DNC sues . . . well, almost everybody, except Trump himself.

A group of Washington Post reporters, led by veteran journalist Tom Hamburger, is reporting that the Democratic National Committee has filed a multimillion-dollar lawsuit against the Russian government, the Trump election campaign (but not Trump himself), and the WikiLeaks organization.   The suit alleges "a far-reaching conspiracy to disrupt the 2016 campaign and tilt the election to Donald Trump."

This suit has been filed in federal district court in Manhattan.   It alleges, among other things, that "top Trump campaign officials conspired with the Russian government and its military spy agency" to hurt Hillary Clinton and help Donald Trump by hacking computer networks of the DNC and disseminating stolen material found there.

In an accompanying statement, DNC Chair Thomas Perez said;  "During the 2016 presidential campaign, Russia launched an all-out assault on our democracy, and it found a willing and active partner in Donald Trump's campaign. ."

Perez continued:   "This constituted an act of unprecedented treachery:  the campaign of a nominee for President of the United States in league with a hostile foreign power to bolster its own chance to win the presidency."

The Post article asserts that this legal tactic "echoes a similar legal tactic that the Democratic Party used during the Watergate scandal" in 1972.  It eventually won a $750,000 settlement from the Nixon campaign of the $1 million damages sought in the suit.  That settlement was reached on the day Nixon left office.

Although the suit does not name Trump as a defendant, it does charge aides who are believed to have been affiliated with Russia during the campaign.   These include:  Donald Trump, Jr., Jared Kushner, Paul Manafort, and Rick Gates.    The Russian military intelligence service (GRU), WikiLeaks, Julian Assange, and Roger Stone are also named, as are a number of other minor players.

This was unexpected, by me anyway.   It's hard to know what this means and what it will lead to.    In many ways, of course, it parallels the Mueller investigation.   It avoids, however, naming the president himself as a defendant.   In doing that, it would seem to give this suit the freedom to be pursued in the federal courts, rather than being bound by rules that govern whether a sitting president can be charged.  Perhaps it could also lead to  depositions of these people and trials, regardless of what happens in the Mueller investigation and report.

This news has just broken midday Friday.   I'm sure we'll be hearing lots of legal analysis and opinions on the cable news talk shows.   And I'll be adding to this as the day goes on.

Ralph