Mark Steyn Calls Out Corrupt Democrats by Name

[CarlinAnnArbor]

These are the foreigners we need in America!

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

Liberals hate him because of the color of his skin.

 

[Crick]

We hate you because you're a bigot. Does any of this have anything to do with the environment?

 

[Dale Smith]

We hate you because you're a bigot. Does any of this have anything to do with the environment?

"We"??? You are the spokesperson for leftards now????

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

We hate you because you're a bigot. Does any of this have anything to do with the environment?

If you watched the video you wouldn’t be asking that question

 

[SSDD]

We hate you because you're a bigot. Does any of this have anything to do with the environment?

Clearly you didn't watch the video....more bullshit opinion pulled straight out of your ass....I can see why you wouldn't want to watch though...it isn't as if you could mount any rational argument against anything he had to say...Does he fall in that group who you believe it would be more efficient to simply kill off?

 

[SSDD]

We hate you because you're a bigot. Does any of this have anything to do with the environment?

"We"??? You are the spokesperson for leftards now????

They march in lockstep...what one says, they all say.

 

[Wuwei]

Liberals hate him because of the color of his skin.

What?? You are the spokesperson for liberals now????

All Steyn did is to whine - disingenuously. He rattled off scientists who won the Tyler Prize for Environmental Achievement — an award sometimes described as the "Nobel Prize for the environment." There is a difference between that analogy and the actual Nobel Prize. If those scientists actually claimed they won the Nobel Prize, I would like to see a reference to that. Otherwise Steyn is just a blatant liar.

 

[skookerasbil]

Liberals hate him because of the color of his skin.

What?? You are the spokesperson for liberals now????

All Steyn did is to whine - disingenuously. He rattled off scientists who won the Tyler Prize for Environmental Achievement — an award sometimes described as the "Nobel Prize for the environment." There is a difference between that analogy and the actual Nobel Prize. If those scientists actually claimed they won the Nobel Prize, I would like to see a reference to that. Otherwise Steyn is just a blatant liar.

Nobody takes those awards seriously. It's all inside baseball stuff.....like Kim Kardasian coordinating a best boobs contest with Selma Hyek.

Winners of that award will invariably be affiliated the the Climate Cange Manufacturing Co.

Doy

 

[mamooth]

What's the point of repeating a 2015 propaganda piece? Everyone already knows Steyn is a liar, and that the Republicans are corrupt and stupid. Oh, that's right. The Trumptards are desperate and flailing. Just look at their little limp wrists flapping around madly. We can use them for wind power.

Dr. Mann sued Steyn for defamation in 2012. The lawsuit still drags on, because at first Steyn kept slowing it down. Then Bob Carter and Bill Gray died, and Steyn suddenly realized "Oh crap, all my supposed expert witnesses are kicking the bucket!", so he flipped about and asked to expedite. That's a problem with denialism. The only "scientists" supporting it are old, crotchety and kind of senile. There are no young denier scientists. As they say, science advances one funeral at a time.

Steyn's best hope is that the case is decided as Weaver vs. Ball was, when the judge ruled denier Tim Ball was such an idiot, nobody actually took him seriously, and thus there wasn't any defamation.

 

[Billy_Bob]

What's the point of repeating a 2015 propaganda piece? Everyone already knows Steyn is a liar, and that the Republicans are corrupt and stupid. Oh, that's right. The Trumptards are desperate and flailing. Just look at their little limp wrists flapping around madly. We can use them for wind power.

Dr. Mann sued Steyn for defamation in 2012. The lawsuit still drags on, because at first Steyn kept slowing it down. Then Bob Carter and Bill Gray died, and Steyn suddenly realized "Oh crap, all my supposed expert witnesses are kicking the bucket!", so he flipped about and asked to expedite. That's a problem with denialism. The only "scientists" supporting it are old, crotchety and kind of senile. There are no young denier scientists. As they say, science advances one funeral at a time.

Steyn's best hope is that the case is decided as Weaver vs. Ball was, when the judge ruled denier Tim Ball was such an idiot, nobody actually took him seriously, and thus there wasn't any defamation.

What a load of shit...

Mann is refusing to comply with discovery and is now in contempt.. This whole suit of Mann's is about to implode...

 

[Oddball]

 

[Crick]

Mann is refusing to comply with discovery and is now in contempt.. This whole suit of Mann's is about to implode...

Link please

 

[Crick]

From the Competitive Enterprise Institute at Michael E. Mann v. National Review and CEI, et al.

Oddly, Billy Boy, I see diddly squat about Mann refusing to comply with discovery and being held in contempt.

