Oh, please!

It's defensive because of the indictments. If they had a leg to stand on they would have sued much earlier.

By indictments you prob mean Republican-authored criminal referrals, right?

Which indictments? The dozen or so Mueller indictments against Russian hackers two months ago?

Hahahaha...Russian trolls become Russian hackers.

Edit: And the DNC kept calling it a hack. In other words the information that wikileaks provided is genuine. Their words.

That was never really in question. There was some question as to whether, in the huge mass of emails, a few faked and especially sensationalist ones had been inserted into the hacked documents.

That doesn't sound familiar. Have a link? Well shit I guess they will have to examine every email to find out. Before child eater erase is at all. Again.

Sorry it's Forbes and so there's some minor-but-annoying soft paywall action, but...

https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2017/05/26/russian-dnc-hackers-planted-leaks-with-fake-data/#35cfc45c52ff

The first evidence that the hacker crew responsible for the breach of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) snuck false information into their leaks has been uncovered by a group of researchers.

The hackers, a group called Fancy Bear that U.S. intelligence and law enforcement claim to be sponsored by Russia's intelligence unit, the GRU, planted the information inside a leak of emails belonging to a journalist and critic of the Putin regime, according to a report from Citizen Lab, a University of Toronto-based organization. That formed part of a massive hacking campaign attempting to steal Google passwords from 218 targets across 39 countries, including former American defense officials.

Though Citizen Lab couldn't definitively tie Fancy Bear to those "tainted leaks," Forbes separately obtained evidence that indicated the group was responsible.

It marks a worrying moment in the early history of mega-leaks: the doctoring of data and the subsequent promulgation of that legitimate-looking information to prop up propaganda. "Tainted leaks are the next frontier of disinformation: an attempt to really tamper with the integrity of large sets of information that people will believe to be genuine," said John Scott-Railton, researcher at Citizen Lab.

Here is a hot take, there is nothing that sensational in the DNC leaks. The absolute WORST LOOK emails show staffers saying whether Bernie is an atheist or Jewish might make a few points difference for southern baptist voters.

That's absolutely true.

The sensationalism over the fact that they WERE leaked sort of overwhelmed the fact that there wasn't much in them, at all. It was a "THESE ARE SECRET LEAKS, SO THEY MUST BE SCANDALOUS" sort of "scandal". But they weren't scandalous...

Bullshit.

You have Clinton's own staffers calling her incompetent. You have many "journalists" contacting them to get their talking points. They even go so far as to call themselves hacks!

Not only that but walnut sauce and kids in the pool.

Don't act like there was nothing to those emails.

What indictments?

And yeah, they never disputed that it was geniune. Why would they? There wasn't anything remotely scandalous in there. It was really disappointing for anyone hoping to find something damning.

During the discovery phase won't they have to turn over their servers to prove that the Russians hacked them?

Yep. So tells you that the Russians probably did it.

nah. They just hope to get a Clinton crony judge again who will accept their bogus Crowdstrike report.

They didn't need the Crowdstrike report to know it was a hack.

The FBI knew the DNC was being hacked before the DNC did. The FBI informed the DNC they were being hacked long before the Crowdstrike report.

The FBI informed the DNC they were being hacked

Where did you see this?

Hacked? I think the word you meant was leaked. When did the DNC surrender their servers to an actual investigative body? Oh, right... they didn't.

You think I mean to say "The FBI informed the DNC they were being leaked"?

No.

The FBI contacted the DNC in 2015 to warn them hackers had infiltrated their system. Crowdstrike didn't even get involved until 2016.

The FBI contacted the DNC in 2015 to warn them hackers had infiltrated their system.

That. Where did you see that?

Former Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson during his House Intelligence Committee testimony.

“The FBI and the DNC had been in contact with each other months before about the intrusion, and the DNC did not feel it needed DHS’s assistance at that time.”

https://docs.house.gov/Committee/Calendar/ByEvent.aspx?EventID=106152

OK.

The department of Homeland Security is not the FBI. This one quote does not state who contacted who regarding the DNC leaks.

