Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 109

Thread: Giuliani, Powell, et al. Sued for Defamation

  1. #1

    Giuliani, Powell, et al. Sued for Defamation

    This is gonna be fun. And to think, Trump wants to make it easier for defamation plaintiffs.

    An election systems worker driven into hiding by death threats has filed a defamation lawsuit against President Donald Trump’s campaign, two of its lawyers and some conservative media figures and outlets.

    Eric Coomer, security director at the Colorado-based Dominion Voting Systems, said he wants his life back after being named in false charges as a key actor in “rigging” the election for President-elect Joe Biden. There has been no evidence that the election was rigged.

    His lawsuit, filed Tuesday in district court in Denver County, Colorado, names the Trump campaign, lawyers Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell, conservative columnist Michelle Malkin, the website Gateway Pundit, Colorado conservative activist Joseph Oltmann, and conservative media Newsmax and One America News Network.

    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/202...media-n1252205
    We have long had death and taxes as the two standards of inevitability. But there are those who believe that death is the preferable of the two. "At least," as one man said, "there's one advantage about death; it doesn't get worse every time Congress meets."
    Erwin N. Griswold

    Taxes: Of life's two certainties, the only one for which you can get an automatic extension.
    Anonymous



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    When you rig an election and get called out on it there is no defamation.

  4. #3

  5. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonny Tufts View Post
    And to think,...
    I'll tell you what makes me think. You're a tax lawyer. You voted for Biden, Hilary, and Zero. You're pro-minimum wage at all levels of government. You're against Ron Paul and Rand Paul.

    So what is the purpose of this thread?
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCount View Post
    ...I believe that when the government is capable of doing a thing, it will.
    Quote Originally Posted by Influenza View Post
    which one of yall fuckers wrote the "ron paul" racist news letters
    Quote Originally Posted by Dforkus View Post
    Zippy's posts are a great contribution.




    Disrupt, Deny, Deflate. Read the RPF trolls' playbook here (post #3): http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...eptive-members

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by phill4paul View Post
    When you rig an election and get called out on it there is no defamation.
    As with any civil suit, the burden of proof is on the plaintiff. But given the utter inability of Giuliani and Powell to substantiate in court any of their conspiracy theories, it could be an interesting case.
    We have long had death and taxes as the two standards of inevitability. But there are those who believe that death is the preferable of the two. "At least," as one man said, "there's one advantage about death; it doesn't get worse every time Congress meets."
    Erwin N. Griswold

    Taxes: Of life's two certainties, the only one for which you can get an automatic extension.
    Anonymous

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonny Tufts View Post
    As with any civil suit, the burden of proof is on the plaintiff. But given the utter inability of Giuliani and Powell to substantiate in court any of their conspiracy theories, it could be an interesting case.
    as far as I know, to date no court has actually heard a case brought by Powell or Guiliani on the merits. All have been denied on procedural grounds, aka the courts are afraid to get involved. At least I have heard many statements made to that effect.

    I believe Powell/Wood are happy to defend a lawsuit, esp from Dominion or Smartmatic as it opens the door for discovery, and for witnesses/evidence to finally be heard in a court of law.

    When the courts will not even listen to the hundreds of witnesses and experts and examine the evidence, what redress do "we the people" have?

    As for Eric Coomer, I would think he's the last person that should be throwing stones. Will be interesting to watch for sure.

  8. #7
    The American election was fair and free right? i still find it strange how Biden somehow had received more votes then Clinton, Bush, Obama, Trump nothing suspicious there i suppose?

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonny Tufts View Post
    This is gonna be fun. And to think, Trump wants to make it easier for defamation plaintiffs.
    James Troupis one of the attorneys who testified for Donald Trump swore to take an oath to testify to the US Senate on election fraud. There is no defamation! This is a frivolous lawsuit!



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Eric Coomer is gift wrapping a chance for the Trump legal team to finally get a chance to present their evidence in the court of law.

    Sonny, if you are actually an attorney then you should know that sworn affidavits are absolutely evidence.

    This is good for “democracy.”
    No - No - No - No
    2016

  12. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonny Tufts View Post
    This is gonna be fun. And to think, Trump wants to make it easier for defamation plaintiffs.
    we all know where this is going.

  13. #11
    The truth is an absolute defense to defamation.

