Laura Loomer Files $3 BILLION Lawsuit Against Facebook for Defamation

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Only evidence that is relevant to the defamatory accusation can be presented in court

Which is precisely what i described. They removed her due to their policies, subject to their interpretation of them. They merely have to show a reasonable opinion why this is so, in that context. It doesn't have to be completely, objectively, perfectly true, in everyone's opinion. You are very confused about who carries the burden, here.

WRONG.

They have to prove their affirmative defense that the statements were true, that she is a terrorist, murderer or person inciting violence. That's how they defined "dangerous individual" and they can't backtrack on that shit. In fact, because they failed to specify what she did to warrant the "dangerous individual" label, they actually must prove all 3, which the cannot.

Facebook needs to just get out that checkbook. It's over.

.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

No, you said that anything she posted that someone might object to can be used as evidence.

That's a shameless lie. I never stated or implied that.

I said they have to demonstrate that what they did may be considered reasonable, in the context of their policies. They don't have to demonstrate that anything with a brain would be compelled to agree.

Again, you are ass backwards on who carries the burden, here.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Her right to post on Facebook is irrelevant.

100% wrong. For instance, a case that she was incorrectly labeled a terrorist by a nefarious actor in our government, limiting her actions to which she has a right, would be a much different case.

What the **** are you talking about?

She has not sued a government entity. She sued FACEBOOK, who called her a terrorist, or a murderer, or a person who incites violence. They can't back off on that shit.

.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

They have to prove their affirmative defense that the statements were true, that she is a terrorist, murderer or person inciting violence.

No they don't. What an absurd pile of madeup crap.

You dont even know what their statement was.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

She seems very much like the person that has been married 6 times...but it is always the ex’s fault.

She is probably really bitchy and hard to live with.

That still doesn't make her a terrorist or a mass murderer, or a person who incites violence.

Facebook is fucked.

 

[progressive hunter]

as long as they are equally applied,, which they arent,,,its all purely one sided,,,

Oh? I wasn't aware Louis Farrakhan is on your side. Thanks for clarifying that.

how would you know what side is mine???

Based on your defense of the one side you wrongly portrayed as being the only target in this.

its best not to assume things you dont know about,,,

Have you noticed how all these leftwing douchebags defend the Big Brother behavior of Facebook in kneejerk fashion?

its par for the course for them,,,

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

She has not sued a government entity.

Yes, that was precisely my point, coupled with the idea of her rights being harmed. Thank you for repeating my point back to me. That would be a very different situation, contrasted to the idea that she has no right to post on facebook.

 

[Dragonlady]

She was banned along with others who express hate speech, including Alex Jones and Louis Farrakhan.

"Hate speech" is undefinable, and Facebook defines it to mean "any opinion Mark Zuckerberg doesn't like."

So what? It's their site. If you don't like it, don't post your hate speech on it.

no such thing as hate speech,,,

And yet, there is. I already posted what Facebook considers hate speech.

you said it,,,WHAT THEY CONSIDER,,,

and by their actions its all politically based and not about hate,,,

But you're using the same criteria for your opinion. YOU don't consider it hate speech, so its not. But here is the thing. If you don't own the website she's posting on, your opinion of what constitutes hate speech is irrelevant. So if you want a social media app for haters, racists and assholes, have at it.

Oh wait!! You already have such a website. 4chan!! You want to talk white supremacy, replacement, and all of your other hate fuelled bullshit, go to 4chan. Talk amongst yourselves and leave Facebook out of it.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Facebook is under no obligation to allow members to use their service to promote hate speech. And hate speech can be dangerous. We'll have to wait and see what she posted to warrant Facebook's actions si that we can then argue if it was hate speech or not.

theres no such thing as hate speech,,,

Of course there is. Hate speech is as simple as expressing hatred towards a specific group. It's not a legal term and does not present any legal consequences unless it becomes a verbal threat, but it is a thing and Facebook has a right to prohibit it on their website.

Loomer also has a right to sue them for defamation when Facebook uses it's arbitrary definition of "hate."

No she doesn't. Legally, Loomer doesn't have a leg to stand on here. Facebook can make any sort of artbitrary decision they like to ban a person, and they don't have to justify their reasons. It's a private company. They can't ban her on race, religion or nation of origin, but that's about it. The usual "public accommodations" stuff.

Look at it this way. You invite someone to your home for a dinner party. The guests are a diverse group, but one of your guests comes in, and starts calling people racists names, acting like a total asshole, insulting and offending your other guests, and arguments are breaking out.