Who has jurisdiction over "cyber crime"?

The DNC never surrendered their servers, therefore all we have as evidence for this alleged hack is thier word, based off a report from crowdstrike. (this is the same organization that pointed fingers at north korea during that "the interview" garbage a few years ago)

Why has the DOJ not filed charges against these "russian hackers" like they did with "Putter Panda"?

You have a few holes in your understanding.

Besides the crowdstrike report, the DNC created a server image and gave that to the FBI(per Comey).

Charges are a public matter. It's quite possible they would not be brought if doing so would expose national intelligence practices and be possibly fruitless. If you look more into the PLA charges, it was specifically coined as trade war violation and only 5 out of hundreds were indicted. This served a concrete purpose to declare stances on stealing IP stances. Furthermore, it might be pollitically not in the best interests of the current DoJ.

While it dosen't state who contacted who, you can infer using other media. For instance Dona Brazzile's book with how the FBI informed the DNC coupled with the quoted communucation months before the release.

Furthermore a Dutch unit intercepted Russian hacking of the servers by accident. Also nots George Papadopolous telling the Australian diplomat Russia has hacked emails.

This is simply public knowlege information not even infringing on the classified intelligence we have.

I'm on mobile right now and it's making it a pain to search the testimony PDF and give you a direct copy. Two sources, Comey testimony to Senate Intel Committee, and DNC spokesman. The Comey one you should find easy in the testimony, however I can't get a direct DNC source, only 3rd party.

Some 3rd party sources easier for me to copy

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/fbi-director-comey-agency-requested-access-to-dnc-servers/

https://www.buzzfeed.com/alimwatkins/the-fbi-never-asked-for-access-to-hacked-computer-servers?utm_term=.wtZPZn9P3e#.cyJg6oXglZ

http://fortune.com/2017/12/11/russian-hacking-election-confession/

https://www.buzzfeed.com/jasonleopold/he-solved-the-dnc-hack-now-hes-telling-his-story-for-the?utm_term=.tfN7ZeW7pK#.xxJpXerp71

https://nypost.com/2017/07/06/republicans-want-answers-from-private-firm-with-access-to-hacked-dnc-server/

On the plus side you even have the right leaning NY post report on the image so it's not partisan spin.

Everywhere? It was first reported by NYT:

When Special Agent Adrian Hawkins of the Federal Bureau of Investigation called the Democratic National Committee in September 2015 to pass along some troubling news about its computer network, he was transferred, naturally, to the help desk.

His message was brief, if alarming. At least one computer system belonging to the D.N.C. had been compromised by hackers federal investigators had named “the Dukes,” a cyberespionage team linked to the Russian government.

The name of the agent who made the call and the person the agent reached at the DNC is public knowledge and everything.

Thabks for this info I didn't have. Seems to me though they didn't care until it got them outed on their bad behaviour

The DNC could have been hacked AND have their emails leaked by Seth Rich.

Name checks out

Let's not forget the Dutch intelligence agents who literally watched the GRU via cctv hacking the DNC

It's the summer of 2014. A hacker from the Dutch intelligence agency AIVD has penetrated the computer network of a university building next to the Red Square in Moscow, oblivious to the implications. One year later, from the AIVD headquarters in Zoetermeer, he and his colleagues witness Russian hackers launching an attack on the Democratic Party in the United States. The AIVD hackers had not infiltrated just any building; they were in the computer network of the infamous Russian hacker group Cozy Bear. And unbeknownst to the Russians, they could see everything.

That's how the AIVD becomes witness to the Russian hackers harassing and penetrating the leaders of the Democratic Party, transferring thousands of emails and documents. It won't be the last time they alert their American counterparts. And yet, it will be months before the United States realize what this warning means: that with these hacks the Russians have interfered with the American elections. And the AIVD hackers have seen it happening before their very eyes. 

https://www.volkskrant.nl/media/dutch-agencies-provide-crucial-intel-about-russia-s-interference-in-us-elections~a4561913/

They got a judge already. He was a prosecutor in Watergate.

