Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  newsreader  login

... I want a COLOR T.V. and a VIBRATING BED!!!

rocksolid / News / US federal court exposes Democratic Party conspiracy against Assange and WikiLea

o US federal court exposes Democratic Party conspiracy against Assange aAnonUser

US federal court exposes Democratic Party conspiracy against Assange and WikiLea
From: AnonU...@rslight.i2p (AnonUser)
Subject: US federal court exposes Democratic Party conspiracy against Assange and
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2019 01:03:57 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: Rocksolid Light
Message-ID: <01dd27fae00de1c247f1140726121d6b$>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2019 01:03:57 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info:; posting-account="retrobbs1"; posting-host="localhost:";
logging-data="22570"; mail-complaints-to=""
User-Agent: rslight (
X-Spam-Checker-Version: RSLight spam filter 0.6
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$VBdEhafkftfTKLKjcinND.IZCy0ZMepV5z7CzSvuwZKDPeWFxypn2
Xref: rslight2
 by: AnonUser - Sat, 3 Aug 2019 01:03 UTC

Judge dismisses DNC lawsuit
US federal court exposes Democratic Party conspiracy against Assange and
By Eric London
31 July 2019

In a ruling published late Tuesday, Judge John Koeltl of the US District
Court for the Southern District of New York delivered a devastating blow
to the US-led conspiracy against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.

In his ruling, Judge Koeltl, a Bill Clinton nominee and former assistant
special prosecutor for the Watergate Special Prosecution Force, dismissed
“with prejudice” a civil lawsuit filed in April 2018 by the Democratic
National Committee (DNC) alleging WikiLeaks was civilly liable for
conspiring with the Russian government to steal DNC emails and data and
leak them to the public.

Jennifer Robinson, a leading lawyer for Assange, and other WikiLeaks
attorneys welcomed the ruling as “an important win for free speech.”

The decision exposes the Democratic Party in a conspiracy of its own to
attack free speech and cover up the crimes of US imperialism and the
corrupt activities of the two parties of Wall Street. Judge Koeltl stated:

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. But that would impermissibly elevate
a purely private privacy interest to override the First Amendment interest
in the publication of matters of the highest public concern. 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. This type of information is plainly
of the type entitled to the strongest protection that the First Amendment

The ruling exposes the illegality of the conspiracy by the US government,
backed by the governments of Britain, Ecuador, Australia and Sweden and
the entire corporate media and political establishment, to extradite
Assange to the US, where he faces 175 years in federal prison on charges
including espionage.

The plaintiff in the civil case—the Democratic Party—has also served
as Assange’s chief prosecutor within the state apparatus for over a
decade. During the Obama administration, Democratic Party Justice
Department officials, as well as career Democratic holdovers under the
Trump administration, prepared the criminal case against him.

The dismissal of the civil suit exposes massive unreported conflicts of
interest and prosecutorial misconduct and criminal abuse of process by
those involved. The criminal prosecution of Assange has nothing to do with
facts and is instead aimed at punishing him for telling the truth about
the war crimes committed by US imperialism and its allies.

The judge labeled WikiLeaks an “international news organization” and
said Assange is a “publisher,” exposing the liars in the corporate
press who declare that Assange is not subject to free speech protections.
Judge Koeltl continued: “In New York Times Co. v. United States, the
landmark ‘Pentagon Papers’ case, the Supreme Court upheld the
press’s right to publish information of public concern obtained from
documents stolen by a third party.”

As a legal matter, by granting WikiLeaks’ motion to dismiss, the court
ruled that the DNC had not put forward a “factually plausible” claim.
At the motion to dismiss stage, a judge is required to accept all the
facts alleged by the plaintiff as true. Here, the judge ruled that even if
all the facts alleged by the DNC were true, no fact-finder could “draw
the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct

Going a step further, the judge called the DNC’s arguments
“threadbare,” adding: “At no point does the DNC allege any facts”
showing that Assange or WikiLeaks “participated in the theft of the
DNC’s information.”