Are you going to stand there and say "She is just expressing her opinions as is her right under the Constitution", or are you going to say "You can't talk like that to my other guests. Stop it right now or you'll have to leave".

The right to "free speech" in America is not a carte blanche to promote hate and bigotry. The right to "free speech" is extremely limited: You cannot be arrested or prosecuted for criticizing the government. That's it. You cannot enter a private business and start shouting that you hate brown people. They'll throw you out and rightfully so.

She's not suing because they banned her. She's suing because they labeled her "dangerous."

She is suing because of $$$ at the end of the day. How is she more dangerous than Ilhan Omar? All jokes aside.

 

[bripat9643]

No, you said that anything she posted that someone might object to can be used as evidence.

That's a shameless lie. I never stated or implied that.

Liar:

And then Facebook's lawyers bring into court all of her disgusting writings to demonstrate why they made that public conclusion. And then everyone goes home.
​

"All her disgusting writings" means whatever writings someone might object to.

 

[Faun]

And then Facebook's lawyers bring into court all of her disgusting writings to demonstrate why they made that public conclusion. And then everyone goes home.

Nope. They can only use evidence that proves she's a "dangerous person." Saying Islam isn't compatible with Western society does no such thing.

No, but if she said something about rising up against it, which has been alleged, her posts could be reasonably considered dangerous.

"Rising up against it" simply means passing laws that don't allow it. Are you saying that proposing legislation makes someone a "dangerous person?"

Great, show where she put that in context of legislation...

Show where she put anything in the context of calling for people to be assaulted.

She purportedly called on "patriots" to "rise up against" Omar, who receives death threats. Rising up against Omar is not something which can be done through legislation, ya ******* moron.

 

[bripat9643]

Oh? I wasn't aware Louis Farrakhan is on your side. Thanks for clarifying that.

how would you know what side is mine???

Based on your defense of the one side you wrongly portrayed as being the only target in this.

its best not to assume things you dont know about,,,

Have you noticed how all these leftwing douchebags defend the Big Brother behavior of Facebook in kneejerk fashion?

its par for the course for them,,,

Here's the rule:

How do you identify a Stalinist? They defend Facebook censorship and defamation.

 

[Dragonlady]

The truth hurts.

I love it.

The Trump supporting flame throwers spew trheir shit all over the internet & then run crying when the favor is returned.
You asssfucks need to grow the **** up & try the truth instead of believing the Loomers & Limbaughs.

No wonder you are all dumber than shit.

If I own a newspaper, I don't have to print your shit.

I hope there is a counter suit & the dumb ***** loses everything.

Facebook is going to get $3 billion of truth.

Sure, ******* moron. And Madison Square Garden is in Wisconsin according to you.

Same old trick.

It never gets old.

Yeah, because you have nothing else in your quiver.

When you're dealing with someone who isn't very bright, you really don't need to change your tactics. You just go with what works. In your case,one is all she needs.

Speaking of frivlous lawsuits you've promoted. How much money did Nick Sandmann get? Motions for Dismissal have been filed by both CNN and WAPO. These Motions indicate that neither company offered him so much a one red nickle.

Remember when you told us this kid was going to get millions for slander. And we said "Good luck with that bullshit".

 

[bripat9643]

Nope. They can only use evidence that proves she's a "dangerous person." Saying Islam isn't compatible with Western society does no such thing.

No, but if she said something about rising up against it, which has been alleged, her posts could be reasonably considered dangerous.

"Rising up against it" simply means passing laws that don't allow it. Are you saying that proposing legislation makes someone a "dangerous person?"

Great, show where she put that in context of legislation...

Show where she put anything in the context of calling for people to be assaulted.

She purportedly called on "patriots" to "rise up against" Omar, who receives death threats. Rising up against Omar is not something which can be done through legislation, ya ******* moron.

Nope:

“We need some patriots to rise up and protect our Constitution so we can prevent the establishment of a caliphate,” ​

She didn't say what you claim. I wouldn't describe that as a call to commit violence. She also said it on instagram, not Facebook.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Nope. They can only use evidence that proves she's a "dangerous person." Saying Islam isn't compatible with Western society does no such thing.

No, but if she said something about rising up against it, which has been alleged, her posts could be reasonably considered dangerous.

"Rising up against it" simply means passing laws that don't allow it. Are you saying that proposing legislation makes someone a "dangerous person?"

Great, show where she put that in context of legislation...

Show where she put anything in the context of calling for people to be assaulted.