What happened to Mueller Time? Have they lost confidence?

Mueller works for the DOJ.

The DNC is a private organisation.

Concurrent prosecutions by different parties.

Are you talking about the CIA's recently exposed cyber hacking technology that allows them to commit false flag cyber attacks and hacks using faked digital "finger prints" of any other country that best serves their agenda, including Russia? Pretty obvious why the DNC refused to allow the FBI to conduct a detailed analysis of their alleged "Russian" hack.

Nothing in your paragraph has proof. Russia's action in 2016 have proof.

Cheers

Russia's actions in 2016 have proof.

The only Russian actions with proof are the ones that they bought Facebook ads. The “proof” of the so called hack of the DNC comes from a DNC contractor.

Why didn’t they just turn over the servers originally though?

Fantastic! Let’s have a look at those servers!

And their money laundering. And the Imran Awan brothers... I bet they had access here too

I don't think the DNC is afraid of discovery at this point. Pretty sure their aim here is to force discovery.

I don't think the DNC is afraid of discovery at this point. Pretty sure their aim here is to force discovery.

Their aim is to force discovery that the DNC emails were leaked and that the "Russian hack" story is complete bullshit?

If they knew the emails were leaked, do you think they would put themselves in a position that would prove that and destroy their own case?

Or maybe, just maybe, do you think that there might have actually been a hack?

The contents of the leaks wont be forgotten. DNC fucked bernie and fucked democrats.

Which only adds to their case. They can claim that the hacked emails were the precise reason their lost, and the hack had a substantial effect on the election. Committing a crime changed the outcome of what is thought of as a legal event. It calls the legitimacy of the election into question.

What crime?

The hack.

Political issues aren't justiciable. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_question

Political question doctrine doesn't have much teeth anymore. I wouldn't count on it.

They can claim that the hacked emails were the precise reason their lost, and the hack had a substantial effect on the election.

How do they prove that it was the hack and not their own behavior that had the effect?

Their behavior would not have been known without the hack. At least not to the extent it was known with the hack.

Inside job. All emails are dated prior to June. 2016.

Podesta made an example of the leaker.

And without their bad behavior, a hack wouldn't have been so damaging. How do you prove who is ultimately responsible? Besides, has anyone established that the Kremlin provided the emails in question to wikileaks?

Without the hack, they mistreated Bernie but no one definitively knew, so the mistreatment was largely inconsequential.

With the hack, the mistreatment was known, so it had an impact.

Ultimately, the hack is what made the difference.

And email source is not determined, but the DNC making this move shows they are 100% positive it wasn't an internal leak.

Without the hack,

Has it been established that wikileaks received the emails in question from any hackers, let alone hackers working for the Kremlin?

they mistreated Bernie but no one definitively knew, so the mistreatment was largely inconsequential.

Anyone paying attention knew that the Clinton campaign was being favored by the DNC. The debate schedules alone made this painfully obvious.

Ultimately, the hack is what made the difference.

That's a non-sequitur. You are just presenting speculation as fact.

And email source is not determined

So why do you keep attributing the release of the emails to any hack, let alone a Kremlin-lead hack?

but the DNC making this move shows they are 100% positive it wasn't an internal leak.

Ha, no. It just means that they think they have something to gain. The DNC is world-class in terms of shooting themselves in the foot and being incompetent. We are talking about the party that managed to lose to Donald fucking Trump, after all.

So it's fair to say that no matter what argument is made, you will disagree unless it is disparaging the DNC, right?

Good to know you're here to engage in honest discussion.

I'm just calling you out for presenting speculation as fact.

I'm also supplementing it with logic. Because we don't have all the facts, we must rely on speculation. But logic and common sense can be applied to what we do know, and through that, we can come up with some fairly reasonable (and likely) speculations.

That's fair, but you should be clear about what relies upon speculation and who's.

Obviously they're ok with that or else they wouldn't have filed the lawsuit.

