruption and to maintain fair elections. While the actual base limits on individuals will vary with each year, the principle behind limitations remains intact and has been continuously sustained by the Supreme Court. These limit computations require ridiculously absurd government mathematics because of the ways in which "party committee" contributions can increase an individual’s legal opportunities to contribute.
The shrewd individuals running the Hillary Victory Fund (HVF) figured out these campaign mathematics, and in 2016 appeared to legally solicit up to $356,100 from Clinton’s supporters at extravagant fundraisers, such as a dinner at George Clooney’s house and a concert featuring Elton John. Compare this to the $2,700 limit the government sets per individual contributor in a general election. How did they do it? HVF figured out how to maximize the permissible contribution numbers by calling themselves a "joint fundraising committee" comprised of Clinton’s campaign, the DNC, and 32 state party committees.
#1
Investigation of Clinton's donors ought to be interesting. Toss in the investigation of the CF and things will really get interesting. We're talking yuge amounts of money--billions.
Fortune Magazine is a Time Warner product. Time also owns CNN.
AT&T wants to buy them, but CNN is the anti-trust sticking point.
Some might conclude that Time Warner is the corporate press arm of Hillary and Antifa. If AT&T in its current incarnation is a Texas run company, what does this say about the Texan who chairs it?
Posted by: Fred ||
04/20/2018 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11126 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
Smeggin' hell! I literally choked on my beverage reading that headline. Do click thru and read the entire list. Fortune has apparently jumped the shark.
#3
Some might conclude that Time Warner is the corporate press arm of Hillary and Antifa. If AT&T in its current incarnation is a Texas run company, what does this say about the Texan who chairs it?
AT&T is actually a Globalist company. They like Texas because Texas is a business friendly state.
Fortune is also a Globalist media outlet. Political birds turkeys of the same feather.
One more thought. When the left says "its for the children", get ready for child abuse. This kid's head is going to be so messed up after they dump him...
Holy s&^t, Hillary, see a shrink; this is not healthy. Self-pity is not good box office.
[DailyBeast] "No one in modern politics, male or female, has had to withstand more indignities, setbacks and cynicism. (Sarah Palin, anyone? - ed.)
She developed protective armor that made the real Hillary Clinton an enigma. But if she was guarded about her feelings and opinions, she believed it was in careful pursuit of a dream for generations of Americans: the election of the country’s first woman president."
That would have been the nut graf of The New York Times story about Hillary Clinton’s historic victory that would have run under the headline "Madam President" spread across six front-page columns, according to reporter Amy Chozick’s new book, Chasing Hillary: Ten Years, Two Presidential Campaigns, and One Intact Glass Ceiling.
Chozick writes that the Clinton campaign, which she covered from the beginning, had reacted furiously to the prospect of a Joe Biden run, as floated first in an August 2015 Maureen Dowd Times column and then in a reported story by Chozick. In the book, she writes that "Biden had confided (off the record) to the White House press corps that he wanted to run, but he added something like ’You guys don’t understand these people. The Clintons will try to destroy me.’"
#1
’You guys don’t understand these people. The Clintons will try to destroy me.’
Maybe ol' Joe is not as slow as we thought.
Posted by: Bobby ||
04/20/2018 10:04 Comments ||
Top||
#2
The media should be blasting her, they carried her horrible resume as far as they could and she campaigned like a corpse.
* If she'd only visited a few states she thought were sure things (but filled with icky blue collar workers).
* If she'd not avoided the press for nearly a year thinking it was in the bag.
* If she hadn't taken a week off the campaign trail because of illness.
* If only she'd tried just a little all their efforts probably would have secured her the Presidency.
Thankfully she was as horrible a campaigner as she is a person and the nation noticed.
h/t Instapundit
[NYMag] It’s been obvious from the very beginning of the Trump era of American politics that a lot of things about the man who became the 45th president that worry upscale Republicans (and their elite #NeverTrump representatives) just don’t matter as much to the white working-class folk who have provided Trump’s sturdiest base of support. Some of it may have to do with news consumption habits: If you watch Fox News rather than read National Review, you got a very different impression of the options available to conservative-leaning voters in 2016.