Proceedings & Orders

• Feb 13, 2019
  Letter on Rehearing en Banc
• Mar 13, 2017
  RESPONSE of Michael Mann to Petition for Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc
• Feb 28, 2017
  ORDER for Response to En Banc Petition
• Jan 30, 2017
  BRIEF of Amici Curiae Newsmax Media, et al.
• Jan 26, 2017
  BRIEF of Amicus Curiae Stephen McIntyre
• Jan 25, 2017
  MOTION of Dr. Judith A. Curry Leave to File Amicus Curiae Brief
• Jan 25, 2017
  BRIEF of Amicus Curiae Dr. Judith A. Curry
• Jan 19, 2017
  BRIEF of Amicus Curiae Cato Institute
• Jan 19, 2017
  PETITION of CEI and Rand Simberg for Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc
• Jan 19, 2017
  PETITION of National Review for Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc
• Dec 22, 2016
  JUDGEMENT of the D.C. Court of Appeals
• Sep 24, 2014
  APPELLATE REPLY BRIEF of CEI and Rand Simberg
• Sep 24, 2014
  APPELLATE REPLY BRIEF of National Review
• Sep 03, 2014
  APPELLATE BRIEF of Mann
• Aug 14, 2014
  OPENING BRIEF of National Review in D.C. Appellate Court
• Aug 14, 2014
  OPENING BRIEF of CEI in D.C. Appellate Court
• Aug 11, 2014
  BRIEF of Amicus Curiae Mark Steyn in Support of Expeditious Ruling
• Aug 11, 2014
  BRIEF of Amici Curiae Electronic Frontier Foundation, et al.
• Aug 11, 2014
  BRIEF of Amici Curiae Cato Institute, et al.
• Aug 11, 2014
  BRIEF of Amicus Curiae Alliance Defending Freedom
• Aug 11, 2014
  BRIEF of Amicus Curiae District of Columbia
• Aug 11, 2014
  BRIEF of Amici Curiae of the Reporters Committee for the Freedom of the Press, et al.
• Jun 16, 2014
  ORDER Scheduling for the D.C. Court of Appeals
• Apr 30, 2014
  ORDER of the D.C. Court of Appeals Permitting and Expediting Appeal
• Apr 25, 2014
  OPPOSITION to Response to Show Cause Order
• Apr 15, 2014
  RESPONSE to Show Cause Order Regarding Appeal
• Jan 22, 2014
  ORDER of D.C. Superior Court Denying Renewed Anti-SLAPP Motions to Dismiss
• Dec 19, 2013
  ORDER of the D.C. Court of Appeals Remanding the Case
• Nov 22, 2013
  BRIEF of Amicus Curiae the District of Columbia
• Nov 14, 2013
  BRIEF of Amicus Curiae of the ACLU
• Nov 13, 2013
  BRIEF of Amici Curiae of Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, et al.
• Nov 07, 2013
  RESPONSE of Defendants to D.C. Court of Appeals on Jurisdiction
• Oct 12, 2013
  ORDER of the D.C. Superior Court Staying Proceedings Pending Interlocutory Appeal
• Sep 12, 2013
  ORDER of the D.C. Superior Court Denying Defendants’ Joint Motion to Certify Interlocutory Appeal
• Jul 19, 2013
  ORDER of the D.C. Superior Court Denying Anti-SLAPP Motion
• Jun 28, 2013
  MOTION to Amend Complaint and Amended Complaint
• Dec 14, 2012
  MOTION to Dismiss under D.C. Anti-SLAPP Act
• Dec 14, 2012
  MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim
• Oct 22, 2012
  COMPLAINT of Michael Mann and DC Superior Court Summons

 

[jc456]

What's the point of repeating a 2015 propaganda piece? Everyone already knows Steyn is a liar, and that the Republicans are corrupt and stupid. Oh, that's right. The Trumptards are desperate and flailing. Just look at their little limp wrists flapping around madly. We can use them for wind power.

Dr. Mann sued Steyn for defamation in 2012. The lawsuit still drags on, because at first Steyn kept slowing it down. Then Bob Carter and Bill Gray died, and Steyn suddenly realized "Oh crap, all my supposed expert witnesses are kicking the bucket!", so he flipped about and asked to expedite. That's a problem with denialism. The only "scientists" supporting it are old, crotchety and kind of senile. There are no young denier scientists. As they say, science advances one funeral at a time.

Steyn's best hope is that the case is decided as Weaver vs. Ball was, when the judge ruled denier Tim Ball was such an idiot, nobody actually took him seriously, and thus there wasn't any defamation.

can't make this up at allllllllll.