I mean, everyone's assuming that the people to overlook those servers are in it for justice. Why is everyone acting like anybody in government gives a damn about anything but themselves and the club?

IMO this is great. We'll see if they present any information that's new to the public instead of just talking about it over and over. If they fail to do so and just regurgitate the same stuff, that'll also tell us something.

also gets the DNC on legal record with testimony under oath.

Yes, this is bad for the DNC.

Jason Goodman, George Webb, Roger Stone, Alex Jones, Charles Ortel , David Seaman, Manuel Chavez (aka DeFango), Patricia Negron, "Abel Danger", "Lionel Nation", etc

Yes

Flashback:

http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/313555-comey-fbi-did-request-access-to-hacked-dnc-servers

Flashback:

The lawsuit echoes a similar legal tactic that the Democratic Party used during the Watergate scandal. In 1972, the DNC filed suit against former president Richard Nixon’s reelection committee seeking $1 million in damages for the break-in at Democratic headquarters in the Watergate building.

The suit was denounced at the time by Nixon’s Attorney General, John Mitchell, who called it a case of “sheer demagoguery” by the DNC. But the civil action brought by former DNC chair Lawrence F. O’Brien was ultimately successful, yielding a $750,000 settlement from the Nixon campaign that was reached on the day in 1974 that Nixon left office.

Yeah but in that case the burglars got caught red-handed. Here the victim won't let the police come in and dust for fingerprints

I believe as OP has stated they'll have to turn that over in the discovery phase. So we should get to find out. I also find it hard to believe the DNC knowing they'll have to do this would do it if it would come back at them. I guess we'll see how it plays out.

Never underestimate the arrogance of people who have the media on their side

like hannity and trump? yeah, a lot of hubris

This is funny because it implies Trump has the media on his side.

Yes, YouDownWithFSB is CONSTANTLY making statements which are not based in reality.

He argued with me a few days ago, insisting that "Trump IS TPTB" and "the most powerful man in the world" and so commands the media.

Dude is fucking delusional or playing a character.

Why assume that poster is human at all?

Everyone in Reddit is a bot except you.

lol, yes trust the president, he isnt tptb

a billionaire with nuclear weapons, a pawn, just like you and i!

Removed. Rule 10.

He has the Murdoch empire plus the gateway pundit fake mews crowd.

whats the largest network

But it's already been wiped... like with a cloth.

Unless the server burnt int he fire at Hillary’s house.

the "victim"

The real victim was Seth Rich. Can. Not. Believe. The DNC thinks they can throw a spotlight on this and come away clean. They've purged dissident within the party to such a degree even party leadership seems to actually believe their own spin.

It would make sense if you stop and consider an alternate idea ... that it was Russian hackers who stole the emails to share with WikiLeaks, and Seth Rich was just a dude who got shot in D.C.

Why does he have to consider your point but you don't have to consider his?

Ive considered his point and there's absolutely nothing there. Might as well also consider whether he was killed by the Pittsburgh Steelers or the Queen of England...there's equal evidence for all three

To be fair the links to Russian hackers are pretty weak as well. The intelligence report released on ties to Russia was pretty generic and suggested that it "looked" like a Russian state sponsored hack.

Seriously... Why can't people just fucking believe what the TV tells them to?!

it was Russian hackers who stole the emails to share with WikiLeaks

Has it been established that the emails were provided to wikileaks by the Kremlin?

I'm no computer expert, but do they need access to the physical server in order to conduct an investigation? It was my understanding that they don't need to actually accesse the server.

“We’d always prefer to have access hands-on ourselves if that’s possible,” Comey said, noting that he didn’t know why the DNC rebuffed the FBI’s request.

Keep in mind this was all before any emails got released, before anyone accused a foreign country of attacking, before anyone would accuse the President of having cheated to win the election. At the time it was a simple hacking of a private group. Given these incredible high stakes, and the fact that a copy of a server can easily be manipulated or altered, it's hard to accept anything less than the FBI itself examining the servers

It wasn't before anyone accused a foreign entity of attacking. The FBI already knew about the Russian attempts to hack the DNC, so did the Dutch who actually watched Russia doing it in real time.

