Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Tuesday March 17 2020, @01:43PM   Printer-friendly
from the prosecution-lacks-conviction dept.

https://www.courthousenews.com/feds-move-to-drop-charges-against-russian-firm-filed-in-mueller-probe/

A federal judge on Monday dismissed charges against a Russian company accused of funding the Kremlin's efforts to influence the 2016 presidential election, after federal prosecutors said the company has flaunted court rules and made the prosecution more trouble than it is worth.

The ruling by U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich came hours after the Justice Department asked to drop the charges against Concord Management and Consulting.

"There is a substantial federal interest in defending American democratic institutions, exposing those who endeavor to criminally interfere with them, and holding them accountable, which is why this prosecution was properly commenced in the first place," the government said in a 9-page motion filed Monday. "In light of the defendant's conduct, however, its ephemeral presence and immunity to just punishment, the risk of exposure of law enforcement's tools and techniques and the post-indictment change in the proof available at trial, the balance of equities has shifted."

Part of special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation, a grand jury in February 2018 indicted Concord Management and Consulting, as well as 13 Russian nationals and two other companies in connection with Russian efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential elections using social media troll farms and influence campaigns.

Concord Management was the only alleged conspirator to enter an appearance in court and vigorously contested the charges over the ensuing two years.

But prosecutors say Concord Management has never really participated in the prosecution, instead using court proceedings to collect information about how the U.S. government responds to and monitors efforts from foreign countries to interfere in its elections.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 17 2020, @02:18PM (32 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 17 2020, @02:18PM (#972209)

    But prosecutors say Concord Management has never really participated in the prosecution, instead using court proceedings to collect information about how the U.S. government responds to and monitors efforts from foreign countries to interfere in its elections.

    We had to drop the charges because taking this to trial would mean we needed to provide evidence.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +5  
       Troll=1, Redundant=1, Insightful=7, Total=9
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 3, Touché) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday March 17 2020, @02:27PM (25 children)

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday March 17 2020, @02:27PM (#972215) Journal

    True, but, we need remember something. Jurisdiction. We got none in Russia. Nada, zilch, zero.

    Among the first lessons a leader must learn, if he hopes to be an effective leader, is to never give an order that you know won't be obeyed. Our "justice department" can sit at the edge of our yard, and/or at the edge of Russia's yard, and bark endlessly. That barking isn't going to get the people they want, though.

    It's better to STFU, and crawl back under the porch, than to sit outside yapping away, annoying the neighbors.

    • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 17 2020, @02:43PM (8 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 17 2020, @02:43PM (#972228)

      The wrong department was used. The CIA was the one to use. Make the heads of the company worry. This is why you don't let the public know what's going on at the federal level. Public opinion should never guide high level decisions of a Corp or Country.
      Ignore the SJW while they bark at the fence.

      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 17 2020, @05:40PM (7 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 17 2020, @05:40PM (#972354)

        Oh come now. Do you think anybody actually cared about the alleged "meddling" in and of itself? Can you even define meddling? I damn sure can't in any way that makes it anything whatsoever unique. For instance take the same standard social media companies used to point to "Russian agents" meddling. That seemed to be somebody from Russia engaging in political actions around the US election. Ok, now take that same standard and tell me how many "American agents" meddling in Brexit? Or even back to our own election, how many "Israeli agents" or "Mexican agents" meddled?

        It's a nonsensical allegation. This [google.com] is a Google Trends for "election meddling". It didn't exist (practically speaking) until we invented it as an allegation after Trump was elected. And it was never about any alleged crime. It was an effort to try to undermine Trump and undermine democracy. Because by suggesting it was the evil reds manipulating people, you don't have to accept that Trump was democratically elected. And indeed, the establishment has been trying to get Trump out of office since day 0 of his election.

        The reason it was parroted out is because it was never about the offense. It was about trying to manipulate public opinion and spread FUD - fear, uncertainty, and doubt - a disinformation strategy used to manipulate people. To put it more succinctly - propaganda. Quite ironic.

        • (Score: 5, Interesting) by DeathMonkey on Tuesday March 17 2020, @05:44PM (6 children)

          by DeathMonkey (1380) on Tuesday March 17 2020, @05:44PM (#972356) Journal

          It is illegal for foreign governments to help candidates win elections.

          Do you think anybody actually cared about the alleged "meddling" in and of itself?

          George Washington cared about meddling:

          "A free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government.” Washington’s Farewell Address, 1796

          • (Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 17 2020, @05:48PM (1 child)

            by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 17 2020, @05:48PM (#972362)

            Russia hoax, fake news, deep state FBI. Umm, 12D chess!