    But unfortunately, this issue is so intertwined with the election that anti-Trump “judges” will be inclined to rule against the defendants.

    The system is corrupt to its core.

  14. #12
    LOL @ those who think this reflects poorly on Sidney and Lin. No one wants for this to end up being aired out in a court more than those two.

    Quell your excitement.
    Quote Originally Posted by timosman View Post
    This is getting silly.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    It started silly.
    T.S. Elliot's The Hollow Men

    Some of you still watch the news, and it shows.

  15. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Contumacious View Post
    The truth is an absolute defense to defamation.

    But unfortunately, this issue is so intertwined with the election that anti-Trump “judges” will be inclined to rule against the defendants.

    The system is corrupt to its core.
    I have two questions for you:

    1. Do you have any reason to think that these judges are corrupt apart from their rejection of Trump's lawsuits?

    2. How do you explain the fact that many of these judges are Republicans, several nominated by Trump himself?

    As to the second point, here are some examples:

    The Post found that 38 judges appointed by Republicans dealt blows to such suits, with some writing searing opinions.

    The latest example came Saturday, when federal District Judge Brett H. Ludwig, a Trump nominee who took the bench in September, dismissed a lawsuit filed by the president that sought to throw out the election results in Wisconsin, calling the request “extraordinary.”

    “A sitting president who did not prevail in his bid for reelection has asked for federal court help in setting aside the popular vote based on disputed issues of election administration, issues he plainly could have raised before the vote occurred,” he wrote. “This Court has allowed plaintiff the chance to make his case and he has lost on the merits.”

    Trump asked for the rule of law to be followed, Ludwig noted, adding: “It has been.”
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...7e8_story.html

    I guess these judges are members of the Deep State, and Trump nominated them because....the Deep State made him do it?

    Does that really make sense to you?

  16. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    I have two questions for you:
    If the fact that Trump won the vast majority of counties where dominion voting systems were used isn't enough to derail this particular crazy train, then I'm not sure that the appointment details of judges are going to tip the scales.

    However, I applaud your efforts.
    "The one permanent emotion of the inferior man is fear - fear of the unknown, the complex, the inexplicable. What he wants above everything else is safety."
    H. L. Mencken

    Quote Originally Posted by Contumacious View Post
    Yes, indeed , we will never be able to prove fraud.

  17. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    I have two questions for you:

    1. Do you have any reason to think that these judges are corrupt apart from their rejection of Trump's lawsuits?

    2. How do you explain the fact that many of these judges are Republicans, several nominated by Trump himself?

    As to the second point, here are some examples:



    https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...7e8_story.html

    I guess these judges are members of the Deep State, and Trump nominated them because....the Deep State made him do it?

    Does that really make sense to you?

    Judicial Corruption , the politicians in black robes syndrome has been with us for quite sometime:

    1- The Brandeis/Frankfurter Connection: The Secret Political Activities of Two Supreme Court Justices

    2- Justice at War: The Story of the Japanese-American Internment Cases


    3- The Best Defense

    4- Don Boudreaux points out that Justice Thurgood Marshall took a dim view of drug dealers and openly suggested that he would reflexively side against them in cases (via Radley Balko). Marshall told LIFE in 1987, a year after Ronald Reagan signed the 1986 Drug Abuse Act, “If it’s a dope case, I won’t even read the petition. I ain’t giving no break to no dope dealer.




    And so it goes


    .
    .
    .DON'T TAX ME BRO!!!

    .
    .
    "It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)

  18. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCount View Post
    If the fact that Trump won the vast majority of counties where dominion voting systems were used isn't enough to derail this particular crazy train, then I'm not sure that the appointment details of judges are going to tip the scales.

    However, I applaud your efforts.
    It's possible that this person who believes that Trump won in a landslide could change his mind if presented with a compelling counterargument.

    There's always a chance...

    Quote Originally Posted by Contumacious View Post
    Judicial Corruption , the politicians in black robes syndrome has been with us for quite sometime:

    1- The Brandeis/Frankfurter Connection: The Secret Political Activities of Two Supreme Court Justices

    2- Justice at War: The Story of the Japanese-American Internment Cases


    3- The Best Defense

    4- Don Boudreaux points out that Justice Thurgood Marshall took a dim view of drug dealers and openly suggested that he would reflexively side against them in cases (via Radley Balko). Marshall told LIFE in 1987, a year after Ronald Reagan signed the 1986 Drug Abuse Act, “If it’s a dope case, I won’t even read the petition. I ain’t giving no break to no dope dealer.




