If they have American assets the court can lay hands on those.
Yes, this is a thing, but can be an extremely complicated thing to untangle and would probably not warrant the effort as long as we're talking about thousands and not millions of dollars.
I guess that depends on how long they don't turn over info for. Long enough and it could start looking worthwhile.
This is, of course, assuming that they're unwilling to pay. The fact that they are working within the US system to appeal (albeit with apparently trollish US lawyers?) suggests that they have enough investment in the American market that they're trying to normalize things and continue doing business however they have in the past. It may not end up being an issue at all.
You're mixing up the 6000 court cases, the Troll lawyers are representing the russian troll farm (fitting); we don't know much of anything about the company refusing to cooperate.
Well things are getting interesting over here now again.
Quick edit: oh and the judge is a trump appointee, FYI.
My guess is they are dicking her around because it's Russia and that's what they do. And no judge, regardless of political affiliation, likes that shit.
Lawyers for one of the Russian companies charged over election meddling continue to file peevish things in court, this time about how unhappy the judge seemed to be about previous peevish filings ->
Brad Heath is a reporter for USA Today.
You know, there's stupid.
And then there's this.
Get the popcorn, the fallout from this is going to be amazing.
I believe that right after what’s posted here, they go on to complain about Rachel Maddow doing a segment about their childish filings.
If they have American assets the court can lay hands on those.
Yes, this is a thing, but can be an extremely complicated thing to untangle and would probably not warrant the effort as long as we're talking about thousands and not millions of dollars.
I guess that depends on how long they don't turn over info for. Long enough and it could start looking worthwhile.
This is, of course, assuming that they're unwilling to pay. The fact that they are working within the US system to appeal (albeit with apparently trollish US lawyers?) suggests that they have enough investment in the American market that they're trying to normalize things and continue doing business however they have in the past. It may not end up being an issue at all.
You're mixing up the 6000 court cases, the Troll lawyers are representing the russian troll farm (fitting); we don't know much of anything about the company refusing to cooperate.
I was JUST about to post that same thing. I conflated the two cases.
The Russian troll farm is indeed represented by a US troll lawyer that is based in Washington DC.
Maddow also spent maybe about 5 minutes of her show on these clowns, mostly just laughing at how dumb they are and giving a rundown of the judge ripping them apart.
She also drew attention to the fact that they are being used as a tool of Russian intelligence.
If they have American assets the court can lay hands on those.
Yes, this is a thing, but can be an extremely complicated thing to untangle and would probably not warrant the effort as long as we're talking about thousands and not millions of dollars.
I guess that depends on how long they don't turn over info for. Long enough and it could start looking worthwhile.
This is, of course, assuming that they're unwilling to pay. The fact that they are working within the US system to appeal (albeit with apparently trollish US lawyers?) suggests that they have enough investment in the American market that they're trying to normalize things and continue doing business however they have in the past. It may not end up being an issue at all.
And isn't the fine 50K a day? So 1.5 Million a month, 18 Million a year. On the one hand this is enough to fund the Mueller investigation perpetually. On the other, for a large enough company, that's less than the catering budget.
0
Options
Drake ChambersLay out my formal shorts.Registered Userregular
If they have American assets the court can lay hands on those.
Yes, this is a thing, but can be an extremely complicated thing to untangle and would probably not warrant the effort as long as we're talking about thousands and not millions of dollars.
I guess that depends on how long they don't turn over info for. Long enough and it could start looking worthwhile.
This is, of course, assuming that they're unwilling to pay. The fact that they are working within the US system to appeal (albeit with apparently trollish US lawyers?) suggests that they have enough investment in the American market that they're trying to normalize things and continue doing business however they have in the past. It may not end up being an issue at all.
And isn't the fine 50K a day? So 1.5 Million a month, 18 Million a year. On the one hand this is enough to fund the Mueller investigation perpetually. On the other, for a large enough company, that's less than the catering budget.