Judge Koeltl said the DNC’s argument that Assange and WikiLeaks
“conspired with the Russian Federation to steal and disseminate the
DNC’s materials” is “entirely divorced from the facts.” The judge
further ruled that the court “is not required to accept conclusory
allegations asserted as facts.”

The judge further dismantled the DNC’s argument that WikiLeaks is
guilty-by-association with Russia, calling the alleged connection between
Assange and the Russian government “irrelevant,” because “a person
is entitled to publish stolen documents that the publisher requested from
a source so long as the publisher did not participate in the theft.”

Judge Koeltl also rejected the DNC’s claim “that WikiLeaks can be held
liable for the theft as an after-the-fact coconspirator of the stolen
documents.” Calling this argument “unpersuasive,” the judge wrote
that it would “eviscerate” constitutional protections: “Such a rule
would render any journalist who publishes an article based on stolen
information a coconspirator in the theft.”

In its April 2018 complaint, the DNC put forward a series of claims that
have now been exposed as brazen lies, including that Assange, Trump and
Russia “undermined and distorted the DNC’s ability to communicate the
party’s values and visions to the American electorate.”

The complaint also alleged: “Russian intelligence services then
disseminated the stolen, confidential materials through GRU Operative #1,
as well as WikiLeaks and Assange, who were actively supported by the Trump
Campaign and Trump Associates as they released and disclosed the
information to the American public at a time and in a manner that served
their common goals.”

At the time the DNC filed its complaint, the New York Times wrote that the
document relies on “publicly-known facts” as well as “information
that has been disclosed in news reports and subsequent court
proceedings.” The lawsuit “comes amid a swirl of intensifying scrutiny
of Mr. Trump, his associates and their interactions with Russia,” the
Times wrote.

It is deeply ironic that Judge Koeltl cited the Pentagon Papers case, New
York Times Co. v. United States, in his ruling.

The DNC’s baseless complaint cited the New York Times eight times as
“proof” of Assange and WikiLeaks’ ties to Russia, including articles
by Times reporters Andrew Kramer, Michael Gordon, Niraj Chokshi, Sharon
LaFraniere, K.K. Rebecca Lai, Eric Lichtblau, Noah Weiland, Alicia
Parlapiano and Ashley Parker, as well as a July 26, 2016 article by
Charlie Savage titled “Assange, avowed foe of Clinton, timed email
release for Democratic Convention.”

The first of these articles was published just weeks after the New York
Times hired James Bennet as its editorial page editor in March 2016. James
Bennet’s brother, Michael Bennet, is a presidential candidate, a senator
from Colorado and former chair of the DNC’s Democratic Senatorial
Campaign Committee. In 2018, Bennet signed a letter to Vice President Mike
Pence noting he was “extremely concerned” that Ecuador had not
canceled asylum for Assange, who was then trapped in the Ecuadorian
embassy in London.

“It is imperative,” the letter read, “that you raise US concerns
with [Ecuadorian] President [Lenin] Moreno about Ecuador’s continued
support for Mr. Assange at a time when WikiLeaks continues its efforts to
undermine democratic processes globally.”

In April 2019, after the Trump administration announced charges against
Assange, the New York Times editorial board, under James Bennet’s
direction, wrote: “The administration has begun well by charging Mr.
Assange with an indisputable crime.” Two weeks later, Michael Bennet
announced his presidential run and has since enjoyed favorable coverage in
the Times editorial page.

Additionally, the father of James and Michael Bennet, Douglas Bennet,
headed the CIA-linked United States Agency for International Development
in the late 1970s and early 1980s.

On Wednesday, the Times published a brief, six-paragraph article on page
25 under the headline, “DNC lawsuit against election is dismissed.” In
its online edition, the Times prominently featured a link to its special
page for the Mueller Report, which is based on the same DNC-instigated
threadbare lies that Judge Koeltl kicked out of federal court.
Posted on Rocksolid Light


rocksolid light 0.9.1
clearnet tor