            • (Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 17 2020, @07:44PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 17 2020, @07:44PM (#972432)

              ...Fake president...

          • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 17 2020, @07:19PM (3 children)

            by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 17 2020, @07:19PM (#972420)

            Ah, so when Obama chose to speak in Britain about Brexit and was overtly trying to direct Brits on who to elect, that was illegal?

            This is the thing about the "meddling". No matter how you try to define it, it's mostly nonsensical. And that's the reason it only became a term in 2016. It's one of those things that sounds kind of scary and ominous, but when you actually ask yourself what is actually being alleged - it is mostly nonsensical, capricious, arbitrary, and above all - grossly exaggerated.

            • (Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 17 2020, @07:41PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 17 2020, @07:41PM (#972428)

              Like the virus crisis.

            • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Tuesday March 17 2020, @08:00PM

              by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Tuesday March 17 2020, @08:00PM (#972440)

              Hey A/C, can you tell us about Obama's tan suit or how awful it is to put mustard on a hamburger?

            • (Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 17 2020, @10:38PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 17 2020, @10:38PM (#972513)

              Lol at Soylent for this having a troll mod

    • (Score: 5, Interesting) by hendrikboom on Tuesday March 17 2020, @02:44PM (15 children)

      by hendrikboom (1125) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday March 17 2020, @02:44PM (#972229) Homepage Journal

      There well may have been evidence. The grand jury seemed to think so. But without jurisdiction, evidence is useless.

      • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Tuesday March 17 2020, @03:14PM (10 children)

        by DeathMonkey (1380) on Tuesday March 17 2020, @03:14PM (#972253) Journal

        It's not like this would be hard to prove. The DNC hacking, maybe, but this is about the troll farm not the hacking.

        I mean, crap, they couldn't even remember to turn their VPN on first! [twitter.com]

        • (Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 17 2020, @03:25PM (9 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 17 2020, @03:25PM (#972262)

          The DNC "hacker"/leaker is a true American hero! He needs to get the presidential medal of freedom. We desperately need more like him!

          • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 17 2020, @03:51PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 17 2020, @03:51PM (#972286)

            The DNC "hacker"/leaker is a true American hero!

            Unfortunately he fell victim to an all-too-common occurrence these days:

            being shot during a robbery in broad daylight without having anything stolen

            Happens all the time.

          • (Score: 0, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 17 2020, @08:16PM (7 children)

            by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 17 2020, @08:16PM (#972449)

            Check out all the downmods!

            Democrat BrownShirts are hyperactive today!

            They are doing Trump's dirty work for him. They actually prefer him to their own candidate!

            • (Score: 2, Funny) by DeathMonkey on Tuesday March 17 2020, @09:12PM (6 children)

              by DeathMonkey (1380) on Tuesday March 17 2020, @09:12PM (#972479) Journal

              WAAAAAAHHHH! People don't like my internet post.

              I was also downmodded but you don't see me crying about it like a little bitch.

              • (Score: 0, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 17 2020, @10:03PM (4 children)

                by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 17 2020, @10:03PM (#972499)

                WAAAAAAHHHH! People don't like my internet post.

                Nah, it's democrats saying, WAAAHH! you hurt my feels!

                Then they try to filter out the post for everybody.

                Downmodders are the whiny little bitches. We need to publicly shame them more.

                • (Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday March 18 2020, @10:48AM (3 children)

                  by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday March 18 2020, @10:48AM (#972703) Journal

                  Downmodders are the whiny little bitches. We need to publicly shame them more.

                  You're not even starting to do that.

                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 18 2020, @04:47PM (2 children)

                    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 18 2020, @04:47PM (#972810)

                    That's right The little psychos are loving the attention, so they'll probably do it more. I don't mind. The visiting aliens can see right through them.

                    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 19 2020, @12:26AM (1 child)

                      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 19 2020, @12:26AM (#972992)

                      Guess I'll be the one to let you know, you're the one coming off as a little psycho right now.

                      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 19 2020, @10:59PM

                        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 19 2020, @10:59PM (#973328)

                        Yeah well, at least I'm not a democrat! So there's still hope...

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 18 2020, @07:47PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 18 2020, @07:47PM (#972887)

                That's probably because you downvote more than anybody on this site. I'll grant you that sliver of self awareness to see the irony in complaining about it. Anyhow, you always hand the handful of 2 or 3 suspects to give you a bump right back.