No, I don't think so. Last I saw it was $5,000 a week, so $250k per year.
Got this wrong too apparently!
Drake Chambers on
0
Options
AthenorBattle Hardened OptimistThe Skies of HiigaraRegistered Userregular
Did they really just turn an internet troll saying "die in a fire" into two sentences of legalese?
I mean, of course they did. I should sue for the time it took me to read and parse that.
If they have American assets the court can lay hands on those.
Yes, this is a thing, but can be an extremely complicated thing to untangle and would probably not warrant the effort as long as we're talking about thousands and not millions of dollars.
I guess that depends on how long they don't turn over info for. Long enough and it could start looking worthwhile.
This is, of course, assuming that they're unwilling to pay. The fact that they are working within the US system to appeal (albeit with apparently trollish US lawyers?) suggests that they have enough investment in the American market that they're trying to normalize things and continue doing business however they have in the past. It may not end up being an issue at all.
And isn't the fine 50K a day? So 1.5 Million a month, 18 Million a year. On the one hand this is enough to fund the Mueller investigation perpetually. On the other, for a large enough company, that's less than the catering budget.
No, I don't think so. Last I saw it was $5,000 a week, so $250k per year.
If they have American assets the court can lay hands on those.
Yes, this is a thing, but can be an extremely complicated thing to untangle and would probably not warrant the effort as long as we're talking about thousands and not millions of dollars.
I guess that depends on how long they don't turn over info for. Long enough and it could start looking worthwhile.
This is, of course, assuming that they're unwilling to pay. The fact that they are working within the US system to appeal (albeit with apparently trollish US lawyers?) suggests that they have enough investment in the American market that they're trying to normalize things and continue doing business however they have in the past. It may not end up being an issue at all.
And isn't the fine 50K a day? So 1.5 Million a month, 18 Million a year. On the one hand this is enough to fund the Mueller investigation perpetually. On the other, for a large enough company, that's less than the catering budget.
No, I don't think so. Last I saw it was $5,000 a week, so $250k per year.
If they have American assets the court can lay hands on those.
Yes, this is a thing, but can be an extremely complicated thing to untangle and would probably not warrant the effort as long as we're talking about thousands and not millions of dollars.
I guess that depends on how long they don't turn over info for. Long enough and it could start looking worthwhile.
This is, of course, assuming that they're unwilling to pay. The fact that they are working within the US system to appeal (albeit with apparently trollish US lawyers?) suggests that they have enough investment in the American market that they're trying to normalize things and continue doing business however they have in the past. It may not end up being an issue at all.
And isn't the fine 50K a day? So 1.5 Million a month, 18 Million a year. On the one hand this is enough to fund the Mueller investigation perpetually. On the other, for a large enough company, that's less than the catering budget.
No, I don't think so. Last I saw it was $5,000 a week, so $250k per year.
If they have American assets the court can lay hands on those.
Yes, this is a thing, but can be an extremely complicated thing to untangle and would probably not warrant the effort as long as we're talking about thousands and not millions of dollars.
I guess that depends on how long they don't turn over info for. Long enough and it could start looking worthwhile.
This is, of course, assuming that they're unwilling to pay. The fact that they are working within the US system to appeal (albeit with apparently trollish US lawyers?) suggests that they have enough investment in the American market that they're trying to normalize things and continue doing business however they have in the past. It may not end up being an issue at all.
And isn't the fine 50K a day? So 1.5 Million a month, 18 Million a year. On the one hand this is enough to fund the Mueller investigation perpetually. On the other, for a large enough company, that's less than the catering budget.
No, I don't think so. Last I saw it was $5,000 a week, so $250k per year.
If they have American assets the court can lay hands on those.
Yes, this is a thing, but can be an extremely complicated thing to untangle and would probably not warrant the effort as long as we're talking about thousands and not millions of dollars.
