Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Defamation is saying something damaging when you are uncertain or know what you said is wrong.What’s the difference between being wrong and defamation?
And that is supposed to mean what? Not a serious argument to the discussion.There’s a difference between justice and just getting what you want.
WRONG! She can defame a person using her platform. Doesn't matter if she knew it was a lie or not. That is why REAL journalists are schooled for so long on the use of the word ALLEGED.Third, he has to prove Maddow knew it was a lie.
That is a big IF. Nunes' team has challeges as well as the plaintiff. Because the it is a civil suit, the burden of proof is different than criminal in that they only have to show a "preponderance" of evidence. Also it only takes a 5/6ths majority for a plaintiff to win in a civil suitIf the defense is successful in sitting an anti-Trump jury, don't bet on a verdict going Nunes' way.
Frivolous lawsuits shouldn’t be one of them.
For starters, you do not know what Maddow has or doesn’t have.
Second, Nunes has to prove it’s a lie.
Third, he has to prove Maddow knew it was a lie.
You can’t be sued for being mistaken. If that were the case, everyone on national television would be sued.
The judge actually dismissed most of the lawsuit. This is the single scrap left over.The judges ruling means it isn't frivolous.
It’s simple. She just has to say that no one reasonably considers her show to be factual.WRONG! She can defame a person using her platform. Doesn't matter if she knew it was a lie or not. That is why REAL journalists are schooled for so long on the use of the word ALLEGED.
Yeah, she can say anything she wants--it is a losing strategy and she knows it, but she can say it.It’s simple. She just has to say that no one reasonably considers her show to be factual.
The judge actually dismissed most of the lawsuit. This is the single scrap left over.
It’s simple. She just has to say that no one reasonably considers her show to be factual.
You aren’t allowed slander and libel which is the accusation against Maddox, it isn’t suppressing free speech either. Do you believe Alex Jones had a right to be sued over what he said? I do and Maddox if found guilty then she needs to think before she speaks as well. You can’t smear people without evidence.You have a right to voice your opinion in public spaces and your own property. That’s it.
I cannot come and place a sign in you front lawn and whine when you take it down because you’re “not allowing me to voice my opinion”. It’s your right to manage your property as you see fit.
It’s a strategy that has worked for others in the media.Yeah, she can say anything she wants--it is a losing strategy and she knows it, but she can say it.
What? It’s a legal argument. That can’t be perjury.Which would be perjury.
Your legal opinions suck.
Lying under oath is perjury not a legal strategy.What? It’s a legal argument. That can’t be perjury.
It’s a legitimate strategy.
Not sure where the trial will be or what rules apply in whatever state that is. But I think at least in most places you're right. But I have been left angry and just shaking my head at too many of the more ridiculous court decisions over the last several years and honestly think much injustice has been done. I now hope but don't expect much justice from the system.That is a big IF. Nunes' team has challeges as well as the plaintiff. Because the it is a civil suit, the burden of proof is different than criminal in that they only have to show a "preponderance" of evidence. Also it only takes a 5/6ths majority for a plaintiff to win in a civil suit
What? It’s a legal argument. That can’t be perjury.
It’s a legitimate strategy.
Not sure where the trial will be or what rules apply in whatever state that is. But I think at least in most places you're right. But I have been left angry and just shaking my head at too many of the more ridiculous court decisions over the last several years and honestly think much injustice has been done. I now hope but don't expect much justice from the system.
Yes, the blatant injustice of the last six years especially, have been very sad. I hope things are getting better. Maybe unjustified optimism.Not sure where the trial will be or what rules apply in whatever state that is. But I think at least in most places you're right. But I have been left angry and just shaking my head at too many of the more ridiculous court decisions over the last several years and honestly think much injustice has been done. I now hope but don't expect much justice from the system.
