Seth Rich brings down the entire narrative, all the other shit people have pointed out in the Dossier really doesnt matter. The entire Dossier was based off a lie, Hilary's shit got ripped by Seth Rich on a thumb drive, no russians involved.
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.”
U.S. District Judge John G. Koeltl said Russia was “undoubtably” the primary wrongdoer in the alleged criminal enterprise, but the country can’t be sued in U.S. courts except in special circumstances not present in this case.
OMG, that's what the plaintiff alleges. That is funny.
Yes, yes, Time actually does make things up. Thanks for confirming that for me. Maybe if they bothered reading the rest of the document they could have reported more accurately on it.
People have said "this is a civil case and there's less burden of proof" to dismiss this. If you hear that remind them that what that means is if the FBI's report was credible it would have been more than enough proof to meet the burden.
20050724? ago
Seth Rich brings down the entire narrative, all the other shit people have pointed out in the Dossier really doesnt matter. The entire Dossier was based off a lie, Hilary's shit got ripped by Seth Rich on a thumb drive, no russians involved.
20041155? ago
Did podesta get Seth rich and andrew breitbart too?
20040814? ago
It does not say Russia did not hack the DNC server.
The court said it was obvious that Russia hacked it, but the Russian Federation couldn't be sued in that court.
20040858? ago
You must have read a different article.
20042179? ago
It's directly from the court's ruling.
https://time.com/5639493/judge-denies-trump-case/
20042186? ago
No that's from Time's reporting.
20042446? ago
Time magazine does not just make things up lol.
Here's the actual ruling from the court document.
See the last paragraph in the second page.
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/6225724/DNC-Trump-7-30-19.pdf
20042731? ago
OMG, that's what the plaintiff alleges. That is funny.
Yes, yes, Time actually does make things up. Thanks for confirming that for me. Maybe if they bothered reading the rest of the document they could have reported more accurately on it.
20042931? ago
No, you if you read the next few paragraphs you will see that it's the summary of the ruling in the first few pages.
20039957? ago
That’s worth a FF or two. Great post
20038804? ago
Big news
big enough to have warranted a FF
20038117? ago
People have said "this is a civil case and there's less burden of proof" to dismiss this. If you hear that remind them that what that means is if the FBI's report was credible it would have been more than enough proof to meet the burden.
20037302? ago
And.....crickets
20042382? ago
Because the judge did not say that Russia did not hack the DNC server. He said the opposite.
Check this https://voat.co/v/QRV/3368349/20042179
20037015? ago
NEXT MONTH - BIG BIG BIG HAPPENINS
20036879? ago
BIG HABBENINGS!™
20041129? ago
“July 31, 2019”
“Quick everyone, check out last weeks news!”
If it were the Epstein dump that’d be different, but it’s not.
20041703? ago
It was last week, but no one reported it because of false flags.
20042759? ago
You might have missed it: https://voat.co/v/QRV/3366023
It hit front page with 200+ upvotes.
20042807? ago
Yes, then false flags distracted from it. It was time to bring it back up again.
We won't forget.