I guess that depends on how long they don't turn over info for. Long enough and it could start looking worthwhile.
This is, of course, assuming that they're unwilling to pay. The fact that they are working within the US system to appeal (albeit with apparently trollish US lawyers?) suggests that they have enough investment in the American market that they're trying to normalize things and continue doing business however they have in the past. It may not end up being an issue at all.
And isn't the fine 50K a day? So 1.5 Million a month, 18 Million a year. On the one hand this is enough to fund the Mueller investigation perpetually. On the other, for a large enough company, that's less than the catering budget.
No, I don't think so. Last I saw it was $5,000 a week, so $250k per year.
Huh, maybe it increased? I'm certain I had read $5k weekly at some point.
That article says it was originally 5k back in mid August.
I thought I'd read that it increased daily, but that the clock had been stopped while under appeal. Plausibly there were 45 days between the original contempt ruling and the Oct 10 appeal?
I will try to run down that increase later; I thought it was in that recent public filing (with no amount specified) that called out 'The Company' and 'Country' by 'Name'
Edit: Nevermind. Appeals court states plainly where it was set
Per Curiam Order, In re Grand Jury Subpoena, No. 18-3068 (October 3, 2018). The district court then held the Corporation in contempt, imposing a fine of $50,000 per day until the Corporation complies with the subpoena, but stayed accrual [pending appeal]
Must have misunderstood a reference to the fine being assessed every day as it compounding.
Drake ChambersLay out my formal shorts.Registered Userregular
edited January 2019
I can't spend any more time on it this afternoon but here's what I think happened.
On December 18 the appeals court published their ruling, affirming the ruling of the lower court and stating that yeah, Mystery Company has to comply with the subpoena. In their opinion, the court disagreed with the Company's assertion that they couldn't be fined, and they cited another case where a company found in contempt was fined $5,000 a day. Whether such a thing could be done in this case was left as "a question for a later day".
So I think the initial reporting of the $5k a week might have been a misunderstanding of this part of the order. In essence, the appeals court was just saying, "Yeah, it's been done before for this much."
Yes, this is where we are at now.
God help us all.
+11
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
Didn't Manafort get caught in part due to his lack of understanding of computer technology? I forgot what it was specifically, something about his emails and adobe documents or something.
Didn't Manafort get caught in part due to his lack of understanding of computer technology? I forgot what it was specifically, something about his emails and adobe documents or something.
Anyway none of this surprises me.
They used whatsapp for encrypted communications... then saved the logs in plain text to their icloud
Didn't Manafort get caught in part due to his lack of understanding of computer technology? I forgot what it was specifically, something about his emails and adobe documents or something.
Anyway none of this surprises me.
Bond007
Also sending incriminating documents around asking for help with them because he can’t edit .pdfs
Remember, that's the country that deployed nerve agents in British residential neighborhoods and spent awhile joking about it on state media. Their government's been in cartoon-villain territory for awhile.
I also don't think they're that afraid of the Americans, given they got a secretary of state instafired for criticising them during that fiasco.
Trump and Russia are the same. They are fully cooperating, fully on the same page, and absolutely agree on most things.
Eh, Trump and Russia might be on the same page, but Trump is just looking at the pictures, whereas Russia is busy highlighting and underlining key sections in the fine print.
Civics is not a consumer product that you can ignore because you don’t like the options presented.
Trump and Russia are the same. They are fully cooperating, fully on the same page, and absolutely agree on most things.
Eh, Trump and Russia might be on the same page, but Trump is just looking at the pictures, whereas Russia is busy highlighting and underlining key sections in the fine print.
I'm just saying, he's 100% on team Russia, with the limited mental capacity he has. He cares not one bit about the US
Well things are getting interesting over here now again.
Quick edit: oh and the judge is a trump appointee, FYI.
My guess is they are dicking her around because it's Russia and that's what they do. And no judge, regardless of political affiliation, likes that shit.