    And so it goes


    .



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    I have two questions for you:

    1. Do you have any reason to think that these judges are corrupt apart from their rejection of Trump's lawsuits?

    2. How do you explain the fact that many of these judges are Republicans, several nominated by Trump himself?

    As to the second point, here are some examples:



    https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...7e8_story.html

    I guess these judges are members of the Deep State, and Trump nominated them because....the Deep State made him do it?

    Does that really make sense to you?
    Listen, you know I'm not a Trump supporter at all. So take that into consideration. But there's a sort of social squelch going on. Some call it cancel culture, or censorship, but I prefer squelch. It's not that these judges are part of some conspiracy. They're caught up in the same social squelch as the rest of us. They wear masks. They allow illegal government mandates. They can't be honest about race relations. They know there's an "accepted" opinion from which you cannot deviate without paying a price. They're human. Now, add on to that that they are government workers and their own careers are subjected to the whims of the public and an entering administration.

    The judicial branch would rather that election issues remain matters of legislative powers, not judicial. They're not looking at merits. They can easily find the justification in standing to not stick their necks out to be on the chopping block for the next administration, nor get "cancelled" by the media and the left.
    "And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works." - Bastiat

    "It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." - Voltaire

  21. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCount View Post
    If the fact that Trump won the vast majority of counties where dominion voting systems were used isn't enough to derail this particular crazy train, then I'm not sure that the appointment details of judges are going to tip the scales.

    However, I applaud your efforts.
    Are you suggesting that if fraud were to occur somewhere, then it must occur everywhere?
    All modern revolutions have ended in a reinforcement of the power of the State.
    -Albert Camus

  22. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by otherone View Post
    Are you suggesting that if fraud were to occur somewhere, then it must occur everywhere?
    The fraud that is being alleged regarding dominion voting machines and dominion software does not line up with the actual election results.
    "The one permanent emotion of the inferior man is fear - fear of the unknown, the complex, the inexplicable. What he wants above everything else is safety."
    H. L. Mencken

    Quote Originally Posted by Contumacious View Post
    Yes, indeed , we will never be able to prove fraud.

  23. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCount View Post
    The fraud that is being alleged regarding dominion voting machines and dominion software does not line up with the actual election results.
    So you are saying if software tampering occurred in some counties, then all the other dominion counties should have reflected that as well?
    Last edited by otherone; 12-23-2020 at 11:08 PM.
    All modern revolutions have ended in a reinforcement of the power of the State.
    -Albert Camus

  24. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonny Tufts View Post
    As with any civil suit, the burden of proof is on the plaintiff. But given the utter inability of Giuliani and Powell to substantiate in court any of their conspiracy theories, it could be an interesting case.
    Inability? No. To my knowledge, not a single instance in question ever got to discovery, which means the judges had no bases to being able to assess whether a prima facie case existed.

    Something's rotten in Denmark.
    Through lives and lives shalt thou pay, O' king.

    Freedom will be stolen from you in a heartbeat if you do not behave as a wild and ravening beast pursuant to its protection.

    "Government" is naught but a mental construct, a script to which people meekly accept and play out their assigned roles by those with no authority to dictate such.

    Pray for reset.


  25. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    I have two questions for you:

    1. Do you have any reason to think that these judges are corrupt apart from their rejection of Trump's lawsuits?

    2. How do you explain the fact that many of these judges are Republicans, several nominated by Trump himself?

    As to the second point, here are some examples:

    I guess these judges are members of the Deep State, and Trump nominated them because....the Deep State made him do it?

    Does that really make sense to you?
    People don't become judges because of their record of bold action. Judges are, for the most part, quite cowardly. They don't like going out on limbs.
    Through lives and lives shalt thou pay, O' king.

    Freedom will be stolen from you in a heartbeat if you do not behave as a wild and ravening beast pursuant to its protection.

    "Government" is naught but a mental construct, a script to which people meekly accept and play out their assigned roles by those with no authority to dictate such.

    Pray for reset.


