As lawyers for former President Donald Trump move forward with a $100 million dollar lawsuit against former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, they have also asked that a judge assigned to the case recuse himself on grounds that he was appointed to the federal bench by President Bill Clinton.
The suit brought by Trump alleges that Clinton and political associates were involved in a racketeering conspiracy by claiming that Trump was engaged in Russian collusion during the 2016 election.
Trump’s lawyers have asked Judge Donald Middlebrooks to recuse himself from the racketeering suit Trump filed against Hillary Clinton. They allege the judge could be seen as biased since Bill Clinton chose him for the federal court bench in 1997.https://t.co/rozS7bgRur
— POLITICO (@politico) April 4, 2022
Just A Coincidence?
Lawyers for Donald Trump, Alina Habba and Peter Ticktin argue that Bill Clinton-appointed Judge Donald Middlebrooks could be biased based on his being appointed by the defendant’s husband.
The motion filed by Habba and Ticktin reads in part:
“There is no question that Judge’s [sic] Middlebrooks’ impartiality would be questioned by a disinterested observer, fully informed of the facts, due to Judge’s relationship with the Defendant, either, individually, or by the very nature of his appointment to the Federal Bench, by the Defendant’s husband.
The most important issue is not simply that justice must be done, but also that justice must appear to be done. This could not be more important in a case like the above styled cause, where wrongs in regard to a presidential election are to be redressed.”
Support Conservative Voices!
Sign up to receive the latest political news, insight, and commentary delivered directly to your inbox.
Naturally, judges are placed, at least partially, for their perceived agreement with the philosophies of the President that appoints them.
The motion continues:
“Moreover, the Plaintiff is unaware of the exact extent of the relationship between Judge Middlebrooks and the Defendant, HILLARY CLINTON, herself, who acted as First Lady of the United States, during the time of the Judge’s nomination to Federal Court Judge. The Plaintiff is also unaware if the Judge has current [sic] relationship with either the Defendant, HILLARY CLINTON, or her husband, and how far back the relationship has existed.”
Crumbs in comparison to the Hell their Actions Put American Citizens Through! Prayers every night that Trumps Lawsuit Against Them All Brings Huge Consequences For Every Single One Of Them Guilty of These Criminal Acts! Faux Russian Hoax! Hillary’s Crime Alone!
— L’SimplyARose (@SimplyARose) March 31, 2022
Nature Of The Suit
The suit, filed in late March, is seeking damages of roughly $100 million. It alleges that Clinton and the others are accused of having “maliciously conspired to weave a false narrative that … Trump was colluding with a hostile foreign sovereignty.”
It also states that the alleged conspiracy ultimately resulted in “an unthinkable plot – one that shocks the conscience and is an affront to this nation’s democracy.” Others named in the lawsuit include the Democrat National Committee (DNC), former FBI director James Comey, former FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, and current National Security Advisor for the Biden administration Jake Sullivan.
The lawsuit also names several involved in the infamous Steele dossier, including the creator of the dossier, former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele. The document is credited with kicking off Russiagate in earnest.
Ignore the amount Hillary Clinton has been fined by the FEC for, the fact that they did it is enough reason for Trump to win his historic lawsuit and I imagine this fuels more Durham indictments very soon. It’s all going to come together
— George (@BehizyTweets) March 30, 2022
Still More Trouble For Hillary
As if this was not enough bad news for team Hillary, the Federal Election Commission recently fined Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign and the DNC for improper campaign finance disclosures.
The DNC was ordered to pay $105,000 and the Clinton campaign 8,000 for failing to disclose payments for the Steele dossier.
The fine was issued because the Clinton campaign was dishonest about the financing of the dossier, “claiming it was for legal services, not opposition research.”
Both the DNC and the Clinton campaign have denied any wrongdoing, but the fine is sure to play a role in the racketeering lawsuit.
Remember when Democrats and media (but I repeat myself) tried to tell us that it was actually Republicans who funded the Steele Dossier?
Shouldn’t the FEC fine the media outlets who pushed that lie along with Hillary Clinton?
— RBe (@RBPundit) March 31, 2022