Judge dismisses Nick Sandmann's libel suit against Gannett over viral Capitol incident

[MinTrut]

No. Based on what’s known, it appears that they were very smart.

We'll have to agree to disagree.

Coincidentally, the courts agree with me in the vast majority of other instances where the kid sought a payoff.

 

[MinTrut]

Thats right. because judges cant be wrong or biased, can they?

Well, if you have evidence that actual defamation occurred, I'd love to see it.

You can fucking google and see what they did.

I have.

Why you are so damn lazy and obtuse isnt anyones problem but yours.

I think you may be confused about what defamation is - perhaps if you Googled?

 

[45thPatriot]

You're not making sense.

Based on what you know do you think Nicholas Sandmann is a Nazi? A racist?

 

[TNHarley]

So they (who?) speculated about a public occurrence and its participants?

Did they call him a Nazi or a drug addict? (Assuming he's neither.)

Was it?

Do you have evidence of this?

In error it would seem.

When one has no case, it's very difficult to win, yes.

In error it would seem.

Yeah, their lawyers are fucking stupid
Hey genius, have you considered maybe the ones involved, didnt do the same shit as cnn or WP? No? Not surprising.

 

[TNHarley]

Well, if you have evidence that actual defamation occurred, I'd love to see it.

I have.

I think you may be confused about what defamation is - perhaps if you Googled?

They deleted their articles. If I thought you actually cared, I would try to find the videos. But i dont think you do.
Good day. You are boring.

 

[MinTrut]

Based on what you know do you think Nicholas Sandmann is a Nazi? A racist?

Was he called a Nazi?

If he isn't one, that would be defamation.

Racist is another matter; you may want to explore what defamation actually is.

Good luck!

 

[MinTrut]

Yeah, their lawyers are fucking stupid

Possibly.

Hey genius,

Flattery will get you everywhere.

have you considered maybe the ones involved, didnt do the same shit as cnn or WP?

I have.

Can you cite what CNN/WaPo did that you feel arises to defamation?

Thanks!

No?

See above/below.

Not surprising.

Straw man.

 

[45thPatriot]

Was he called a Nazi?

If he isn't one, that would be defamation.

Racist is another matter; you may want to explore what defamation actually is.

Good luck!

Call it what you want the law sided with the sandman.. I notice you deflect led from my question.. are you scared of getting sued? Come on,, no one will sue you lol

 

[MinTrut]

They deleted their articles.

Did they?

Are they archived ANYWHERE?

If I thought you actually cared, I would try to find the videos.

But I do, and would love to see you present any evidence you have - I might end up agreeing with you.

But i dont think you do.

Irrelevant/fallacious.

Good day. You are boring.

Irrelevant/fallacious.

 

[MinTrut]

Call it what you want the law sided with the sandman..

In what instance? He settled privately with two entities that we're aware of.

I notice you deflect led from my question..

What question?

are you scared of getting sued?

Bizarre/irrelevant deflection.

Come on,, no one will sue you lol

See above.

 

[45thPatriot]

In what instance? He settled privately with two entities that we're aware of.

What question?

Bizarre/irrelevant deflection.

See above.

I asked you a question,, answer it.. they settled 200 million because nick is a nice kid?

 

[Care4all]

I asked you a question,, answer it.. they settled 200 million because nick is a nice kid?

How do you know the amount of the settlement? It is unknown. Private, and part of the settlement to keep it quiet, from what I've read?

 

[Marener]

Yeah.

Lots of conservative wishful thinking here, but no defamation happened that I'm aware of.

The kid’s deposition admitted that he basically did what they accused him of doing.

He admitted to standing in his way intentionally and intentionally not moving. He admitted his intention was to “stand up” for his school in confrontation.

When the kid admits that the stories were a rational interpretation of actual events, your case tends to fall apart.

 

[45thPatriot]

How do you know the amount of the settlement? It is unknown. Private, and part of the settlement to keep it quiet, from what I've read?

It was said last night on a major news station. I trust his word .. anything else?

 

[BackAgain]

We'll have to agree to disagree.

Coincidentally, the courts agree with me in the vast majority of other instances where the kid sought a payoff.

Coincidentally, two sets of lawyers gave advice to some major players in the field and came to a startlingly different opinion than yours.

But I do agree to just disagree with you. And I hope that Sandman appeals and gets the dismissals overturned.

 

[MinTrut]

I asked you a question,, answer it.. they settled 200 million because nick is a nice kid?

Do you have evidence of a 200 million dollar settlement?

If so, please present it.

As to why they (CNN) settled, likely for 2 million or less, I don't think they should have.

But they may have run the numbers, and determined that the cost of litigation, combined with exposure of their inner workings, were not worth the price of proceeding, and thus settled.

Perhaps WaPo made the same determination.

 

[MinTrut]

How do you know the amount of the settlement? It is unknown. Private, and part of the settlement to keep it quiet, from what I've read?

He doesn't know the amount, but it was likely 2 million or less.

After lawyers and taxes, the most the kid would have seen from CNN and WaPo is a few hundred thousand.

Not peanuts, but not hundreds of millions.

 

[45thPatriot]

Do you have evidence of a 200 million dollar settlement?

If so, please present it.

As to why they (CNN) settled, likely for 2 million or less, I don't think they should have.

But they may have run the numbers, and determined that the cost of litigation, combined with exposure of their inner workings, were not worth the price of proceeding, and thus settled.

Perhaps WaPo made the same determination.

Why would it cost them anything? If they win he pays them law fees

 

[MinTrut]

The kid’s deposition admitted that he basically did what they accused him of doing.

He admitted to standing in his way intentionally and intentionally not moving. He admitted his intention was to “stand up” for his school in confrontation.

When the kid admits that the stories were a rational interpretation of actual events, your case tends to fall apart.

Clearly no one was at their best on that day, including the kids and the protesters, and the subsequent media presentation of events was somewhat skewed.

But nothing I saw arose to defamation on the part of the media interpretations, biased as some may have been.

 

[MinTrut]

It was said last night on a major news station. I trust his word .. anything else?

This is nonsensical on your part.