twitter:Breaking911 twitterde op vrijdag 20-04-2018 om 17:50:14The Democratic Party filed a federal lawsuit alleging a conspiracy by the Trump campaign, Russia and WikiLeaks to disrupt the 2016 presidential election. - Fox News reageer retweet
twitter:thehill twitterde op vrijdag 20-04-2018 om 18:04:04JUST IN: Russia: Trump invited Putin to the White House https://t.co/Be0NwwT0OW https://t.co/muxtFzvegS reageer retweet
Voor degenen die net als Nintex willen lachen om de hoeveelheid shit waarin de republikeinen zitten, hier is het hele document: https://www.lawfareblog.c(...)lection-interferencequote:Op vrijdag 20 april 2018 18:19 schreef Nintex het volgende:
twitter:Breaking911 twitterde op vrijdag 20-04-2018 om 17:50:14The Democratic Party filed a federal lawsuit alleging a conspiracy by the Trump campaign, Russia and WikiLeaks to disrupt the 2016 presidential election. - Fox News reageer retweet
quote:Under the law of the United States, civil discovery is wide-ranging and may seek disclosure of information that is reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.[4] This is a much broader standard than relevance, because it contemplates the exploration of evidence which might be relevant, rather than evidence which is truly relevant.
Ik vermoed omdat er nog geen bewijs is dat Trump persoonlijk betrokken was. Je zou hem alleen maar de kans geven om dat te zeggen, maakt je zaak niet sterker. Daarnaast kom je dan in de sfeer van presidentiële immuniteit, al kan Trump daar geen beroep op doen voor zaken van voor hij president was.quote:Op vrijdag 20 april 2018 20:54 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
Wat zaken die ik me dan als leek afvraag: hoezo geen Trump zelf?
Ja, op zich wel logisch eigenlijk ... je kunt moeilijk random mensen gaan aanklagen en om Trump zelf aan te klagen zonder dat je bewijs hebt dat hij onderdeel uitmaakte van de samenzwering zou potentieel een PR fiasco zijn.quote:Op vrijdag 20 april 2018 21:01 schreef Tchock het volgende:
[..]
Ik vermoed omdat er nog geen bewijs is dat Trump persoonlijk betrokken was. Je zou hem alleen maar de kans geven om dat te zeggen, maakt je zaak niet sterker. Daarnaast kom je dan in de sfeer van presidentiële immuniteit, al kan Trump daar geen beroep op doen voor zaken van voor hij president was.
Bovendien kan ik me nog voorstellen dat een aanklacht tegen de Trump org. indirect toch wel Trump raakt. Als je eenmaal hebt aangetoond dat de organisatie en haar medewerkers iets fout deden, is het voor de grote baas lastig te beweren dat hij er niets van wist.quote:Op vrijdag 20 april 2018 21:04 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
[..]
Ja, op zich wel logisch eigenlijk ... je kunt moeilijk random mensen gaan aanklagen en om Trump zelf aan te klagen zonder dat je bewijs hebt dat hij onderdeel uitmaakte van de samenzwering zou potentieel een PR fiasco zijn.
Ja, dat gaat een groot mediafeest worden. Enig idee wat nu de procedure gaat zijn en met wat voor termijn discovery zou gaan beginnen?quote:Op vrijdag 20 april 2018 20:59 schreef crystal_meth het volgende:
De hack bracht al hun interne communicatie naar buiten, nu kunnen ze het Trump kamp hetzelfde aandoen. Met het discovery process kunnen ze veel meer te weten komen en openbaar maken dan wat Mueller's onderzoek zal opleveren.
[..]
Hoeveel shit, en wat is de kans van slagen? Ik lees verder niet in die link, of kijk ik verkeerd?quote:Op vrijdag 20 april 2018 18:22 schreef Mike het volgende:
[..]
Voor degenen die net als Nintex willen lachen om de hoeveelheid shit waarin de republikeinen zitten, hier is het hele document: https://www.lawfareblog.c(...)lection-interference
quote:O'Brien Sues GOP Campaign
Lays Blame For Bugging on White House
By Bob Woodward
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, June 21, 1972; Page A01
Democratic National Chairman Lawrence F. O'Brien, apparently seizing on the break-in and attempted bugging of party headquarters here as a major campaign issue, attempted yesterday to lay responsibility for the incident at the door of the White House.
