Laura Loomer Files $3 BILLION Lawsuit Against Facebook for Defamation

[bripat9643]

She can't be all that abused, I've never even heard of her.

That doesn't matter for a defamation case.

She had100,000 followers who Facebook informed that she was banned for being dangerous. It's pretty clear cut. Only question is how much Facebook will pay.

.

Actually, all of Facebook's 2 billion members were informed that she is dangerous.

 

[Dragonlady]

Facebook has a right to ban her, what they don’t have a right to do is defame her. So she could sue, win and never have to look at Facebook.

It’s not defamation if it’s true. And she will have to not only prove that she not a dangerous racist bigot given to hate speech, but that the Facebook banning harmed her in some financial way.

You can’t win a lawsuit without proving your damages. I can call you anything I want, but if want damages have to prove actual financial harm.

I doubt Loomer lost one thin dime from all this.

 

[bripat9643]

She can't be all that abused, I've never even heard of her.

That doesn't matter for a defamation case.

She had100,000 followers who Facebook informed that she was banned for being dangerous. It's pretty clear cut. Only question is how much Facebook will pay.

.

Nothing. It's a private platform. If she was preaching hate (what most of those idiots have been banned for) she doesn't have a case.

Wrong again, shit for brains. She can preach whatever she likes, so long is it's not illegal. "Hate" as you call it, is not illegal. In fact, it's protected by the First Amendment.

 

[bripat9643]

Facebook has a right to ban her, what they don’t have a right to do is defame her. So she could sue, win and never have to look at Facebook.

It’s not defamation if it’s true. And she will have to not only prove that she not a dangerous racist bigot given to hate speech, but that the Facebook banning harmed her in some financial way.

You can’t win a lawsuit without proving your damages. I can call you anything I want, but if want damages have to prove actual financial harm.

I doubt Loomer lost one thin dime from all this.

No, she doesn't have to prove it's not true. Facebook has to prove it is true, and you know they can't make that case.

No, you can't say anything you like about me. You can't make false accusations, say, that I'm a child molester, without becoming the subject of a defamation suit.

The damages are easy to prove. She is receiving death threats. She is harmed financially because she is banned and defamed.

It's an open an shut case.

 

[bripat9643]

She can't be all that abused, I've never even heard of her.

That doesn't matter for a defamation case.

She had100,000 followers who Facebook informed that she was banned for being dangerous. It's pretty clear cut. Only question is how much Facebook will pay.

.

Nothing. It's a private platform. If she was preaching hate (what most of those idiots have been banned for) she doesn't have a case.

Wrong. "Hate" is a total bullshit concept. All it means is that she disputed the leftwing orthodoxy.

 

[bripat9643]

The tech giants are about to get what they deserve. If they want to behave like publishers, then they can be subject to the same laws that publishers face. For instance, you can't go around labeling people as "haters, dangerous individual and white supremacists" without facing legal consequences.

Laura Loomer Files $3 BILLION Lawsuit Against Facebook for Defamation - Laura Loomer Official

On Tuesday, Larry Klayman, the founder of Freedom Watch and a former federal prosecutor announced the filing of a defamation lawsuit by conservative investigative journalist Laura Loomer against Facebook. The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida (Case No. 9:19-cv-80893), alleges that Facebook and its wholly owned sister company Instagram, in banning Ms. Loomer from the social media sites, maliciously defamed her by publishing that she is a “dangerous individual” and a domestic Jewish terrorist.​

Oh? What are they gonna get? She has to first prevail before she can have a hope of collecting a dime.

Thanks for stating the obvious, Sherlock.

 

[bripat9643]

She can't be all that abused, I've never even heard of her.

That doesn't matter for a defamation case.

She had100,000 followers who Facebook informed that she was banned for being dangerous. It's pretty clear cut. Only question is how much Facebook will pay.

.

Nothing. It's a private platform. If she was preaching hate (what most of those idiots have been banned for) she doesn't have a case.

Preaching "hate" (aka an opposing view) and being dangerous are completely different things. They told users she was dangerous, which implies that she is violent or has incited violence.

We all know good and Goddamn well that this person was not violent. Facebook commies just didn't like her message.

They were trying to be cute with their banning bullshit, but they fucked up.

But, I think Facebook should go with the "hate speech" defense. They will be required to prove it, and what they offer will be NOTHING but political speech.

Just one "conservative" on that jury will be enough.

People are fed up with this bullshit, and now they have a chance to do something about it.

.

Opposing point of view does not equal preaching hate. She associates with know violent individuals and posts hate speech and racist videos on her page. She has no case.

Here's some of Facebook's reasons for banning her.

• Loomer appeared with McInnes in December, and more recently declared her support for far-right activist Faith Goldy, who was banned after posting racist videos to her account.

