SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
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.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 17 2020, @07:19PM (3 children)
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
Like the virus crisis.
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Tuesday March 17 2020, @08:00PM
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
Lol at Soylent for this having a troll mod