He said there is "a developing clear line to the white House," and cited what he called the "potential involvement" of special counsel to the President, Charles Colson.
O'Brien made his remarks as the Democratic National Committee filed a $l million suit in U.S. District Court here against the Committee for the re-election of the President, whose chief security agent was one of five men arrested at the break-in at 2:30 a.m. on Saturday.
President Nixon's campaign chairman, former Attorney General John N. Mitchell, again deplored the bugging incident, denied any party responsibility for it and called the law suit "another example of sheer demagoguery on the part of Mr. O'Brien."
In other developments yesterday:
• White House consultant and former CIA employee Howard E. Hunt, whose name was found in two of the suspects' address books, was reported to be a "good friend" of the suspects' first attorney, Douglas Caddy.
• Federal sources close to the investigation said that a diagram that could have been used in a past or future bugging attempt on Miami Beach headquarters on Sen. George S. McGovern was found among the suspects' belongings.
• Sources in the FBI said that agents were ordered to question Hunt yesterday, but the sources were unable to indicate if Hunt had been reached. This was the first indication that the government thought Hunt might have some information about the bugging.
Sen. William Proxmire (D-Wis.) charged yesterday that the Federal Reserve Board "ducked, misled, hid out, avoided calls" and gave him "the idiot treatment" in connection with his request that the board produce the name of the bank involved in issuing 58 $l00 bills seized from the five suspects.
Proxmire, ranking Democratic member of the Senate Banking Committee, said that the board's failure to act "suggests they have something to hide."
Banks are required to record details of any transaction involving sums over 5,000 or large federal reserve notes.
O'Brien charged that Mitchell attempted to make it appear that former CIA employee James W. McCord Jr., the security agent who was arrested Saturday, had ended his employment with the Nixon committee some months ago.
Until Monday McCord was the salaried security chief for the committee. Mitchell's first statement Sunday on McCord's employment with the committee was that McCord was employed months ago.
"We know that as of the moment of his arrest at gunpoint just l0 feet from where I now stand, Mr. McCord was in the pay of the Committee for the Re-election of the President," O'Brien said.
"If John Mitchell's reflex attempt to conceal that fact is any signal of what is to come from the Republican Party and administration, I fear we shall be long in getting at the truth."
O'Brien went on to call the incident a "cheap cloak-and-dagger intrigue at the national political level. We learned of this bugging attempt only because it was bungled. How many other attempts have there been? And just who was involved?"
He said the lawsuit was an attempt to force the issue into examination by the court. A Democratic spokesman said court hearings on the matter could begin in "the near future."
"I believe we are about to witness the ultimate test of this administration that so piously committed itself to a new era of law and order just four years ago." O'Brien said.
In a prepared statement, Mitchell called O'Brien's suit a "political stunt."
"This committee did not authorize and does not condone the alleged actions of the five men apprehended Saturday morning. We abhor such activity.
"The Committee for the Re-election of the President is not legally, morally or ethically accountable for actions taken without its knowledge and beyond the scope of its control." Mitchell said.
In yesterday's editions, The Post reported the existence of Hunt's name in the suspects' address books and that he functioned at the White House as an assistant to Colson.
A White House aide confirmed that Colson, who is said to handle delicate assignments for the president, was the man who brought hunt to the White House. The aide, who said Hunt was hired because of his CIA expertise, said Hunt worked on declassifying the Pentagon Papers and, most recently, on narcotics intelligence.
He said Hunt last worked for the White House on March 20.
Presidential spokesman Ronald Ziegler said yesterday morning, "I talked to Mr. Colson after reading The Washington Post story this morning, and he made it clear that he is in no way involved with this matter..." Later Ziegler told reporters that he was finished with any comment on the subject.:
Federal sources close to the bugging investigation said two large ballrooms scheduled to be used as Miami headquarters for McGovern during the Democratic Convention were diagrammed in another address book taken by authorities from the suspects' belongings.
The rough diagram, a sketch, shows the Regency and Mediterranean rooms at the Doral Hotel on the Ocean in Miami.
It also denotes the location of two emergency exits from the rooms. The word "May" was written by the diagram, apparently a reference to the month, the sources said.
Asked about the diagram yesterday, McGovern's convention coordinator, Owen Donley, confirmed that the rooms have been slated for use by McGovern convention staff since January.
Donley said one room would be used by the news media and the other for staff or delegate caucuses.
