THERE’S A NEW KID ON THE BLOCK
HTTPS://UNITEDTOPROTECTDEMOCRACY.ORG/ABOUT/
COMPILATION AND COMMENTARY
BY LUCY WARNER
JULY 14, 2017

A NEW WATCHDOG HAS EMERGED, STAFFED BY GOVERNMENT LAWYERS WHOSE PLEDGE IS TO SEEK TO RETAIN DEMOCRACY IN A TIME OF STRESS. THE TRUMP OVERREACH AND, LET’S FACE IT, THE SHEER CHAOS THAT WE ARE INVOLVED IN NOW. IF THE WORK OF THIS ORGANIZATION PANS OUT TO BE AS IMPORTANT AS IT SEEMS TO ME TO BE, IT WILL STAND BESIDE THE ACLU, SPLC, NAACP, LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS, AND OTHERS WHO EXTEND THEIR HANDS AND SOMETIMES THEIR NECKS TO PINPOINT AND UNCOVER WHAT IS DELETERIOUS TO THE FRAMEWORK AND THE PHILOSOPHICAL UNDERPINNINGS OF OUR COUNTRY. THE PLAINTIFFS IN THE CASE HAVE THE GOAL OF STICKING THEIR FINGER IN THE HOLE IN THE DIKE. “THEY WANT TO ENSURE THAT WHAT THEY HAVE GONE THROUGH DOES NOT BECOME SOMETHING WE ACCEPT AS PART OF OUR DEMOCRACY.”

SEE ALSO THEIR SITE WHICH GIVES UPDATES ON PARTICULAR ACTIONS AND NEW INFORMATION. KNOWING THAT THEY WILL UNDOUBTEDLY ASK ME FOR MONEY, I HAVE GIVEN THEM MY EMAIL ADDRESS ANYWAY, BECAUSE I WANT TO KEEP UP WITH WHAT THEY ARE DOING. THEIR UPDATE SITE IS: HTTPS://UNITEDTOPROTECTDEMOCRACY.ORG/UPDATES/.

FOR COCHRUM V TRUMP CAMPAIGN, SEE THE NYT ARTICLE BELOW. “THEY WANT TO ENSURE THAT WHAT THEY HAVE GONE THROUGH DOES NOT BECOME SOMETHING WE ACCEPT AS PART OF OUR DEMOCRACY.” OVER THE PAST 20 OR SO YEARS, WE HAVE BEEN “ACCEPTING” A GOOD MANY EVILS AS PAR FOR THE COURSE, IF NOT IDEAL; AND AS A RESULT, A CLASS OF “SLITHY TOVES” HAS EMERGED ONE AT A TIME, AS A GROUP, AND NOW AS A MOB, AS CAMP FOLLOWERS OF DONALD TRUMP.

WE PASSIVE, COMPLACENT, MIDDLE CLASS, WHITE MAJORITY MEMBERS OF AMERICAN SOCIETY LET THAT HAPPEN, BECAUSE WHEN AN INCREASE IN THE ACTIVITIES OF KKK AND FASCIST GROUPS OCCURRED, WE DID NOTHING – DIDN’T EVEN LOOK UP AND PAY ATTENTION TO THE NEWS REPORTER. THE PHILOSOPHY AND THE POLITICAL LINKS OF THE ALT-RIGHT ARE THE BACKBONE OF THAT PRO-TRUMP GROUP. THINK ABOUT ARCHIE BUNKER. HE’S THE ROLE MODEL FOR A CERTAIN SUBSET OF AMERICAN CITIZENS.

THAT’S THE KEY TO WHY SO MANY AMERICANS ARE, TO PUT IT MILDLY, NOT IN THE LEAST ACCEPTING OF HIS POSITION AS PRESIDENT, AND EAGER TO SEE HIM REMOVED FROM THE PRESIDENCY. WE ARE HORRIFIED, AND GUILT-RIDDEN, OVER OUR PARTICIPATION IN HIS SUCCESSES AMONG ONE OF THE TWO LAYERS OF POVERTY IN THE USA, THE RELATIVELY UNEDUCATED WHITES. BY NOT STANDING UP STRONGLY AGAINST THEM, NOT BEING WILLING TO PROTECT BLACKS AND OTHER MINORITIES, WE SET UP THE CULTURE MEDIUM FOR THE REGROWTH OF A DEADLY DISEASE. I CAN ONLY PRAY THAT THERE WON’T BE A “RACE WAR,” AS SOME WHITE SUPREMACISTS HAVE OPENLY CHAMPIONED, OR A TOTALITARIAN TAKEOVER WHICH IS CLOAKED BY A VENEER OF DEMOCRATIC TRADITION AND PATRIOTIC TALK. THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THE MORE “CONSERVATIVE” REPUBLICANS WANT – THE APPEARANCE OF DEMOCRACY AMID THE SMOTHERING OF REAL PARTICIPATION BY THE CITIZENS.