It’s also entirely possible that white working-class voters are more cynical than their more highly educated counterparts about the moral tone of politicians who are not named Trump; "They’re all crooks" is a pretty common sentiment in those circles. In any event, this is a question that is not important strictly as a matter of retrospectively figuring out how a man of Trump’s character and background managed to get himself elected in the first place; as Ron Brownstein observes, it may well determine the political impact of the continuing Trump scandals we are hearing about nearly every day:
#4
As a southern, middle class, working ex-Navy man, I still haven't seen any Trump scandals, but I keep seeing all the anti-American efforts by the lefties! Plus all their corruption!
#5
NYMag is a little slow on the uptake aren't they.
Fake scandal after fake scandal after we've got him now only just sends his poll numbers up. The game is over, the players exposed, and that crap (and other Republicans failure to punch back) is why Trump was elected in the first place.
#7
The race card is played out for me, and every effort to circle a discussion back to race or shadowed by race casues me to simply stop listening to the source, and repeats make that dismissal permanent. I honestly wonder if voiding each other isn't a better answer than this never ending victimhood claim by most people of color. Sadly it still works on many, so they won't stop, but I'm pretty much done caring about it or them!
[Washington Examiner] The memos written by former FBI Director James Comey that were delivered to Congress by the Justice Department on Thursday have been leaked.
The memos were obtained by the Washington Examiner.
Comey, who was fired by President Trump last May, said in congressional testimony he kept memos memorializing conversations with the president.
[WashingtonPost] The group paused before grainy photos of German troops executing Catholic clergy in Poland by firing squad. "Were they actually manufacturing these weapons?" [councilman Trayon] White asked.
Moments later, White was nowhere to be seen....
Seven of White's staff members stayed with the guide, who soon was showing them an exhibit on the Warsaw Ghetto. As she explained the walling in of Polish Jews, one aide asked whether it was similar to "a gated community."
Posted by: lord garth ||
04/20/2018 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11127 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
A sacred ku visits the shul
Whose students view home rule as cool:
"I nose about ghettos
Like cows around meadows."
"This White boy is nobody's fool!"
#5
But, formerly favored, now, not-so-much, African Americans, will you think it's funny when it happens to you? Just askin'...
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
04/20/2018 11:17 Comments ||
Top||
#6
I've been to the D.C. Holocaust Museum. Twice. He needs to finish his tour of that facility first. Then write a report, for his constituents, and the Washington Post.
Posted by: Bobby ||
04/20/2018 11:17 Comments ||
Top||
[COMMERCIALAPPEAL] House politicians on Tuesday approved a last-minute amendment to remove $250,000 allocated to the city of Memphis as punishment for the removal of Confederate monuments.
The amendment, which was approved with a 56-31 vote, was introduced as a result of Memphis officials’ decision to remove two controversial statues on public property last year.
After being denied a waiver by the state Historical Commission to remove the statues, Memphis sold two public parks in December to a nonprofit, which then removed statues of Confederate Gen. Nathan Bedford Forrest and Confederate President Jefferson Davis.
Posted by: Fred ||
04/20/2018 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11125 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The City Council unanimously approved the sale of Health Science Park, home of Confederate Gen. Nathan Bedford Forrest, and its easement on Fourth Bluff Park, home of Confederate President Jefferson Davis, for $1,000 each to Memphis Greenspace Inc. Fourth Bluff, or Memphis Park, is owned by a group called The Overton Heirs.
The sale — which is almost certain to result in a lawsuit from statue supporters — allows Greenspace to legally do what the city of Memphis cannot: Remove the statues from their visible perches in the parks, Chief Legal Officer Bruce McMullen said. He said they would be stored in an undisclosed location for security reasons.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
.jpg)