 

[Crick]

No, you can't

From Weaver v Ball 2018 BCSC 205 - Ad IDEM / CMLA

Justice Skolrood had this to say:

I accept Dr. Ball’s characterization that the Article is an opinion piece directed at an issue of public interest, namely, climate change and the role of humans in contributing to global warming. While Dr. Weaver is mentioned in the Article, he is not its primary focus.Further, despite Dr. Ball’s history as an academic and a scientist, the Article is rife with errors and inaccuracies, which suggests a lack of attention to detail on Dr. Ball’s part, if not an indifference to the truth.While Dr. Ball presents his central thesis that climate science has been corrupted by politics, the Article offers little in the way of support for that thesis, apart from vague references to missing or falsified data and political manipulation, unsubstantiated and erroneous references to Dr. Weaver as referred to above, and a recommendation that people read a 45-year-old text on climate science written by Professor Hubert Lamb.Overall, even as an opinion piece, the Article presents as poorly written and it provides little in the way of credible support for Dr. Ball’s thesis.

In answer to the question, whether the words in the article were defamatory of Dr. Weaver, Skolrood J. states:

...the Article is poorly written and does not advance credible arguments in favour of Dr. Ball’s theory about the corruption of climate science. Simply put, a reasonably thoughtful and informed person who reads the Article is unlikely to place any stock in Dr. Ball’s views, including his views of Dr. Weaver as a supporter of conventional climate science....the Article is clearly an opinion piece, and statements of opinion are generally evaluated differently than statements of fact....it is very unlikely that the Article and the opinions expressed therein had an impact on the views of anyone who read it, including their views, if any, of Dr. Weaver as a climate scientist. Rather, the reasonably thoughtful and informed reader would have recognized the Article as simply presenting one side of a highly charged public debate.The issue of climate change is a matter of public interest and, as noted, Dr. Weaver has been at the forefront of public discussion. It has long been recognized that where someone enters the public arena, it is to be expected that his or her actions and words will be subject to robust scrutiny and criticism.In summary, the Article is a poorly written opinion piece that offers Dr. Ball’s views on conventional climate science and Dr. Weaver’s role as a supporter and teacher of that science. While the Article is derogatory of Dr. Weaver, it is not defamatory, in that the impugned words do not genuinely threaten Dr. Weaver’s reputation in the minds of reasonably thoughtful and informed readers. Dr. Weaver has therefore failed to establish the first element of the defamation test.
****************************************************************************************************
By the way, I am still waiting for Billy Bob to provide a link to the reference from which he claims that Dr Mann (Mann v Steyn, and CEI) was being held in contempt for refusing to comply with discovery and that his case was about to "blow up" on him.

 

[skookerasbil]

Steyn is hysterical.....makes liberals look so dumb you have to bite your lip so you dont die laughing. He out-absurds the absurd.....brilliantly so.

 

[Shrimpbox]

What's the point of repeating a 2015 propaganda piece? Everyone already knows Steyn is a liar, and that the Republicans are corrupt and stupid. Oh, that's right. The Trumptards are desperate and flailing. Just look at their little limp wrists flapping around madly. We can use them for wind power.

Dr. Mann sued Steyn for defamation in 2012. The lawsuit still drags on, because at first Steyn kept slowing it down. Then Bob Carter and Bill Gray died, and Steyn suddenly realized "Oh crap, all my supposed expert witnesses are kicking the bucket!", so he flipped about and asked to expedite. That's a problem with denialism. The only "scientists" supporting it are old, crotchety and kind of senile. There are no young denier scientists. As they say, science advances one funeral at a time.

Steyn's best hope is that the case is decided as Weaver vs. Ball was, when the judge ruled denier Tim Ball was such an idiot, nobody actually took him seriously, and thus there wasn't any defamation.

Scientists like Ocasio-Cortez, right?

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

What's the point of repeating a 2015 propaganda piece? Everyone already knows Steyn is a liar, and that the Republicans are corrupt and stupid. Oh, that's right. The Trumptards are desperate and flailing. Just look at their little limp wrists flapping around madly. We can use them for wind power.

Dr. Mann sued Steyn for defamation in 2012. The lawsuit still drags on, because at first Steyn kept slowing it down. Then Bob Carter and Bill Gray died, and Steyn suddenly realized "Oh crap, all my supposed expert witnesses are kicking the bucket!", so he flipped about and asked to expedite. That's a problem with denialism. The only "scientists" supporting it are old, crotchety and kind of senile. There are no young denier scientists. As they say, science advances one funeral at a time.

Steyn's best hope is that the case is decided as Weaver vs. Ball was, when the judge ruled denier Tim Ball was such an idiot, nobody actually took him seriously, and thus there wasn't any defamation.

This country is divided precisely because of people like you who deal in absolutes. Your cat is smarter than you.

 

[Crick]

What absolute is that? His observation about the age and condition of the majority of denier scientists is accurate.