She purportedly called on "patriots" to "rise up against" Omar, who receives death threats. Rising up against Omar is not something which can be done through legislation, ya ******* moron.

It is at best a confrontation but not a threat? Faun, do you believe that Omar openly hates Jews? I do. Do you believe her rhetoric causes violence against Jews? I do. Do I think she should be banned? No.

Now I dont know anything about Loomer and she may be more dangerous but she is definitely less famous.

 

[bripat9643]

Facebook is going to get $3 billion of truth.

Sure, ******* moron. And Madison Square Garden is in Wisconsin according to you.

Same old trick.

It never gets old.

Yeah, because you have nothing else in your quiver.

When you're dealing with someone who isn't very bright, you really don't need to change your tactics. You just go with what works. In your case,one is all she needs.

Speaking of frivlous lawsuits you've promoted. How much money did Nick Sandmann get? Motions for Dismissal have been filed by both CNN and WAPO. These Motions indicate that neither company offered him so much a one red nickle.

Remember when you told us this kid was going to get millions for slander. And we said "Good luck with that bullshit".

You can gloat when the lawsuits are settled. Not until then.

 

[bripat9643]

Facebook is going to get $3 billion of truth.

Sure, ******* moron. And Madison Square Garden is in Wisconsin according to you.

Same old trick.

It never gets old.

Yeah, because you have nothing else in your quiver.

When you're dealing with someone who isn't very bright, you really don't need to change your tactics. You just go with what works. In your case,one is all she needs.

Speaking of frivlous lawsuits you've promoted. How much money did Nick Sandmann get? Motions for Dismissal have been filed by both CNN and WAPO. These Motions indicate that neither company offered him so much a one red nickle.

Remember when you told us this kid was going to get millions for slander. And we said "Good luck with that bullshit".

Faux is a "she?" That's interesting.

 

[Dragonlady]

Only evidence that is relevant to the defamatory accusation can be presented in court

Which is precisely what i described. They removed her due to their policies, subject to their interpretation of them. They merely have to show a reasonable opinion why this is so, in that context. It doesn't have to be completely, objectively, perfectly true, in everyone's opinion. You are very confused about who carries the burden, here.

WRONG.

They have to prove their affirmative defense that the statements were true, that she is a terrorist, murderer or person inciting violence. That's how they defined "dangerous individual" and they can't backtrack on that shit. In fact, because they failed to specify what she did to warrant the "dangerous individual" label, they actually must prove all 3, which the cannot.

Facebook needs to just get out that checkbook. It's over.

.

No they don't. When you claim that someone has defamed you, YOU have to prove it. The Plaintiff has to prove their case, not the Defendant. She not only has to prove she was slandered, and since she's a public figure that's going to be difficult, she has to prove she has been "harmed" by the slander. How is anyone harmed by not being allowed to post on FaceBook?

This isn't a criminal case. But even in a criminal case, the burden of proof is on the Plaintiff - the State. The Plaintiff always has to prove their case.

 

[Faun]

No, but if she said something about rising up against it, which has been alleged, her posts could be reasonably considered dangerous.

"Rising up against it" simply means passing laws that don't allow it. Are you saying that proposing legislation makes someone a "dangerous person?"

Great, show where she put that in context of legislation...

Show where she put anything in the context of calling for people to be assaulted.

She purportedly called on "patriots" to "rise up against" Omar, who receives death threats. Rising up against Omar is not something which can be done through legislation, ya ******* moron.

Nope:

“We need some patriots to rise up and protect our Constitution so we can prevent the establishment of a caliphate,” ​

She didn't say what you claim. I wouldn't describe that as a call to commit violence. She also said it on instagram, not Facebook.

That quip is not in isolation. It was purportedly made in context to Omar and her belief that Omar is a terrorist trying to destroy Anerica from within.

 

[progressive hunter]

Nope. They can only use evidence that proves she's a "dangerous person." Saying Islam isn't compatible with Western society does no such thing.

No, but if she said something about rising up against it, which has been alleged, her posts could be reasonably considered dangerous.

"Rising up against it" simply means passing laws that don't allow it. Are you saying that proposing legislation makes someone a "dangerous person?"

Great, show where she put that in context of legislation...

Show where she put anything in the context of calling for people to be assaulted.

She purportedly called on "patriots" to "rise up against" Omar, who receives death threats. Rising up against Omar is not something which can be done through legislation, ya ******* moron.

but it can be done at the ballot box and in the court of public opinion,,,