HTTPS://WWW.NYTIMES.COM/2017/07/12/US/POLITICS/TRUMP-CAMPAIGN-AND-ADVISER-ARE-SUED-OVER-LEAKED-EMAILS.HTML?MCUBZ=0&_R=0
Trump Campaign Is Sued Over Leaked Emails Linked to Russians
By CHARLIE SAVAGE JULY 12, 2017

Photograph -- Roger J. Stone Jr. at the La Quinta Resort and Club in La Quinta, Calif., in March. He is accused in an invasion of privacy lawsuit. Credit Jenna Schoenefeld for The New York Times

WASHINGTON — Two Democratic Party donors and a former party staff member have filed an invasion of privacy lawsuit against President Trump’s campaign and a longtime informal adviser, Roger J. Stone Jr., accusing them of conspiring in the release of hacked Democratic emails and files that exposed their personal information to the public.

The case was organized by Protect Democracy, a government watchdog group run by former Obama administration lawyers. It filed the claim just short of a deadline under a one-year statute of limitations for privacy invasion lawsuits: WikiLeaks published the first archives of stolen Democratic National Committee emails, which intelligence agencies say Russia hacked to harm Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign and help Mr. Trump, last July 22.

Mr. Trump and his political advisers, including Mr. Stone, have repeatedly denied colluding with Russia, and the 44-page complaint, filed on Wednesday in the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia, does not contain any hard evidence that his campaign did. But it is seeking to depose witnesses and obtain campaign emails and other documents during the discovery process that is a standard part of lawsuits.

If a judge permits the case to reach that stage, the lawsuit would become a new and independent fact-finding investigation into the Trump-Russia issue — one that is overseen by a judge rather than by congressional Republicans, like the oversight inquiries conducted by the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, or by the Trump administration, like the criminal inquiry led by the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III.

“These plaintiffs are using the law and the American civil justice system the way it was intended: to vindicate important rights and values, such as the right to privacy and the right to participate in the political process; and to deter others who might consider colluding with a foreign government for political gain,” said Ian Bassin, the executive director of Protect Democracy. “They want to ensure that what they have gone through does not become something we accept as part of our democracy.”

A spokesman for Mr. Trump’s outside legal team did not respond to a request for comment, but Mr. Stone called the lawsuit meritless and said he expected it to be “quickly dismissed.”

He also said “there is no evidence whatsoever” that he had advance knowledge of the hacking or that the Trump campaign was involved in it “if they were even hacked.”

Among the plaintiffs is Scott Comer, who was the chief of staff in the finance department of the Democratic National Committee, and whose hacked emails revealed to his grandparents that he is gay, which strained family relations, the lawsuit said.

Mr. Comer also received harassing and threatening phone calls, and was marginalized at work because of comments he had made about co-workers, and eventually left his job, it said.

The plaintiffs also include two Democratic Party donors, Roy Cockrum and Eric Schoenberg, whose Social Security numbers, dates of birth, home addresses and other personal details became public when WikiLeaks published the files.

The lawsuit said the disclosures resulted in attempts by strangers to steal the plaintiffs’ identities and obtain credit in their names, which caused “significant distress and anxiety and will require lifelong vigilance and expense.”

The complaint noted that the goal of the hacking “was to harm the Democratic Party’s candidate for president of the United States and improve the Trump campaign’s likelihood of success.” But, it said, “the direct victims included Mr. Cockrum, Mr. Schoenberg and Mr. Comer.”

The complaint largely consists of a catalog of publicly known facts that it presents as circumstantial evidence that the defendants had the motive, desire and opportunity to conspire with Russia. It noted public statements by the defendants and revelations about meetings and contacts with Russians that various associates of Mr. Trump concealed when applying for security clearances.

Those facts include the Trump campaign’s efforts to soften language in the Republican Party platform condemning Russia’s intervention in Ukraine, and the disclosure in recent days that in June 2016, Mr. Trump’s campaign manager, eldest son and son-in-law attended a meeting with a Russian lawyer whom they believed would give them dirt on Mrs. Clinton as part of Moscow’s support for Mr. Trump.

