Seth Rich Attorney's Subpoena Twitter Messages Of Wikileaks & Other Outlets

a reply to: burntheships

What are they suing for, exactly?

a reply to: burntheships

I believe they are attempting to demonstrate that Wikileaks, Kim, etc had no actual basis for the stories they published (on their websites, Tweetface, etc) relating to Rich's death.

Of course, if those publications have the goods, then it doesn't bode well for your suit.

originally posted by: KansasGirl
a reply to: burntheships

What are they suing for, exactly?

Defamation.

So they have to show that it was malicious or reckless (and false).

They want to root through the muck to see what they find to support that accusation.


Plot twist: assuming the unnamed "Obama lawyers" angle is true (I haven't looked into at all), then this discovery, if allowed, would let them see what exactly is out there re:Rich, and plan ahead to craft a new narrative around it before they paint themselves in a corner. So even if the civil suit falls flat, they get a heads up to what may be coming down the pike.

a reply to: burntheships

If the sources named produce damming information, there a possibility that a chain of custody can be established for the information. This may verify Hillary and the DNC had a lot to lose and would put them in the crosshairs as the prime motivation for his murder. It may be a fishing expidition or there may be solid reasons for the request. In any event, I imagine buckets of sweat are being produced in the Clintonista camp.

Cheers - Dave

originally posted by: KansasGirl
a reply to: burntheships

What are they suing for, exactly?

This subpoena is for the private direct messages sent over twitter platform.

It seems it must be related to the other lawsuit, but I have not been
able to verify that yet.

It seems like a bit of an overreaction for a "closed" case.

Like Star Wars Episode 1 when ObiWan feels like there's a lot of anxiety over a "mere trade dispute".

a reply to: FlyingFox

Agreed, especially considering that some of the people
subpoenaed are merely bystanders.

Are people not allowed to gossip any longer?

a reply to: Tekaran

Why do you think that?