How Ironic:
TRUE PUNDIT HAS FALSE HEADLINE
As Defiant pointed out, nowhere does the filing allege that the RATs fabricated the hack (even though we know this to be the case).
The filing points out, in a part that Bob Ireland noted, that the hack is “based on information and belief”, which is legalese for “I kinda think this is how it happened”, and argues that if the DNC can’t tell whether it suffered an interception at all, whether the Trump campaign knew about it or whether the campaign made use of it.
“even though the DNC hired a “cybersecurity technology firm” to “investigate the attack” and conduct a “forensic analysis of the DNC’s computer network”...the DNC pleads interception only “upon information and belief”....If the DNC cannot tell whether there was an interception, the Campaign surely cannot have known or had reason to know there was an interception.”
The filing does not say that the RATS fabricated the hack, as you note. It says there is no factual allegation of a hack or of use by the campaign, even after Crowdstrike got to look at the evidence. As I said previously, it is a shot across the bow, indicating that forensic analysis of the server, if it still exists, will be an issue, and the DNC BS will not survive the discovery process.