In addition to the invasion of privacy claim, the lawsuit contains two counts of other harms it said were a foreseeable consequence of the disclosure of the stolen emails: intentional infliction of emotional distress, and the violation of a statute that forbids conspiracies to intimidate classes of lawful voters from participating in the democratic process, or to injure them for having done so. The latter charge was brought under a federal statute that dates from a Reconstruction Era law to help combat the Ku Klux Klan. The lawsuit seeks unspecified compensatory and punitive damages.

It does not name as defendants Russia, which has sovereign immunity, or WikiLeaks, whose founder Julian Assange, an Australian citizen, is living in the embassy of Ecuador in London.

Follow Charlie Savage on Twitter @charlie_savage.


TODAY’S PROTECT DEMOCRACY UPDATE OFFERING IS –

July 14, 2017 | Protect Democracy. First Judge to Weigh in on Trump Missile Strikes Sides with Protect Democracy, Orders Administration to Expedite Document Disclosure.

Today, a federal judge sided with Protect Democracy in ordering the Departments of Defense, State and Justice to move faster in disclosing President Trump’s legal authority to conduct military strikes against the Syrian regime. In the first court opinion to weigh in on President Trump’s April 6, 2017 Tomahawk cruise missile strikes on Assad, the judge expressed concern that the American people still have not had a chance to weigh in on whether the President has authority to conduct these strikes. As the court put it: “Being closed off from such a debate is itself a harm in an open democracy,” and pointed out that the escalating conflict in Syria means the Administration must rapidly get information to the American people before it’s too late. In the court’s words: “Military strikes cannot be undone.”

Protect Democracy had requested all three Departments produce documents reflecting what the Administration’s legal authority was for conducting the April 6 strike, and after the Administration conducted a second strike, Protect Democracy moved for a preliminary injunction. In today’s opinion, the Court ordered the Department of Defense and State Department to expedite processing of Protect Democracy’s FOIA request, as the Justice Department already had, and ordered the Departments to update the court in two weeks by July 28, a remarkably short timeline seemingly reflecting the Court’s recognition of the urgency of the increasing hostilities in Syria without a proper public debate, which is precisely what motivated Protect Democracy to bring this case.

Allison Murphy, Counsel for Protect Democracy, said: “This ruling reinforces a core principle of our democracy at a critical time: the President does not have a blank check to fire missiles whenever he wants at whomever he wants. While the Assad regime has committed horrible abuses, President Trump is constrained by the law and owes the American people an explanation of his legal authority for ordering these strikes — and for any new military strikes going forward. This decision is a critical defense of Americans’ right to be a check on the executive, as an informed citizenry, on one of the most consequential decisions our government can make, the decision to start a war.”

Read the Opinion: Protect Democracy Project v. Department of Defense, et. al. (pdf)


July 12, 2017 | Protect Democracy
Why Protect Democracy is Representing Victims of Election Hacking
By Ian Bassin, Executive Director, Protect Democracy

When we founded Protect Democracy six months ago, it was to focus on efforts that are absolutely essential to the health of our democracy itself. That interest is a nonpartisan one that should be important to all Americans. Our mission is not about taking sides on policy or political fights that are more appropriately settled at the ballot box.

Since forming, we’ve worked on protecting our core checks and balances — ensuring a separation between politics and law enforcement, supporting an independent civil service and Judiciary, and bolstering the rule of law, especially on matters of war and peace. We made a point not to simply react to the latest headlines.

It became more clear every day, however, that the ultimate check in our democracy — free and fair elections — had an open wound. That in the hacking and distribution of Americans’ private information during the 2016 election, there were real victims. We thought about the people who were not political candidates or public figures, but who were just trying to participate in their democracy at the basic level as Americans always have. And it became obvious that so long as those victims didn’t have justice, their access to our democracy would stand violated and other civic-minded Americans might be chilled from participating.


WHO ARE UNITED TO PROTECT DEMOCRACY?

https://unitedtoprotectdemocracy.org/about/
About Us

What is United to Protect Democracy?

United to Protect Democracy is a nonpartisan nonprofit with an urgent goal: to hold the President and the Executive Branch accountable to the laws and longstanding practices that have protected our democracy through both Democratic and Republican Administrations. We have seen an unprecedented tide of authoritarian-style politics sweep the country that is fundamentally at odds with the Bill of Rights, the constitutional limitations on the role of the President, and the laws and unwritten norms that prevent overreach and abuse of power. The only limits to prevent a slide away from our democratic traditions will be those that are imposed by the Courts, Congress, and the American people.