The FBI warned the DNC they were being hacked and the DNC didn't do anything to fix it.

I'll clarify that at the time it wasn't considered the level of attack that would result in leveling sanctions, more garden variety. The Dutch thing is just silly and hasn't been confirmed by the Dutch government or any official on the record. I don't take that story seriously. The FBI "warnings" also sound like part of a cover story after the fact to me. The bottom line is, even today you'll still see major news outlets refer to "alleged Russian hacking", although they waiver back and forth. Nothing's been proven. All of the IC statements have included tons of caveats and weasle words

So...if theres evidence that doesnt fit the scenario you believe happened, you just decide its probably not true?

It's anonymous sources and I'm not even aware of a US news organization confirming the anonymous sources

so did the Dutch who actually watched Russia doing it in real time.

You’re gonna need to cite that one.

To perform a proper digital forensic investigation you DO need physical access. You need to create a bit stream copy of the memory and storage on which you perform the investigation. You then need to pull all logs from all network devices starting at the firewall all the way down stream through every network device. That process can be done remotely if remote access has been setup.

They knew it was an inside job. That’s why they called in CrowdStrike to perform the “investigation” and not the FBI. CrowdStrike gets funneled hundreds of millions of dollars in Government and other business contracts by the DNC. They confirmed what was expected and wrote a report with a conclusion that the DNC wanted. The FBI was provided with the report but told to fuck off when they wanted access to perform their own investigation. Why wouldn’t you want the FBI to investigate it unless there wasn’t a shitload of information they didn’t want them to know about? Especially when they are claiming a foreign government is trying to hack their systems and influence the presidential election.

Oh, and here’s the kicker: Dmitri Alperovitch, the founder and co owner of CrowdStrike, is Russian!

https://www.crowdstrike.com/executive-team/

Crowd strike is funded by google.

Ok? And what is your point?

• leak occurs
• Crowd strike is created in response
• New company take possession of the servers
• tell FBI what happened and destroy the evidence.

And it's all Forest Gumps fault too.

What people don't realize is that the most damning evidence were the recordings that came from the system Nixon himself had installed in the Whitehouse. He fought tooth and nail against having those recordings released. Even when the courts ordered him to turn the tapes over he attempted to subvert this order. He offered compromise to the courts, the tapes would be transcribed by a reputable person of their choosing and the transcripts would be turned over as evidence. They realized he was trying to pull a fast one when the person they chose to transcribe the tapes was John Stennis who was practically deaf. They told him to pound sand and produce the tapes, which had Nixon discussing the payoff to keep the watergate burglars quiet.

Well, it's true. That did literally happen.

The only question is if it's an actual tort or not.

A lot of CBTS_Stream exiles in this thread, still pretending that every bit of bad news for non-Democrats is ACTUALLY a sign of an impending mass imprisonment for Democrats at Guantanamo Bay. It's sad.

no shit

LARP means "live-action role-playing" like when you pretend to exist in some alternate dimension. When he's writing it, he's referrering to people who live in an alternate world where Donald Trump is actually a secret genius Christian warrior who is secretly taking down the Democrats they all hate. According to them, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have already been charged, or are on the run, or are secretly at Guantanamo Bay, or are being executed this weekend ... just a series of totally fake claims.

They do this whole dance because it's easier for them to see Trump as some mythical figure taking down the people they hate than admitting that he's a con man who conned them and everyone else who believed the stuff he was spewing.

Yeah, that's how the whole CBTS_Stream thing sounds...don't blame me for that! It's not my fault it sounds convoluted and bizarre.

You guys know bots aren't quite that good yet, right? God help us all if they are. I doubt we'll have one consistently pass the Turing test for a good number of years now

Dipshit bot comments seem really popular with the brigaders, nonsensical as they are.

