Image 01 Image 03

Federal Judge Dismisses DNC Hacking Lawsuit Against Trump Team

Federal Judge Dismisses DNC Hacking Lawsuit Against Trump Team

“entirely divorced from the facts”

Trump was just handed another legal win. A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit from the Democratic National Committee against the Trump team in the Wikileaks related hacking case of the 2016 election.

Gregg Re reports at FOX News:

Judge dismisses DNC hacking lawsuit against Trump team, says claims ‘entirely divorced from the facts’

A federal judge in frank terms Tuesday dismissed a lawsuit by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) against key members of the Trump campaign and WikiLeaks over hacked DNC documents, saying they “did not participate in any wrongdoing in obtaining the materials in the first place” and therefore bore no legal liability for disseminating the information.

The ruling came as Democrats increasingly have sought to tie the Trump team to illegal activity in Russia, in spite of former Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s findings that the campaign in fact refused multiple offers by Russians to involve them in hacking and disinformation efforts.

President Trump, in a tweet late Tuesday, noted that the judge in the case, John Koeltl, was appointed by Bill Clinton. The president called Koeltl’s decision “really big ‘stuff'” and “yet another total & complete vindication and exoneration.”

Here are Trump’s tweets:

Josh Gerstein of Politico has more from Judge Koeltl:

Koeltl said such actions were protected by the First Amendment when taken by people not involved in the actual hacking.

“Even if the documents had been provided directly to the Campaign [and] the Campaign defendants … they could have published the documents themselves without liability because they did not participate in the theft and the documents are of public concern,” the judge wrote in an 81-page opinion. “The DNC cannot hold these defendants liable for aiding and abetting publication when they would have been entitled to publish the stolen documents themselves without liability.”…

“The DNC’s published internal communications allowed the American electorate to look behind the curtain of one of the two major political parties in the United States during a presidential election,” Koeltl wrote. “This type of information is plainly of the type entitled to the strongest protection that the First Amendment offers.”…

“The DNC’s interest in keeping ‘donor lists’ and ‘fundraising strategies’ secret is dwarfed by the newsworthiness of the documents as a whole,” the judge wrote. “If WikiLeaks could be held liable for publishing documents concerning the DNC’s political financial and voter-engagement strategies simply because the DNC labels them ‘secret’ and trade secrets, then so could any newspaper or other media outlet.”

Another Democrat talking point just went up in smoke.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


smalltownoklahoman | July 31, 2019 at 7:47 am

Good on the judge! Questions of legality about those docs being taken and disseminated aside once they were out there the genie was out of the bottle. Trump and his campaign would have been beyond stupid NOT to take advantage of them once they were available and widely known about. Talking about things the public already knows about? Making that a crime is hopefully only something that will exist in your dreams Dems!

If this Judge had been Calvin Coolidge, his ruling could have been expressed in 4 words: “Pentagon Papers – Case Dismissed.”

anyone with any legal knowledge at all had said this was going to be the outcome from the day this was filed.

Attempting to take legal action against the GOP for disseminating the material while refusing to allow law enforcement investigation of the crime – way to go. Don’t let the door hit you…

    TrickyRicky in reply to Edward. | July 31, 2019 at 8:54 am

    Nail. Hammer. Head.
    The morons wouldn’t let the FBI even look at the servers in question. Nothing to see here, move along.

    Paul In Sweden in reply to Edward. | July 31, 2019 at 11:09 am

    The kicker was that Obama/Hillary were able to get 17 intelligence agencies to parrot Hillary’s Russian Hack talking points. Without an investigation all the FBI, CIA, NSA, etc, etc, etc should have said was: “Obama told us to say what Hillary tells us to say”.

      notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to Paul In Sweden. | July 31, 2019 at 1:30 pm

      Obama had 8 loooooooong years to stick in all his
      on-their-knees sycophants….

      …..into all parts of the Fed government, agencies, and even down to the state levels….

      Milhouse in reply to Paul In Sweden. | August 1, 2019 at 12:06 am

      They didn’t get 17 agencies to say it. They just said they did. The Director of National Intelligence speaks for all 17, so when he said it they considered it “as if” all 17 had said it. But that’s not how it works. Certainly none of the 17 agencies disagreed with the statement; but only 4 supported it. 13 out of 17 said nothing at all, because it was not in their bailiwick so they never looked into it and never formed an opinion.

2smartforlibs | July 31, 2019 at 9:01 am

This amounts to Moder day McCarthyism. Like the Stupid Liberalfonia law to keep Trump off the ballot. How is that not voter suppression?

    McCarthy was right about the progress of foreign and domestic leftism, if a bit ahead of the curve when considering American citizens. No, this is a modern day witch hunt, warlock trial, coup, or selective-child/abortion rite (i.e. summary judgment).

      notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to n.n. | July 31, 2019 at 1:34 pm

      Yes, history has proven him 100% correct – especially about
      Hollywood, and the Fed. Gov. agencies.

      Reading lots and lots of histories, memoirs, diaries, journals, autobiographies, etc. I continually keep discovering such things as how immediately as the Russian Revolution started in 1917, the Communists started infiltrating other countries governments.

      Yes, starting in 1917.

    Milhouse in reply to 2smartforlibs. | August 1, 2019 at 12:14 am

    California doesn’t have to hold primaries at all, so if it chooses to it can set the rules. If the CA GOP wants to hold its own primary, at its own expense, it can put whomever it likes on the ballot.

    Either way, whomever the GOP eventually nominates, which at this point is certain to be Trump, will be on the CA ballot in Nov 2020. Nothing the CA legislature does can change that. (Well, except cancelling the election altogether, and nominating the state’s electors some other way.)

notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital | July 31, 2019 at 1:27 pm

Can we sue the Deep State????

WHY NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Judge Jeanine: If you questioned the deep state’s existence, you just saw it – July 28, 2019

It’s very funny for me when a judicial decision reflects things I have been saying for years as a layman. This is such a case.

What I don’t understand about this decision is why, if it was a slam-dunk that any reasonable unbiased lawyer would know had no legs, the judge refused to sanction the DNC for wasting the courts time and engaging in frivolous law fare sueing…

How awesome is Donald Trump?

THIS awesome:

Trump directs Navy to rescind medals for Eddie Gallagher’s prosecutors:

That traitorous fraud obama nearly destroyed our military. The Donald has risen to the rescue.