Posted on 10/26/2017 8:51:30 AM PDT by Rusty0604
WikiLeaks' publication of thousands of emails apparently hacked from the Democratic National Committee was legal and specifically protected by federal law, the Trump campaign argued in a court filing Wednesday.
The Trump campaign's motion to dismiss the case argues that WikiLeaks qualifies as the kind of online service that Congress rendered immune from legal liability through legislation passed more than two decades ago.
The motion filed Wednesday in federal court in Washington largely repeats arguments the Trump campaign advanced last month that the suit it is facing is legally flawed on a variety of grounds. The main argument is that the collection of emails published by WikiLeaks was newsworthy when taken as a whole, so the courts should not entertain a suit about their publication.
Another contention from Trump's lawyers is that allowing the lawsuit to proceed could interfere with the investigation being conducted by Special Counsel Robert Mueller.
The suit is pending before U.S. District Court Judge Ellen Huvelle, an appointee of President Bill Clinton. A spokesman for United to Protect Democracy, a liberal group representing the plaintiffs in the case, had no immediate comment on the new Trump campaign filing.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
The object of this lawsuit is to launch a private investigation into the President of the United States. Plaintiffs have not named the President as a defendant, but the complaint foreshadows a fishing expedition into his “tax returns” (Am. Compl.¶ 205), “business rlationships and financial ties” (id.), “real estate projects” (id.¶ 105), conversations “with FBI Director Comey” (id. ¶ 218), and on and on. Plaintiffs’ lawyers admit as much. They have put out a press release that describes this case as “a vehicle for discovery of documents and evidence.”
http://www.politico.com/f/?id=0000015f-5581-d77a-a35f-f5e9ab300001
The New York Time published the Pentagon papers. Same thing.
Of course it was legal. If what wikileaks did was illegal, then the whole staff of the New York Times, Washington Post, Chicago Tribune, etc, needs to be behind bars because they do the same things regularly.
The theft of the emails may have been illegal, but publishing them is wholly protected by the 1st Amendment.
If I remember correctly, Wikileaks published what the Feds had already published, right? The feds dumped them onto a website and Julian had people go through them and pick the best of the best.
Yep. Not even a close call.
um...emails weren’t hacked. They were leaked.
“The New York Time published the Pentagon papers. Same thing.
From a 1A POV, it’s the same thing.
From a moral POV, the Pentagon Papers was the publication of real, national security information. Wiki just published the internal emails of criminals.
OF COURSE Wiki is protected by the 1A. 1A does not say ONLY the WaPo and NYT are protected. It says “the press” is protected.
Publication is protected.
They were not hacked, they were leaked.
His name was Seth Rich!
Interesting the double standards of Leftists.
Obama gave a pardon to the tranny leaker who put actual American lives at risk. The Left cheered.
Wikileaks was cheered when they released Bush-era documents and videos surrounding the Gulf War 2.
But now Hillary says Assange should be murdered and Wikileaks is evil and the MSM follows suit.
Tough to keep up with the selective moral outrage.
Not same thing.
Pentagon Papers was a breach of national security by someone not having the right to publish. Illegal at face value.
DNC/WikiLeaks was by someone who had legal right to do so, employee of a private business. Legal, unless said company can produce an NDA staying the employee can’t - which requires identifying who, that likely being a Seth Rich.
This is to dismiss charges against the Trump campaign for supposedly conspiring with Wikileaks. They are just throwing everything at Trump they can.
You got that right.
The MSM publishes secret stuff all the time... the difference is they attack conservatives... which is just fine with corrupt DC elites...
They only scream when information gets out that might hurt democrats.
Yep - if the Media can print leaks and other such secrets with impunity, then no reason to call posting on Wikileaks as illegal....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.