  26. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by CaptUSA View Post
    Listen, you know I'm not a Trump supporter at all. So take that into consideration. But there's a sort of social squelch going on. Some call it cancel culture, or censorship, but I prefer squelch. It's not that these judges are part of some conspiracy. They're caught up in the same social squelch as the rest of us. They wear masks. They allow illegal government mandates. They can't be honest about race relations. They know there's an "accepted" opinion from which you cannot deviate without paying a price. They're human. Now, add on to that that they are government workers and their own careers are subjected to the whims of the public and an entering administration.

    The judicial branch would rather that election issues remain matters of legislative powers, not judicial. They're not looking at merits. They can easily find the justification in standing to not stick their necks out to be on the chopping block for the next administration, nor get "cancelled" by the media and the left.
    I hear you, and anything's possible, but, in my view, the reason that these lawsuits have failed across the board is the obvious one.

    They have no merit.

    And, to the underlined point, that's not altogether correct; they have in some cases looked at the merits (and found them wanting).

    Further, forget the courts, Trump has the biggest bully pulpit in the world.

    If the evidence of fraud is so clear, let's see it. Why haven't we seen it? A: because it doesn't exist.

    Trump is doing exactly what many of us thought he would do, what he in fact said he would do; contest the result regardless.

    There was no possible world in which Trump was announced the loser and didn't do this.

    It has nothing to do with facts.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Vincent_Peale
    Last edited by r3volution 3.0; 12-23-2020 at 11:19 PM.

  27. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    People don't become judges because of their record of bold action. Judges are, for the most part, quite cowardly. They don't like going out on limbs.
    How do people become Presidents?



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    I hear you, and anything's possible, but, in my view, the reason that these lawsuits have failed across the board is the obvious one.

    They have no merit.

    And, to the underlined point, that's not altogether correct; they have in some cases looked at the merits (and found them wanting).

    Further, forget the courts, Trump has the biggest bully pulpit in the world.

    If the evidence of fraud is so clear, let's see it. Why haven't we seen it? A: because it doesn't exist.

    Trump is doing exactly what many of us thought he would do, what he in fact said he would do; contest the result regardless.

    There was no possible world in which Trump was announced the loser and didn't do this.

    It has nothing to do with facts.
    Except that you will never get the evidence without a detailed audit. Obviously, something unprecedented happen as a result of the rule changes. Was it fraud? There was certainly opportunity. Was it just that the democrats better exploited the myriad of last-minute rule changes? Was it the social media push by the tech companies?

    Maybe it's just that the easier you make it to vote and the more time you give people, the more people who don't care about politics participate?

    All of those seem rational to me.

    What doesn't seem rational is the idea that it's ok to just dismiss the questions or prevent a deep inquiry into what actually occurred because we got the result that 1/2 the people wanted. And the way the media treated this is the worst I've ever seen in my life. Once they adopted the narrative that Biden won, they attacked all contrary information. In fact, there's been an all-out war on anyone stepping outside the allowable viewpoint. And their main message is "nothing to see here - don't analyze the evidence."
    "And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works." - Bastiat

    "It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." - Voltaire

  30. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by CaptUSA View Post
    Except that you will never get the evidence without a detailed audit. Obviously, something unprecedented happen as a result of the rule changes. Was it fraud? There was certainly opportunity. Was it just that the democrats better exploited the myriad of last-minute rule changes? Was it the social media push by the tech companies?

    Maybe it's just that the easier you make it to vote and the more time you give people, the more people who don't care about politics participate?

    All of those seem rational to me.

    What doesn't seem rational is the idea that it's ok to just dismiss the questions or prevent a deep inquiry into what actually occurred because we got the result that 1/2 the people wanted. And the way the media treated this is the worst I've ever seen in my life. Once they adopted the narrative that Biden won, they attacked all contrary information. In fact, there's been an all-out war on anyone stepping outside the allowable viewpoint. And their main message is "nothing to see here - don't analyze the evidence."
    If people want to do investigations, file lawsuits, so forth, fine by me - have at it.

    People are mocking these efforts, but I'm not aware that anyone's stopping them.

    But the point, for me, is that:

    (a) Trump, if the official results said he lost, was going to claim fraud regardless of any facts

    and (b) a large part of the population was going to blindly believe whatever he said.

    And, in my view, that is exactly what's happened.

    I don't see any other story here.