Lawyers for one of the Russian companies charged over election meddling continue to file peevish things in court, this time about how unhappy the judge seemed to be about previous peevish filings ->
Brad Heath is a reporter for USA Today.
You know, there's stupid.
And then there's this.
Get the popcorn, the fallout from this is going to be amazing.
To be clear: Are these US-based lawyers who work for a US-based law firm?
And, in doing this, are they risking/openly-inviting censure from their applicable bar association?
Someone has to graduate at the bottom of every class.
+2
Options
ButtersA glass of some milksRegistered Userregular
Well things are getting interesting over here now again.
Quick edit: oh and the judge is a trump appointee, FYI.
My guess is they are dicking her around because it's Russia and that's what they do. And no judge, regardless of political affiliation, likes that shit.
Lawyers for one of the Russian companies charged over election meddling continue to file peevish things in court, this time about how unhappy the judge seemed to be about previous peevish filings ->
Brad Heath is a reporter for USA Today.
You know, there's stupid.
And then there's this.
Get the popcorn, the fallout from this is going to be amazing.
To be clear: Are these US-based lawyers who work for a US-based law firm?
And, in doing this, are they risking/openly-inviting censure from their applicable bar association?
Someone has to graduate at the bottom of every class.
Michael Cohen attended the lowest ranked law school in the country.
Both Mr. Manafort and Rick Gates, the deputy campaign manager, transferred the data to Mr. Kilimnik in the spring of 2016 as Mr. Trump clinched the Republican presidential nomination, according to a person knowledgeable about the situation. Most of the data was public, but some of it was developed by a private polling firm working for the campaign, according to the person.
Mr. Manafort asked that Mr. Kilimnik pass the data to Oleg V. Deripaska, a Russian oligarch who is close to the Kremlin and who has claimed that Mr. Manafort owed him money from a failed business venture, the person said. It is unclear whether Mr. Manafort was acting at the campaign’s behest or independently, trying to gain favor with someone to whom he was deeply in debt.
Ok like I think I understand this, but help me out here, is this a good or bad thing?
Good thing.
Mystery foreign company has been ordered to pay a fine until they comply with Mueller's request for information, company appealed the fine, this is the Supreme Court saying "You have to pay the fine."
One can't help but wonder if the court got to see some of the same shit that caused Flynn's judge to have a sudden change of heart.
Both Mr. Manafort and Rick Gates, the deputy campaign manager, transferred the data to Mr. Kilimnik in the spring of 2016 as Mr. Trump clinched the Republican presidential nomination, according to a person knowledgeable about the situation. Most of the data was public, but some of it was developed by a private polling firm working for the campaign, according to the person.
Mr. Manafort asked that Mr. Kilimnik pass the data to Oleg V. Deripaska, a Russian oligarch who is close to the Kremlin and who has claimed that Mr. Manafort owed him money from a failed business venture, the person said. It is unclear whether Mr. Manafort was acting at the campaign’s behest or independently, trying to gain favor with someone to whom he was deeply in debt.
All the redactions can be copy-pasted to magically unredact them!
I have no sympathy, but I have seen this happen so many times from so many different companies. The company I used to work for got bit by this as well. I understand that it's because the user did not know how to redact properly, but in the scale that this happens, I'm more inclined to believe this is a massive UI problem that Adobe has. Functions should work exactly how you expect, and if I'm covering text with something, I expect it to be deleted underneath. I can't think of a single reason when this isn't the case. Here's an idea. How about when you try and cover text with a non-transparent object, Adobe should immediately pop up a warning:
"Are you trying to redact data? Please go here"
However, I think the biggest argument that this a screw up on Adobe's part is below...
== EDIT ==
Wrong tool. Even *I* screwed it up!
==Ninja Edit==
"Box Text Select -> Set foreground/background color to black" is just as evil. That says something that you have multiple ways to screw it up.