      • (Score: 5, Informative) by hemocyanin on Tuesday March 17 2020, @03:58PM

        by hemocyanin (186) on Tuesday March 17 2020, @03:58PM (#972292) Journal

        LOL: https://johnhelms.attorney/grand-jury-indict-ham-sandwich/ [johnhelms.attorney]

        Before the grand jury votes on an indictment, the Government will present evidence to the grand jury. Usually, this consists of a law enforcement agent testifying about the evidence the agent knows would show the defendant is guilty. The agent is allowed to testify about what others have told the agent. This is called hearsay. In trials, hearsay is normally not allowed, but it is allowed in grand jury proceedings. The accused does not participate in the presentation to the grand jury. This means that the accused and the lawyer for the accused cannot cross-examine the agent, present their own evidence, or even be present. In addition, the Government is not required to present both sides’ positions. So, a grand jury proceeding is very one-sided.

        Finally, in order to vote for an indictment, grand jurors must only be convinced that there is probable cause to believe that the defendant committed the crime charged. Probable cause is a very low standard of proof. It is far less than the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard required to prove someone guilty at a trial. It basically means that a reasonable person could believe that the person probably committed the crime. This does not even mean that the person probably committed the crime—only that a reasonable person could believe that.

        The one-sidedness, combined with the low standard of proof (probable cause), means that federal grand juries almost always vote to indict someone. When I was a federal prosecutor, I do not recall a federal grand jury ever voting down a proposed indictment in my district. The ease of getting an indictment is why it is said that a grand jury would indict a ham sandwich.

      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by RandomFactor on Tuesday March 17 2020, @04:21PM

        by RandomFactor (3682) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday March 17 2020, @04:21PM (#972311) Journal

        The grand jury seemed to think so.

        Well, that at least puts defendants up there with a ham sandwich :-\
         
        Dropping the charges because a defendant is doing what defendants do leans towards there being an expectation that no defense would be mounted and the purpose of charging was more strongly weighted towards the visuals of indicting Russians than any serious interest in prosecuting. There is likely some evidence under the covers, but it could easily be rationalization of a pre-existing view vs. anything concrete.

        --
        В «Правде» нет известий, в «Известиях» нет правды
      • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Captival on Tuesday March 17 2020, @05:04PM

        by Captival (6866) on Tuesday March 17 2020, @05:04PM (#972332)

        Jurisdiction was a problem from the very beginning, so why did they spend all this time and money and wait until now to cancel? Clearly because it was all a dog and pony show to begin with.

      • (Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 17 2020, @05:21PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 17 2020, @05:21PM (#972341)

        In a related story, the same House members who said during the Impeachment that it was absolutely vital to question John Bolton, have decided not to bother. That attempt to destroy Trump failed, and besides, they have this new shiny thing (Corona virus) that will bring Trump down, this time definitely!

  • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 17 2020, @03:21PM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 17 2020, @03:21PM (#972258)

    You know, when you go around demanding actual evidence, you're going to trigger a lot of democrats. That is why you got modded down. They are still enraged over their election loss. And demanding things like evidence only means that you are pro-Trump. Notice if you will, that absolutely none leaked out during the entire impeachment charade, and the man is still securely on the job. Infuriating, ain't it?

    • (Score: 5, Informative) by DeathMonkey on Tuesday March 17 2020, @05:40PM (1 child)

      by DeathMonkey (1380) on Tuesday March 17 2020, @05:40PM (#972352) Journal

      That's what trials are for, presenting evidence.

      Barr decided enforcing the law was just too darn hard and would make Trump look bad so why bother.

      The only ones choosing to present zero evidence are Barr's prosecutors.

      • (Score: 0, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 17 2020, @05:58PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 17 2020, @05:58PM (#972368)

        *sigh* same old partisan bullshit...

        Democrats hardly made any effort. Aside from bringing in more money, they have failed in every way, to the point of it being intentional to cover their own asses. Enforcing the law will make them all look bad. There's so little demand, from the voters that just will not elect a competent congress.

  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by hemocyanin on Tuesday March 17 2020, @03:48PM

    by hemocyanin (186) on Tuesday March 17 2020, @03:48PM (#972282) Journal

    Agree. And this line is the most ridiculous excuse ever -- like my dog ate my homework level: " federal prosecutors said the company has flaunted court rules and made the prosecution more trouble than it is worth."

    Federal prosecutors are overly aggressive assholes. This reason is pure BS.

  • (Score: 1, Interesting) by fustakrakich on Tuesday March 17 2020, @04:22PM (1 child)

    by fustakrakich (6150) on Tuesday March 17 2020, @04:22PM (#972312) Journal

    taking this to trial would mean we needed to provide evidence.

    Yes, and that evidence would implicate everybody, it would expose their world to the public.

    --
    La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 18 2020, @04:37AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 18 2020, @04:37AM (#972644)

      Troll

      Democrats are so defensive about their dirty little secrets!