"If they wanted to bug the two rooms, it wouldn't bother anyone anyway. They are both public rooms in the hotel. We will hold staff caucuses there, but they will be mass meetings. There wouldn't be anything said there that wouldn't be said out on the street."
Donley said the McGovern campaign staff was exploring various antibugging methods before the Democratic National headquarters incident.
"We didn't suddenly become paranoid. We were paranoid beforehand. That is just part of convention procedure," Donley said. He indicated that antibugging precautions would be taken at the headquarters in Miami.
Hunt, the White House consultant, has a full-time job in the public relations firm of Robert R. Mullen Co., l700 Pennsylvania Ave, NW, directly across from Nixon's re-election headquarters and the chief White House offices.
Yesterday, Robert E. Bennett, president of the Mullen firm, said that Hunt was a "good friend" of the suspects' first attorney, Caddy.
Hunt and Caddy once shared an office at the Mullen firm, according to Bennet. Caddy was not employed there but acted as liaison with General Foods Corp. where he was employed.
In Superior Court here Saturday when the five suspects appeared for arraignment, Caddy was secretive and stayed in the background, bringing in another attorney to represent the five men.
Shortly after 3 a.m. Saturday, Caddy told a reporter, he received a call from the wife of Bernard L. Baker, one of the five men arrested. "She said that her husband told her to call me if he hadn't called her by 3 a.m. that it might mean trouble," Caddy said.
Caddy said he had met Barker once, a year ago, and that they had had a "sympathetic conversation."
Barker, who owns a real estate firm in Miami, has been active in anti-Castro activities and is reported to have played a role in the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba in l961.
In addition to McCord and Barker, the other three suspects are: Frank Surges, also known as Frank Florini, an American who served in Fiddle Castor's revolutionary army and has since been a leader in the anti-Castro movement in Miami: Virgilio R. Gonzalez, a locksmith; and Eugenio R. Martinez, a real estate salesman for Barker.
McCord was still being held in D.C. jail yesterday on $30,000 bond. The other four were being held there on $50,000 bond. All are charged with attempted burglary and attempted interception of telephone and other communication.
Their attorney, Joseph A. Rafferty Jr., filed a motion yesterday seeking a reduction on the bond.
Meanwhile, yesterday Sen. Bob Dole, head of the Republican National Committee, denied as totally false reports that the Republicans had urged Spanish community leaders and other Republicans not to discuss the bugging incident with anyone.
Staat verder niks idd .. hier wel een WaPo artikel erover: Democratic Party files lawsuit alleging Russia, the Trump campaign and WikiLeaks conspired to disrupt the 2016 campaignquote:Op vrijdag 20 april 2018 21:52 schreef Montov het volgende:
[..]
Hoeveel shit, en wat is de kans van slagen? Ik lees verder niet in die link, of kijk ik verkeerd?
Zal van de rechter afhangen of het zover komt. Geen idee hoe lang dat kan duren, ik zou verwachten dat de DNC daar rekening mee gehouden heeft toen ze het moment kozen om dit in te dienen... Wanneer zou het voor hen optimaal zijn?quote:Op vrijdag 20 april 2018 21:07 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
[..]
Ja, dat gaat een groot mediafeest worden. Enig idee wat nu de procedure gaat zijn en met wat voor termijn discovery zou gaan beginnen?
https://www.vox.com/2018/(...)tions-hacking-emailsquote:The DNC may well be hoping to use this new suit to surface more evidence of this, should it proceed to the discovery stage — but as of now, they don’t have the goods on any Trumpworld involvement with the hack and leak that damaged Democrats specifically. (Special counsel Robert Mueller is, of course, continuing to investigate the matter.)
https://www.nytimes.com/2(...)a-trump-lawsuit.htmlquote:Mr. Perez firmly denied that the lawsuit had a political purpose, but he appeared to allude at points to the possibility that civil litigation might bring to light damaging information about Mr. Trump and his associates.
The complaint is largely based on information that has previously been disclosed in news reports and subsequent court proceedings. But if the lawsuit proceeds, the president and his campaign aides could be forced to disclose documents and submit to depositions that require them to answer questions under oath.
To reach the discovery stage, lawsuits have to survive any motion to dismiss the litigation by the defendants.