Facebook bans Alex Jones and Laura Loomer for violating its policies

You're such a idiot. Nothing she did is illegal or a defense for Facebook. Gavin McGinnis and Faith Goldy are just two more people that have a valid defamation case against Facebook.

 

[bripat9643]

The tech giants are about to get what they deserve. If they want to behave like publishers, then they can be subject to the same laws that publishers face. For instance, you can't go around labeling people as "haters, dangerous individual and white supremacists" without facing legal consequences.

Laura Loomer Files $3 BILLION Lawsuit Against Facebook for Defamation - Laura Loomer Official

On Tuesday, Larry Klayman, the founder of Freedom Watch and a former federal prosecutor announced the filing of a defamation lawsuit by conservative investigative journalist Laura Loomer against Facebook. The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida (Case No. 9:19-cv-80893), alleges that Facebook and its wholly owned sister company Instagram, in banning Ms. Loomer from the social media sites, maliciously defamed her by publishing that she is a “dangerous individual” and a domestic Jewish terrorist.​

Oh? What are they gonna get? She has to first prevail before she can have a hope of collecting a dime.

Will a jury find that she is a "dangerous individual" or not?

My guess is NOT, which is defamation.

Facebook tried to get cute by banning opposing views. Now they are gonna pay.

.

LOLOL

My favorite part was this...

As of date, Loomer has been been banned on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Periscope, PayPal, Venmo, GoFundMe, Uber, Uber Eats, Lyft, Medium, and TeeSpring.​

... at some point, even you loonies have to start to consider -- maybe she's the problem.

All that is irrelevant. None of that proves ahe is a dangerous individual.

In Court, Facebook is going to be required to prove she is a dangerous individual. They will have nothing but her content as proof.

Read the complaint for yourself.

http://www.larryklayman.com/pdf/190708-Filed Complaint Loomer.pdf

They basically called her a ******* terrorist.

They are so fucked.

Wrong on all scores. Facebook doesn't have to prove a thing.

Loomer has to prove that Facebook's ban has harmed her financially. That if not for their ban, she would have made $3 billion.

And while we're on the subject of frivolous lawsuits, I remember when all of you were all hopped up over Nick Sandmann and his defamation suits against the WAPO, and CNN. Motions to Dismss have been filed in both cases. Sandmann got NOTHING.

******* right wing snowflakes run around screaming hate and spewing bile and then whining like babies when people call them out on it and refuse to tolerate their lies, their hate, and their bullshit.

Motions to dismiss have been filed. They haven't been awarded. The cases are both proceeding.

You're full of shit, as usual.

 

[westwall]

Not at all, but I will always support private enterprise over the government.

So do I.

I also support civil actions when social media bans an account with thousands of followers and gives the reason that the person is dangerous, which is defamation.

I hope facebook gets an assload of semen on this. I hope the jury awards every penny of that $3 billion or facebooks agrees to a settlement and changes policy.

If she wins, then facebook will not be able to ban anyone simply because of their political opinions.

nothing you would like more than for a company to be forced to be nice to you statist snowflakes.

And yet over and over and over again it is facebook that is furthering the statist goals of the democrat party. Hmmm, looks like you are indeed the progressive you claim not to be.

As is their ******* right to do, but you statist want the damn government to stop them from helping the "other side" when there is not another side.

Nothing but big government statist standing across the playground form each other calling each other names.

Hmmm, Facebook and Google both refuse to help the US government fight terrorism, but is deeply involved with the Chinese military to turn China into a surveillance state.

You approve of that, knowing that the tech they develop with the Chinese will then be turned upon us...and you call me the statist.

You sir. Are a moron.

 

[Faun]

The tech giants are about to get what they deserve. If they want to behave like publishers, then they can be subject to the same laws that publishers face. For instance, you can't go around labeling people as "haters, dangerous individual and white supremacists" without facing legal consequences.

Laura Loomer Files $3 BILLION Lawsuit Against Facebook for Defamation - Laura Loomer Official

On Tuesday, Larry Klayman, the founder of Freedom Watch and a former federal prosecutor announced the filing of a defamation lawsuit by conservative investigative journalist Laura Loomer against Facebook. The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida (Case No. 9:19-cv-80893), alleges that Facebook and its wholly owned sister company Instagram, in banning Ms. Loomer from the social media sites, maliciously defamed her by publishing that she is a “dangerous individual” and a domestic Jewish terrorist.​

Oh? What are they gonna get? She has to first prevail before she can have a hope of collecting a dime.

Will a jury find that she is a "dangerous individual" or not?

My guess is NOT, which is defamation.

Facebook tried to get cute by banning opposing views. Now they are gonna pay.

.

LOLOL

My favorite part was this...

As of date, Loomer has been been banned on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Periscope, PayPal, Venmo, GoFundMe, Uber, Uber Eats, Lyft, Medium, and TeeSpring.​

... at some point, even you loonies have to start to consider -- maybe she's the problem.

All that is irrelevant. None of that proves ahe is a dangerous individual.

In Court, Facebook is going to be required to prove she is a dangerous individual. They will have nothing but her content as proof.

Read the complaint for yourself.

http://www.larryklayman.com/pdf/190708-Filed Complaint Loomer.pdf

They basically called her a ******* terrorist.

They are so fucked.

LOL

They're fucked because all you have to go by at this point is the complaint filed by the plaintiff??



Wait and see what happens before you count your chickens.

 

[TRFjr]

She can't be all that abused, I've never even heard of her.

That doesn't matter for a defamation case.

She had100,000 followers who Facebook informed that she was banned for being dangerous. It's pretty clear cut. Only question is how much Facebook will pay.

.

Nothing. It's a private platform. If she was preaching hate (what most of those idiots have been banned for) she doesn't have a case.

doesn't matter if its a private company a company isnt allowed to misrepresent its product or service if Face book says decision made are done with out bias that they are impartial all you have to do is prove that decisions made are done with bias that they are not impartial

these Tech giants like Facebook cant tell its consumers one thing and then act differently just like manufactories cant put a made in the US tag on products made in China

 

[Snouter]

Faun still has a Mueller avatar. That Mueller *** is actually trying to get out of testifying in a week because all he can do is plead the 5th.

 

[Faun]

The tech giants are about to get what they deserve. If they want to behave like publishers, then they can be subject to the same laws that publishers face. For instance, you can't go around labeling people as "haters, dangerous individual and white supremacists" without facing legal consequences.

Laura Loomer Files $3 BILLION Lawsuit Against Facebook for Defamation - Laura Loomer Official

On Tuesday, Larry Klayman, the founder of Freedom Watch and a former federal prosecutor announced the filing of a defamation lawsuit by conservative investigative journalist Laura Loomer against Facebook. The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida (Case No. 9:19-cv-80893), alleges that Facebook and its wholly owned sister company Instagram, in banning Ms. Loomer from the social media sites, maliciously defamed her by publishing that she is a “dangerous individual” and a domestic Jewish terrorist.​

Oh? What are they gonna get? She has to first prevail before she can have a hope of collecting a dime.

Thanks for stating the obvious, Sherlock.

******* moron, you already declared she's going to prevail when you don't even know what she posted that led to her banishment. You really have shit fer brains.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Good for her, Jeffy boy, needs a good spanking in the pocket book.

Look at the goose-stepping douchebag defending the largest corporations on planet Earth.

Facebook is not even in the top 50 largest corporations on planet earth.

...and you worship it. Lol

Not at all, but I will always support private enterprise over the government...another way you and I differ.

Normally I would agree. In this case these social media companies have become a full on subsidiary of one political wing of our government. Something has to change.

Seems the American way would be to start one that did not do that and give them some competition.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Trial will take...5 yrs min with all the appeals?

Maybe, but that was not the question.
mYou get one "conservative" person on that jury and they are never going home without every single penny of what the plaintiff asks.

People are pissed about this shit. They will want Facebook to suffer.

Facebook was being a dick. They were stupid about it and pissed off a lot of people.

But, it may take a long time before plaintiff gets paid. Or not, when Facebook wants to rid itself of bad publicity and wants to avoid as many duplicate suits as possible.

.

If they settle that will open the flood gates for all the other whiny bitches.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

She can't be all that abused, I've never even heard of her.

That doesn't matter for a defamation case.

She had100,000 followers who Facebook informed that she was banned for being dangerous. It's pretty clear cut. Only question is how much Facebook will pay.

.

Nothing. It's a private platform. If she was preaching hate (what most of those idiots have been banned for) she doesn't have a case.

Preaching "hate" (aka an opposing view) and being dangerous are completely different things. They told users she was dangerous, which implies that she is violent or has incited violence.

We all know good and Goddamn well that this person was not violent. Facebook commies just didn't like her message.

They were trying to be cute with their banning bullshit, but they fucked up.

But, I think Facebook should go with the "hate speech" defense. They will be required to prove it, and what they offer will be NOTHING but political speech.

Just one "conservative" on that jury will be enough.

People are fed up with this bullshit, and now they have a chance to do something about it.

.

One does not have to be violent or has incited violence to be dangerous. Ideas can be dangerous without being violent. I heard Obama called dangerous to our country a thousand times.

you are letting your hate cloud your reason.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

The tech giants are about to get what they deserve. If they want to behave like publishers, then they can be subject to the same laws that publishers face. For instance, you can't go around labeling people as "haters, dangerous individual and white supremacists" without facing legal consequences.

Laura Loomer Files $3 BILLION Lawsuit Against Facebook for Defamation - Laura Loomer Official

On Tuesday, Larry Klayman, the founder of Freedom Watch and a former federal prosecutor announced the filing of a defamation lawsuit by conservative investigative journalist Laura Loomer against Facebook. The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida (Case No. 9:19-cv-80893), alleges that Facebook and its wholly owned sister company Instagram, in banning Ms. Loomer from the social media sites, maliciously defamed her by publishing that she is a “dangerous individual” and a domestic Jewish terrorist.​

Oh? What are they gonna get? She has to first prevail before she can have a hope of collecting a dime.

Will a jury find that she is a "dangerous individual" or not?

My guess is NOT, which is defamation.

Facebook tried to get cute by banning opposing views. Now they are gonna pay.

.

Dangerous is a subjective thing, it does not matter if the jury finds her dangerous, only that FB can explain why they think she is.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

She can't be all that abused, I've never even heard of her.

That doesn't matter for a defamation case.

She had100,000 followers who Facebook informed that she was banned for being dangerous. It's pretty clear cut. Only question is how much Facebook will pay.

.

Nothing. It's a private platform. If she was preaching hate (what most of those idiots have been banned for) she doesn't have a case.

Preaching "hate" (aka an opposing view) and being dangerous are completely different things. They told users she was dangerous, which implies that she is violent or has incited violence.

We all know good and Goddamn well that this person was not violent. Facebook commies just didn't like her message.

They were trying to be cute with their banning bullshit, but they fucked up.

But, I think Facebook should go with the "hate speech" defense. They will be required to prove it, and what they offer will be NOTHING but political speech.

Just one "conservative" on that jury will be enough.

People are fed up with this bullshit, and now they have a chance to do something about it.

.

Opposing point of view does not equal preaching hate. She associates with know violent individuals and posts hate speech and racist videos on her page. She has no case.

Here's some of Facebook's reasons for banning her.

• Loomer appeared with McInnes in December, and more recently declared her support for far-right activist Faith Goldy, who was banned after posting racist videos to her account.

Facebook bans Alex Jones and Laura Loomer for violating its policies

Who, this guy?

Facebook Bans Faith Goldy After HuffPost Report On White Nationalism Content | HuffPost

Every reason they gave is a matter of opinion, but none of that matters

They called her "dangerous" which was not true.

I cannot WAIT for John Paul Watson's suit.

This will be GLORIOUS.

.

Dangerous is a matter of opinion, not something that is set in stone.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Nothing. It's a private platform. If she was preaching hate (what most of those idiots have been banned for) she doesn't have a case.

Preaching "hate" (aka an opposing view) and being dangerous are completely different things. They told users she was dangerous, which implies that she is violent or has incited violence.

We all know good and Goddamn well that this person was not violent. Facebook commies just didn't like her message.

They were trying to be cute with their banning bullshit, but they fucked up.

But, I think Facebook should go with the "hate speech" defense. They will be required to prove it, and what they offer will be NOTHING but political speech.

Just one "conservative" on that jury will be enough.

People are fed up with this bullshit, and now they have a chance to do something about it.

.

Opposing point of view does not equal preaching hate. She associates with know violent individuals and posts hate speech and racist videos on her page. She has no case.

Here's some of Facebook's reasons for banning her.

• Loomer appeared with McInnes in December, and more recently declared her support for far-right activist Faith Goldy, who was banned after posting racist videos to her account.

Facebook bans Alex Jones and Laura Loomer for violating its policies

Who, this guy?

Facebook Bans Faith Goldy After HuffPost Report On White Nationalism Content | HuffPost

Every reason they gave is a matter of opinion, but none of that matters

They called her "dangerous" which was not true.

I cannot WAIT for John Paul Watson's suit.

This will be GLORIOUS.

.

Don't hold your breath, none of them are going anywhere.

We'll see.

I will bet a Benjamin that Facebook settles quickly. They made a stupid blanket statement calling her a dangerous person, when the real reason is because she supported the Canadian dude who was banned for being a "white nationalist."

Iike I said.. We'll see.



.

I will take that bet.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

She can't be all that abused, I've never even heard of her.

That doesn't matter for a defamation case.

She had100,000 followers who Facebook informed that she was banned for being dangerous. It's pretty clear cut. Only question is how much Facebook will pay.

.

Actually, all of Facebook's 2 billion members were informed that she is dangerous.

How were all 2 billion informed of this? I never got the message. Never even heard of her before this thread.