(Need Lawfags to Weigh-In on this)
WHAT IF THIS IS A PART OF "SETTING-THE-STAGE" SO THE "RAW DATA" CAN BE BROUGHT IN AS EVIDENCE FOR THE RUSSIA COLLUSION/SR CASE THAT THE DNC FILED IN WHICH WIKILEAKS IS ALSO A DEFENDANT?
Follow Me Here:
When the DNC filed the "RUSSIAN COLLUSION" lawsuit the day after Q's "Q&A" session on the board (where he answered a question on Seth Rich and later confirmed it was "bait" so evidence could be brought into court – see graphics), I posted a question asking, "What if they just decide to WITHDRAW the case? What would happen then?" Although I never got an answer, (I FIGURED Q would have already thought of this angle anyways) I did mention at the time a potential possibility (??) that WE'D still be able to continue (basically counter-sue) since THEY had already opened the door??
FASTFORWARD:
Seeing the recent Wikileaks "Q-8Chan Slam" on their twitter account yesterday, I began to WONDER IF THIS WAS A PART OF THE PLAN for us to "bypass" any DNC hurdles (regrets) in terms of obtaining discovery? In other words, did we need to COUNTER-SUE A CO-DEFENDANT (don't know if this is a possibility) in order to get the raw data ourselves into evidence???
As so I went to dig – I was very curious to know if the CASE was still on-going AND IF THE DNC WAS PUTTING UP ROADBLOCKS (knowing NOW that it was a set-up) to discovery. Lo and behold, I found a very INTERESTING ARTICLE which may SUPPORT my theory on Wikileaks(???)
Will DNC Civil Suit Against Trump, Russia Lead to an E-Discovery Battle?
The DNC complaint paints a picture of a clandestine effort to undermine Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, coordinated through a series of illicit communications, Russian hacking into the DNC’s computers, and the dissemination of sensitive information to the public.
In such a discovery phase, a defendant could make moves to determine the nature and scope of intrusions by actions like demanding to inspect DNC servers to see whether a malicious code was installed
Additionally, objections could be raised on privacy grounds, Malhotra said, given that servers could contain sensitive third-party information.
Further on….However, compelling certain parties to produce could prove problematic.
BOTTOM LINE: I've seen a lot of JA twats that made it seem like he was SUPPORTIVE OF POTUS and have had a "gut feeling" he's been working right along-side of us.
IF THIS IS TRUE,^^^THEN COUNTER-SUING A "FRIEND" MAY LOOK A BIT SUSPECT AND THUS, THE OPEN OPPOSITION. LONG SHOT: IT MAY ALSO EXPLAIN JA'S SILENCE ON TWAT!
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/dnc-civil-suit-against-trump-160031867.html