Mr. Perez suggested, for instance, that Mr. Trump’s tax returns would reveal “shady conduct” if they were ever made public. Asked if part of the lawsuit’s aim was to force such disclosures, Mr. Perez demurred: “I haven’t given that any thought.”
quote:Always a bad sign when the judge tells you that your motion has “gaping holes in it,” as the judge told the attys for MC and DJT this AM. I don’t know why they continue to hide what they know about the FBI raids. Time to come clean and let the chips fall where they may
Het grappige is dat dit juist the American dream is.quote:Op vrijdag 20 april 2018 12:39 schreef Ulx het volgende:
De oelewapper is weer wakker.Shadey?twitter:realDonaldTrump twitterde op vrijdag 20-04-2018 om 12:34:16So General Michael Flynn’s life can be totally destroyed while Shadey James Comey can Leak and Lie and make lots of money from a third rate book (that should never have been written). Is that really the way life in America is supposed to work? I don’t think so! reageer retweet
Dit volg ik niet helemaal... je denkt dat de American dream is zelf oneerlijk groot te worden en de kleintjes te verpulveren oid?quote:Op vrijdag 20 april 2018 22:46 schreef Vis1980 het volgende:
[..]
Het grappige is dat dit juist the American dream is.
sorry, het ging mij meer om het stukje: "...making lots of money with a third rate book.Is that really the way life in America is supposed to work?"quote:Op vrijdag 20 april 2018 23:03 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
[..]
Dit volg ik niet helemaal... je denkt dat de American dream is zelf oneerlijk groot te worden en de kleintjes te verpulveren oid?
Ik dacht dat de American dream neer kwam op kansen en eerlijkheid van het belonen van hard werken. Dus dat je van arme sloeber zou kunnen opwerken naar rijkaard; met name op basis van inspanning en inzicht ipv vals spelen.quote:Op vrijdag 20 april 2018 23:12 schreef Vis1980 het volgende:
[..]
sorry, het ging mij meer om het stukje: "...making lots of money with a third rate book.Is that really the way life in America is supposed to work?"
Maar inderdaad het 'liegen' over het hoofd gezien. Al maakt dat vaak niet heel veel uit, het doel is uiteindelijk veel geld verdienen.
quote:TRUMP FUNDRAISER OFFERED RUSSIAN GAS COMPANY PLAN TO GET SANCTIONS LIFTED FOR $26 MILLION (The Intercept)
SHORTLY AFTER PRESIDENT Donald Trump was inaugurated last year, top Republican fundraiser Elliott Broidy offered Russian gas giant Novatek a $26 million lobbying plan aimed at removing the company from a U.S. sanctions list, according to documents obtained by The Intercept.
Broidy is a Trump associate who was deputy finance chair of the Republican National Committee until he resigned last week amid reports that he had agreed to pay $1.6 million to a former Playboy model with whom he had an affair. But in February 2017, when he laid out his lobbying proposal for Novatek, he was acting as a well-connected businessman and longtime Republican donor in a bid to help the Russian company avoid sanctions imposed by the Obama administration. The 2014 sanctions were aimed at punishing Russia for annexing Crimea and supporting pro-Russia separatists in eastern Ukraine.
In February 2017, Broidy sent a draft of the plan by email to attorney Andrei Baev, then a Moscow- and London-based lawyer who represented major Russian energy companies for the firm Chadbourne & Parke LLP. Baev had already been communicating with Novatek about finding a way to lift U.S. sanctions.
Broidy proposed arranging meetings with key White House and congressional leaders and generating op-eds and other articles favorable to the Russian company, along with a full suite of lobbying activities to be undertaken by consultants brought on board. Yet even as he offered those services, Broidy was adamant that his company, Fieldcrest Advisors LLC, would not perform lobbying services but would hire others to do it. He suggested that parties to the deal sign a sweeping non-disclosure agreement that would shield their work from public scrutiny.
The plan is outlined in a series of emails and other documents obtained by The Intercept. Broidy and Baev did not dispute the authenticity of the exchanges but said the deal was never consummated.Broidy, die RNC finance pipo in zeden-opspraak die afgetreden is, is ook hier weer terug te vinden ...SPOILEROm spoilers te kunnen lezen moet je zijn ingelogd. Je moet je daarvoor eerst gratis Registreren. Ook kun je spoilers niet lezen als je een ban hebt.
| Forum Opties | |
|---|---|
| Forumhop: | |
| Hop naar: | |