Worthwhile Articles: Trump's Suit, Election Fraud, CRT In Schools

This will simply be some quick links to articles that may well be of interest to readers.

I’ve been asked about Trump’s civil suit. I haven’t read the complaint because I’ve been a bit skeptical about Trump’s chances—just a seat of the pants reaction. Plus, obviously, I’ve been focused on Ukraine and all that. Margot Cleveland has read the complaint and offers her analysis—which is pretty much the same as mine. The difference is that she provides some detailed reasoning:

Can Trump Win His Lawsuit Against Hillary Clinton And The DNC For Their Russia Collusion Lies?

Former President Trump’s lawyers allege a total of 16 separate counts, ranging from racketeering claims to state tort claims.

Last week, former President Donald Trump filed a sprawling lawsuit against Hillary Clinton and the other main players responsible for the Russia collusion hoax. Here’s your lawsplainer for Trump v. Clinton, et. al.

Cleveland breaks the complaint down by category of allegations, after an overall introduction to the factual background. I provide only Cleveland’s conclusion—follow the link for her reasoning:

1. RICO and RICO Conspiracy

Trump’s RICO conspiracy claim will likely fail for the same reason his RICO claim will be dismissed — it was untimely and thus is barred by the statute of limitations.

2. Injurious Falsehood and Conspiracy to Commit Injurious Falsehood2. Injurious Falsehood and Conspiracy to Commit Injurious Falsehood

It seems unlikely the court will view these statements as sufficient to qualify as a falsehood likely to induce others not to deal with Trump, and thus this claim is likely to fail as well. The conspiracy claim in Count IV is likely to also fail because the alleged injurious falsehoods fall outside the statute of limitations.

3. Malicious Prosecution and Conspiracy to Commit Malicious Prosecution

To recover for a civil conspiracy, a plaintiff must show an agreement between two or more parties to do an unlawful act or a lawful act by unlawful means, doing some overt act in pursuance of the conspiracy and damage to the plaintiff as a result. However, because there was no institution of criminal proceedings, this claim will fare no better.

4. Computer Fraud Abuse Act and the Stored Communications Act

If the court finds Trump sufficiently alleged violations of the CFAA and the SCA, the claims will likely survive the statute of limitations challenges because those statutes provide a lawsuit may be filed within “two years from the date the claimant first discovered or had a reasonable opportunity to discover the violation.” ... Here, the clock does not start ticking until Trump discovered the alleged violation. And in this case, Trump only learned of the alleged violations by Joffe within the last year, following the indictment of Sussmann.

5. Theft of Trade Secrets Act

A court is extremely unlikely to find that the DNS data allegedly mined “derives independent economic value” or otherwise constitutes a trade secret, and thus this claim will likely be tossed as well.

6. Agency and Respondeat Superior

… without an underlying wrong by an employee in the first instance, there can be no respondeat superior liability. Thus, the first question is whether Trump properly alleged an employee of the above enterprises committed a wrong for which the law provides a remedy. As detailed above, most of Trump’s legal theory seems doomed, making these claims futile as well.

Next Steps

… it is at least plausible that he will be able to tweak the case enough to keep some of his claims alive for a bit, most likely his Computer Fraud Abuse Act and Stored Communications Act claims given that it is not yet clear what data Joffe allegedly accessed.

Sadly, though, Trump may in the end join Svetlana Lokhova and Alfa Bank as victims of Spygate for whom the legal system provided no relief. There is still hope for justice for Carter Page, though.

Now, briefly …

John Lott has an interesting article on election fraud. He thinks something should be done about it:

New Peer-Reviewed Research Finds Evidence of 2020 Voter Fraud

And here are two articles about the excesses of CRT in government run schools in two school districts that appear to be rather upscale and decidedly white. You get what you pay or vote for, but people are waking up to what they’ve paid or voted for:

Wisconsin School District Claims White Students Can’t Be Discriminated Against

What that actually means, of course, is that white students CAN be discriminated against. It’s simply CRT doctrine—although not the law—that discrimination against whites is not discrimination. Simple, really.

Edmonds School District tells 7-year-olds that gender doesn’t exist, asked for their pronouns

Who could object to that? And yet, at least a few parents did object. They got the back of the hand from the school district.