Both Mr. Manafort and Rick Gates, the deputy campaign manager, transferred the data to Mr. Kilimnik in the spring of 2016 as Mr. Trump clinched the Republican presidential nomination, according to a person knowledgeable about the situation. Most of the data was public, but some of it was developed by a private polling firm working for the campaign, according to the person.
Mr. Manafort asked that Mr. Kilimnik pass the data to Oleg V. Deripaska, a Russian oligarch who is close to the Kremlin and who has claimed that Mr. Manafort owed him money from a failed business venture, the person said. It is unclear whether Mr. Manafort was acting at the campaign’s behest or independently, trying to gain favor with someone to whom he was deeply in debt.
So which private polling firm is it
Totally not the one that locked their doors and frantically disposed of boxes and boxes of documents for 24 hours straight the second they thought they were going to investigated. Surely not.
+9
Options
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
The real right move is to rasterize the page, delete the pixels where the words you want to redact were, then fill it in with black. If you want to be nice you can run OCR on the now-redacted document to reduce file size and make it searchable... but so long as you are just putting a mask over it, you can unmask it.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
0
Options
OrcaAlso known as EspressosaurusWrexRegistered Userregular
The problem is trying to redact a PDF.
They're nominally editable, but in practice...yeah, not really.
And simply blacking out part of the text leaks information since you know the length of the text and can potentially back into the exact text if it's not a fixed width font. Ideally you'd just replace whatever it is with <REDACTED> or something.
I'm sure Mueller is compartmentalizing the various cases to the degree possible, but I hope this sort of garden variety stupidity doesn't fuck things up.
The problem with rasterizing the page is you lose all your text and it kills document search. On the other hand, the document may also also have OCR metatext and equally will bone you. I think that a "clippy" answer is the best. If you are making the text and background black or putting an opaque object over a text object, then a "WTF are you doing" dialog would be enough.
I just realized that it's also most likely they are doing the redaction in Word and exporting to PDF. Then I have no help, and may God have mercy on your soul.
0
Options
AthenorBattle Hardened OptimistThe Skies of HiigaraRegistered Userregular
I'm sure that the legal industry has tools and software purpose built to redact and distribute documents securely.
I'm also sure that Manafort's team is too cheap to buy them, and too incompetent to learn how to use them.
Posts
You're mixing up the 6000 court cases, the Troll lawyers are representing the russian troll farm (fitting); we don't know much of anything about the company refusing to cooperate.
Yes, yes they did.
They also basically concede the point as well.
It is the world's most whiny Parthian shot.
I was JUST about to post that same thing. I conflated the two cases.
The Russian troll farm is indeed represented by a US troll lawyer that is based in Washington DC.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
She also drew attention to the fact that they are being used as a tool of Russian intelligence.
And isn't the fine 50K a day? So 1.5 Million a month, 18 Million a year. On the one hand this is enough to fund the Mueller investigation perpetually. On the other, for a large enough company, that's less than the catering budget.
No, I don't think so. Last I saw it was $5,000 a week, so $250k per year.
Got this wrong too apparently!
I mean, of course they did. I should sue for the time it took me to read and parse that.
CNN has it as 50K a day.
As does CNBC
It is truly Cotton's Bold Legal Strategy.
Let's see if it pays off.
Huh, maybe it increased? I'm certain I had read $5k weekly at some point.
Edit: Okay I'm not crazy. This MSN article stated $5k weekly. That was on December 21 though.
But the New York Times had it at 5K per week.
But Vox has it at 50K per day.
Son of a....
Can I get a straight answer on the per diem here?
I barely have the energy to realize that SCOTUS ruling was a very good thing
Also calling her journalism a "variety show", because we really need more misogyny
Ugh, still writing this post, standby
I thought I'd read that it increased daily, but that the clock had been stopped while under appeal. Plausibly there were 45 days between the original contempt ruling and the Oct 10 appeal?