  31. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    If people want to do investigation, file lawsuits, whatever, fine by me - have at it.

    People are mocking these efforts, but I'm not aware that anyone's stopping them.
    But don't you see? The mocking IS the stopping. It's based on a preconception that nothing was amiss and we simply don't know that. I don't care who the winner is either. But I can easily see that one side wants to figure out what happened (hoping it'll change things), and the other side doesn't want to look at what happened (because they got the result they wanted).

    This line that you have, "I don't see anything to indicate..." is just confirmation bias. Something really strange happened this election. The vote totals for a senile guy who hid out for a year were WAY higher than the guy who transformed the GOTV machinery and inspired a generation. I would think the unbiased viewpoint would be to dig deep to find out what happened. But that's not the case, here.

    From our shared perspective of not caring which tool fills the seat, I'd hope we can still see the opportunity here to call attention to the social squelch. It's that same squelch that is sending us into socialism by both parties.
    "And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works." - Bastiat

    "It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." - Voltaire

  32. #28
    Dominion's Eric Coomer Suing for DEFAMATION! Viva Frei Vlawg
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_OlBCRu9mk

    Dominion’s Eric Coomer Suing Newsmax, OANN, Powell, Wood et al for DEFAMATION


    Frédéric Bastiat (1801-1850)

    • "When law and morality are in contradiction to each other, the citizen finds himself in the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense, or of losing his respect for the law." - The Law (p. 54)
    • "Government is that great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else." - Government (p. 99)
    • "[W]ar is always begun in the interest of the few, and at the expense of the many."
      - Economic Sophisms - Second Series (p. 312)
    • "There are two principles that can never be reconciled - Liberty and Constraint."
      - Harmonies of Political Economy - Book One (p. 447)

    · tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito ·
    MOFA (Make Orwell Fiction Again)

  33. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by CaptUSA View Post
    But don't you see? The mocking IS the stopping. It's based on a preconception that nothing was amiss and we simply don't know that. I don't care who the winner is either. But I can easily see that one side wants to figure out what happened (hoping it'll change things), and the other side doesn't want to look at what happened (because they got the result they wanted).
    I don't think the Trump side wants to find out what happened.

    I think they want to find out that Trump won, which they are already 199% certain is what happened.

    And I think that they will find this out, or have already, regardless of any facts.

    This line that you have, "I don't see anything to indicate..." is just confirmation bias. Something really strange happened this election. The vote totals for a senile guy who hid out for a year were WAY higher than the guy who transformed the GOTV machinery and inspired a generation. I would think the unbiased viewpoint would be to dig deep to find out what happened. But that's not the case, here.
    I don't see anything strange in that at all.

    Trump was the most unpopular President in modern American history.

    He barely won in 2016 (by less than Biden won this time).

    The polls all showed him losing.

    He lost.

    Where's the shocker?

    From our shared perspective of not caring which tool fills the seat, I'd hope we can still see the opportunity here to call attention to the social squelch. It's that same squelch that is sending us into socialism by both parties.
    Sorry Captain, we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

    To my mind, this is on par with the argument about the size of Trump's inauguration day crowd: i.e. ridiculous.

  34. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    I don't think the Trump side wants to find out what happened.

    I think they want to find out that Trump won, which they are already 199% certain is what happened.

    And I think that they will find this out, or have already, regardless of any facts.



    I don't see anything strange in that at all.

    Trump was the most unpopular President in modern American history.

    He barely won in 2016 (by less than Biden won this time).

    The polls all showed him losing.

    He lost.

    Where's the shocker?



    Sorry Captain, we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

    To my mind, this is on par with the argument about the size of Trump's inauguration day crowd: i.e. ridiculous.
    It's not about Trump. Go watch these hearing highlights: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...55#post7007555

    Yes, the Trumpers want Trump to win and the left doesn't. But you've already said you don't care about that. So, why support the squelch? I don't get it.
    "And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works." - Bastiat

    "It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." - Voltaire

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-22-2020, 09:51 PM
  2. The Dangers of Defamation Laws
    By PAF in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-14-2019, 07:03 PM
  3. Replies: 13
    Last Post: 01-12-2012, 08:56 PM
  4. defamation and slander
    By WIwarrior in forum Ron Paul Forum
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 12-28-2011, 09:55 AM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-20-2011, 01:24 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •