Nunes' lawsuit against Maddow and MSNBC moves forward

[White 6]

Free speech is intended to allow people liberty and protect them from government interference or retaliation for what they think, believe, verbally express via word or in writing to in artistic impression. It was never intended to protect them from consequences if they libel or slander others. It was never intended for the press to intentionally tell a lie that is damaging to a person's integrity, credentials, reputation, livelihood, relationships.

Maddow falsely said, without qualification or any evidence whatsoever, that Nunes kept important interference information from his colleagues on the U.S. House Intelligence Committee. Unless she can prove that he did that, to say that on national television is absolutely malicious slander.

Thanks. You're the first to say what this is about, other than paywalled articles. I appreciate you spitting it out for those of us in the cheap seats.

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

That’s a lie.

I hope you are sued for saying it.

I would win. Adams Apple is a leftist wacko.

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

She's too smart for you. Fact.

Dumbest opinion show on TV.

 

[White 6]

Free speech is intended to allow people liberty and protect them from government interference or retaliation for what they think, believe, verbally express via word or in writing to in artistic impression. It was never intended to protect them from consequences if they libel or slander others. It was never intended for the press to intentionally tell a lie that is damaging to a person's integrity, credentials, reputation, livelihood, relationships.

Maddow falsely said, without qualification or any evidence whatsoever, that Nunes kept important interference information from his colleagues on the U.S. House Intelligence Committee. Unless she can prove that he did that, to say that on national television is absolutely malicious slander.

After your post, I was able to find an article fleshing out your information, even further and it is not behind a paywall. Looks like the judge kicked completely out most of Nunes lawsuit legs and the other is in jeopardy. I doubt Nunes will see a dime or have his attorney bill paid by NBC or Maddow.

MSN

www.msn.com

 

[Foxfyre]

Thanks. You're the first to say what this is about, other than paywalled articles. I appreciate you spitting it out for those of us in the cheap seats.

It is sad though what ridiculously high standard the court uses in order to indict much more convict the media for libel or slander. We have tolerated malicious journalism for so long in this country that the lines between honorable journalism and libel/slander have become blurred to the point they are almost non existent.

So the judge has thrown out most of Nunes' suit but is allowing one complaint to go forward. Whether NBC/MSNBC/Maddow will be held accountable is still to be determined. In all honesty, I seriously doubt they will be. That one complaint is that Nunes refuses to say what was in a package--a package that was never opened by him or any of his staff.

MSN

www.msn.com

Edit: Note to White 6, I was typing this and posted it before I saw your post with the same information.

 

[Donald H]

This topic illustrative of Americans' support of free speech with some qualifications!

Foxfyre carelessly exposes the fact that the qualifications will be decided upon by political preferences.

It was never intended for the press to intentionally tell a lie that is damaging to a person's integrity, credentials, reputation, livelihood, relationships.

Fascism brings with it, many new qualifications that weren't relevant under a democratic system.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I got more by using the reader view on my browser, but still did not find what she is supposed to have said about him.

Moron it clearly states in the linked article she claimed he got a package and did not turn it over to the FBI. When in fact he did turn the package over to the FBI unopened the day he got it. Supposedly from the Russians. Learn to read or quit being a moderator who is supposed to be able to read and understand our posts obviously you can't.

 

[White 6]

It is sad though what ridiculously high standard the court uses in order to indict much more convict the media for libel or slander. We have tolerated malicious journalism for so long in this country that the lines between honorable journalism and libel/slander have become blurred to the point they are almost non existent.

So the judge has thrown out most of Nunes' suit but is allowing one complaint to go forward. Whether NBC/MSNBC/Maddow will be held accountable is still to be determined. In all honesty, I seriously doubt they will be. That one complaint is that Nunes refuses to say what was in a package--a package that was never opened by him or any of his staff.

MSN

www.msn.com

Edit: Note to White 6, I was typing this and posted it before I saw your post with the same information.

I thought the judge was just ruling on pretrial stuff as points of fact, to rule out frivolous. This will go to trial for what is left unproven in court filings by either side. I assume the outcome of trial is decided by a jury not a judge?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Thanks. You're the first to say what this is about, other than paywalled articles. I appreciate you spitting it out for those of us in the cheap seats.

Too provided a link in the post you responded to that was not a paywall link yert you did not see it. Some mod you are,

 

[White 6]

Moron it clearly states in the linked article she claimed he got a package and did not turn it over to the FBI. When in fact he did turn the package over to the FBI unopened the day he got it. Supposedly from the Russians. Learn to read or quit being a moderator who is supposed to be able to read and understand our posts obviously you can't.

I posted a link to what the judge ruled and why he ruled that way. I will let the article speak for me, as I did not even know what this was about until Foxfrye posted. See post Foxfrye post #85 or my post #84.

 

[Foxfyre]

I thought the judge was just ruling on pretrial stuff as points of fact, to rule out frivolous. This will go to trial for what is left unproven in court filings by either side. I assume the outcome of trial is decided by a jury not a judge?

You know, I haven't been able to determine for sure, if this continues, that it will be a jury trial. I do know that Nunes has asked for a jury trial.

 

[Donald H]

Too provided a link in the post you responded to that was not a paywall link yert you did not see it. Some mod you are,

White is doing a decent job of moderating. That is, as long as he's not using anonymity to rule certain views out of order.

You have created yourself a track record of nothing but spammiing and abuse of all those who are attempting to keep this boare somewhat reasonably on track.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I posted a link to what the judge ruled and why he ruled that way. I will let the article speak for me, as I did not even know what this was about until Foxfrye posted. See post Foxfrye post #85 or my post #84.

and yet you claimed that a post you responded to had no non paid link in it when it CLEARLY does and the article linked to clearly says why the suit was

 

[RetiredGySgt]

White is doing a decent job of moderating. That is, as long as he's not using anonymity to rule certain views out of order.

You have created yourself a track record of nothing but spammiing and abuse of all those who are attempting to keep this boare somewhat reasonably on track.

You Canadian **** and your opinion can take a hike.

 

[White 6]

You know, I haven't been able to determine for sure, if this continues, that it will be a jury trial. I do know that Nunes has asked for a jury trial.

I have only had 2 semesters business law, so this not covered. I just generally think of these thing as going to a jury in the end, whether that is generally true or not. Don't go by me. 2 Semesters doesn't get you much.

 

[Papageorgio]

People love to use the threat and nuisance of these lawsuits to prevent people from speaking freely about them.

It’s absolutely a disrespect of the freedom of speech.

Do you believe that it is not okay for Facebook, Twitter and YouTube to remove posts from their web sites because it is a disrespect for free speech?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Do you believe that it is not okay for Facebook, Twitter and YouTube to remove posts from their web sites because it is a disrespect for free speech?

No, he supports open censorship by the left.

 

[Foxfyre]

I have only had 2 semesters business law, so this not covered. I just generally think of these thing as going to a jury in the end, whether that is generally true or not. Don't go by me. 2 Semesters doesn't get you much.

I've had a few law courses and was a journalism major in college so I got a really in depth thorough training in libel, slander, ethics, legalities etc. But that was back then when the lines separating ethical reporting and libel, slander, yellow journalism were clearly defined and mostly enforced. We haven't had a lot of real journalism, let alone ethical/honorable journalism, in a huge majority of the MSM for a long time now.

 

[struth]

This topic illustrative of Americans' support of free speech with some qualifications!

Foxfyre carelessly exposes the fact that the qualifications will be decided upon by political preferences.



Fascism brings with it, many new qualifications that weren't relevant under a democratic system.

Slander and Libel were illegal for centuries well before the United States, it's Common Law we took from England.

The Free Speech clause of the First Amendment applies to Govt, not to individuals. Individuals do not have the right to slander someone's reputation. Now, they won't be put in jail, but certainly they should be able held responsibile for knowingly lying and pay for damages.

 

[struth]

Lawyers aren’t free, moron. There’s a cost to defending lawsuits like these. That’s the point.

If they win they can ask for attorney fees, like Trump did with Stormy Daniels, and was able to collect them