I will try to run down that increase later; I thought it was in that recent public filing (with no amount specified) that called out 'The Company' and 'Country' by 'Name'
Edit: Nevermind. Appeals court states plainly where it was set
Must have misunderstood a reference to the fine being assessed every day as it compounding.
pdf:
https://t.co/CRVNi6PmV6?amp=1
On December 18 the appeals court published their ruling, affirming the ruling of the lower court and stating that yeah, Mystery Company has to comply with the subpoena. In their opinion, the court disagreed with the Company's assertion that they couldn't be fined, and they cited another case where a company found in contempt was fined $5,000 a day. Whether such a thing could be done in this case was left as "a question for a later day".
So I think the initial reporting of the $5k a week might have been a misunderstanding of this part of the order. In essence, the appeals court was just saying, "Yeah, it's been done before for this much."
The timing of this with the person posting posting just yesterday that Russian interference in the election wasn't an issue is kinda hilarious.
Every leak out of this investigation isn't even ambiguous or coy. It's like "HOLY SHIT JUST LOOK AT ALL THIS COLLUSION!".
“Racheal Maddow laughed at me,” wrt court cases involving defrauding the US?
C’mon man!
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
God help us all.
Anyway none of this surprises me.
We are in late-80s movie/early-90s music/late-90s videogame lawsuit territory regarding serious matters of national security and constitutional law.
This is reality now, Dormammu.
They used whatsapp for encrypted communications... then saved the logs in plain text to their icloud
Bond007
Also sending incriminating documents around asking for help with them because he can’t edit .pdfs
Trump and Russia are the same. They are fully cooperating, fully on the same page, and absolutely agree on most things.
Eh, Trump and Russia might be on the same page, but Trump is just looking at the pictures, whereas Russia is busy highlighting and underlining key sections in the fine print.
I'm just saying, he's 100% on team Russia, with the limited mental capacity he has. He cares not one bit about the US
Someone has to graduate at the bottom of every class.
Michael Cohen attended the lowest ranked law school in the country.
Honestly, the sheer amount of ineptitude on display here is insulting.
I probably shouldn't complain too much because it's the only thing that's kept these dipshits from taking over the world but I mean. Come on.
Come on.
One can't help but wonder if the court got to see some of the same shit that caused Flynn's judge to have a sudden change of heart.
So which private polling firm is it
I have no sympathy, but I have seen this happen so many times from so many different companies. The company I used to work for got bit by this as well. I understand that it's because the user did not know how to redact properly, but in the scale that this happens, I'm more inclined to believe this is a massive UI problem that Adobe has. Functions should work exactly how you expect, and if I'm covering text with something, I expect it to be deleted underneath. I can't think of a single reason when this isn't the case. Here's an idea. How about when you try and cover text with a non-transparent object, Adobe should immediately pop up a warning:
"Are you trying to redact data? Please go here"
However, I think the biggest argument that this a screw up on Adobe's part is below...
== EDIT ==
Wrong tool. Even *I* screwed it up!
==Ninja Edit==
"Box Text Select -> Set foreground/background color to black" is just as evil. That says something that you have multiple ways to screw it up.
Totally not the one that locked their doors and frantically disposed of boxes and boxes of documents for 24 hours straight the second they thought they were going to investigated. Surely not.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
They're nominally editable, but in practice...yeah, not really.
And simply blacking out part of the text leaks information since you know the length of the text and can potentially back into the exact text if it's not a fixed width font. Ideally you'd just replace whatever it is with <REDACTED> or something.
I'm sure Mueller is compartmentalizing the various cases to the degree possible, but I hope this sort of garden variety stupidity doesn't fuck things up.
I just realized that it's also most likely they are doing the redaction in Word and exporting to PDF. Then I have no help, and may God have mercy on your soul.
I'm also sure that Manafort's team is too cheap to buy them, and too incompetent to learn how to use them.