Contact us:
Press inquiries: press@protectdemocracy.org
General information: info@protectdemocracy.org

Who Are We?

United to Protect Democracy was conceived by a group of former White House and Administration lawyers and experienced constitutional litigators, all with a deep understanding of how the federal government works. As we were the ones tasked with implementing and enforcing the norms that have constrained presidential power for decades, we know what those guardrails are and when those in power may be tempted to violate them. As we defended past presidents against legitimate oversight and illegitimate attacks, we also know how to leverage tools outside government to prevent the exploitation of power within it. One thing that we know about those tools, however, is they require an engaged public—they require all of us to unite to make them effective.

Meet the Protect Democracy Team.

What Will United to Protect Democracy Do?

We will monitor, investigate, report on, organize and litigate against any action taken by the Executive Branch that could erode the rules, practices and freedoms that underpin our ability as a self-governing people to hold our leaders accountable. In short, we will unite with Americans from all backgrounds to use every tool at our disposal to protect our democracy.i>

DONATE TO PROTECT DEMOCRACY
Privacy Policy

Everything that we do at United to Protect Democracy (“Protect Democracy”) is to advance the mission of protecting our democracy from descending into a more autocratic form of government by preventing those in power from entrenching or abusing their positions or depriving Americans of a free, fair and fully-informed opportunity to exercise sovereignty over our government. To advance this mission, we collect and use certain information shared with us on this website. We don’t collect or use information for any other purpose, such as commercial purposes.

This Privacy Policy governs the manner in which Protect Democracy collects, uses, maintains and discloses information collected from users (“You” or “Users”) of our website located at unitedtoprotectdemocracy.org (the “Website”).

The Types of Information Protect Democracy Collects

Non-personally identifiable information

Protect Democracy collects non-personally identifiable information about you whenever you visit our Website. Such information may include the Internet Protocol (IP) address of the computer you used, the type of browser and operating system you used, the date and time you visited the Website, the Internet address of the site from which you linked to the Website, and which pages you viewed on the Website.

Web browser cookies

The Website may use “cookies” to enhance your experience with the Website. Protect Democracy may also use cookies to measure aggregate web statistics, such as collecting the number of Users to the Website, the number of repeat Users and the most popular webpages, and for other purposes. Protect Democracy does not use cookies to track User activity on an individual basis. You may choose to set your web browser to refuse cookies, or to alert you when cookies are being sent. If you do so, however, some parts of the Website may not function properly.

Personally identifiable information

Protect Democracy collects personally identifiable information, such as names, email addresses, and mailing addresses from Users when they voluntarily provide such information to us, including, for example, when Users sign up to join our mailing list, or when Users donate to Protect Democracy or its sister organization, Protect Democracy Project.

How Protect Democracy Uses the Information that It Collects

Protect Democracy uses Users’ personal information to better understand how Users use the Website so that Protect Democracy can improve the Website in ways that would better advance our mission. Protect Democracy also uses Users’ personal information for the purpose for which the Users provided the information, in other words, to add you to our email list, to provide requested information, to process a donation, or to otherwise fulfill a request. If you provide Protect Democracy with your email address, Protect Democracy will add you to its email list. We use that list to keep our community informed of threats to the democracy and what we all can do to address those threats, as well as other ways in which we all can advance the mission of protecting our democracy.

If at any time you wish to stop receiving communications from Protect Democracy, please follow the unsubscribe instructions at the bottom of any email Protect Democracy sends you, or send Protect Democracy an email at info@protectdemocracy.org and ask to be removed from Protect Democracy’s distribution list. If you provide Protect Democracy with your cell phone number, you consent to receive autodialed and/or prerecorded messages at that number on any subject from Protect Democracy and Protect Democracy Project. We will be very sparing in using this tool, but may choose to do so in the rare instance in which we think it is the most powerful way to advance the mission of protecting our democracy.

How Protect Democracy Protects User Information

Protect Democracy adopts appropriate data collection, storage and processing practices and security measures to help protect against unauthorized access, alteration, disclosure or destruction of your personal information, but Protect Democracy cannot guarantee (as unfortunately no organization can in the modern environment) that your information is 100% secure. In addition, please recognize that email is not a secure method of communication, so you should not include sensitive information in any email you send to us. Your credit card information is not stored by Protect Democracy.