BuzzFeed Is Suing the D.N.C. Over Issues Involving the Russia Dossier

BuzzFeed believes that evidence of the alleged D.N.C. break-in by Russian hackers might help the online publisher in a libel suit. But the D.N.C. says releasing information might make it vulnerable to more hacking.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/02/buzzfeed-dnc-lawsuit-russia-dossier

Buzzfeed May hilariously destroy the DNC over server intrusion lawsuit.

https://youtu.be/bhDd95opWcU

https://archive.is/ZX27N

lolololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololo

The Wikileaks material was leaked by a source within the DNC.

The "discovery" period should provide some interesting information. Although, it will probably not be reported by american media since it would likely provide a conflicting narrative.

RIP Seth Rich. True patriot.

I used to hate this government. Not anymore. I hate the mother fucker's that stole our government from us. I'd die for what my government could be.

You could be the captain of the Starship Enterprise, and having sex with alien women. That is correct, the government has taken your ability to have sex with more or less women.

That's probably probably what George Washington was thinking too.

It will be filed in court. You can see it whether the media covers it or not.

Discovered docs aren't made public by discovery alone.

Trees don't all need sunlight. Some are born albino and have a parasitic relationship using mycorrhizae attaching their roots with their mother tree. This Mycor network exists to share nutrients with other trees is a recent discovery and was breaking science when Avatar was written. That is when it was breaking in journals before the public even knew about it. That part of Avatar is based on hard established science.

"Discovery" is a legal term of art that includes depositions, document exchanges, written requests for admissions/answers to interrogatories, etc...

Wtf are you talking about?

not getting my hopes up

And the winner is...........

The lawyers

The lawyers

There a more lawyers in America now that have graduated in the last 10 years, then ever in the history of the country

Chief Justice Warren Burger predicted 35 years ago that America was turning into “a society overrun by hordes of lawyers, hungry as locusts.”

https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2014/05/09/the-lawyer-bubble-pops-not-moment-too-soon/qAYzQ823qpfi4GQl2OiPZM/story.html

Everyone is a winner here. The DNC just formally laid out exactly, with detail and scrutiny over every word, what happened. Now they want to prove it. This is one way of getting the truth.

What a joke.

Why don't they sue the public for voting for Trump.

Wow. It's a combination of both collusion AND pay to play!! MAGA!!!!!!!

DUCK!!!

...or they'll sue you too

They were turned over to the fbi once. The FBI found numerous severe crimes because of it, but no prosecutors wanted to go forward with the prosecution. Comey said it himself publicly.

They were turned over to the fbi once.

I would love to see some proof indicating the FBI ever once had access to the DNC server.

They didn't.

In a way you're right. They had access to what a private forensics firm claims were the contents of the server, if that's what you're saying?

Exactly. The FBI had to rely on second-hand info from a company that had been paid by the DNC.

That's all they were given.

That's a totally fair point. Digital data is easily falsifiable.

They should sue everyone that voted for Trump as well. That will surely get them more voters.

Sure, but CrowdStrike wasn’t created in response. Google acquired part of CrowdStrike because they were politically connected and Schmidt was in the Oval Office every other day during Obama’s Presidency. What better way to circumvent oversight than having Google and their new security toy covering your tracks.

RIP Seth Rich. True patriot.

I used to hate this government. Not anymore. I hate the mother fucker's that stole our government from us. I'd die for what my government could be.

The FBI contacted the DNC in 2015 to warn them hackers had infiltrated their system.

That. Where did you see that?

That doesn't sound familiar. Have a link? Well shit I guess they will have to examine every email to find out. Before child eater erase is at all. Again.

Here is a hot take, there is nothing that sensational in the DNC leaks. The absolute WORST LOOK emails show staffers saying whether Bernie is an atheist or Jewish might make a few points difference for southern baptist voters.

Thabks for this info I didn't have. Seems to me though they didn't care until it got them outed on their bad behaviour

It will be filed in court. You can see it whether the media covers it or not.

What crime?

Political issues aren't justiciable. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_question

They can claim that the hacked emails were the precise reason their lost, and the hack had a substantial effect on the election.

How do they prove that it was the hack and not their own behavior that had the effect?