Doomsider

joined 2 years ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

He disappeared a long time ago when I blocked him for being an asshole.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

No and yes. The country should be ignoring the President and congress should be defunding him. Starve the beast amiriiight!?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It is very relevant, you can't even consider what he says without the context of who he is and his position.

He definitely accused them of aiding and abetting murderers and rapists.

The last bit was in reference to the fact that when you are a senior official you can't just say whatever the fuck you want without consequences.

I am going to go ahead and block you because I don't really care for the whole devil's advocate bullshit and you seem pretty unhinged to begin with.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago (3 children)

You ignore the fact that it is a senior adviser to the President. His words have a lot of weight to them and he is definitely setting himself up to be sued. Why these people are so stupid is beyond me

He also accused them of a crime. Hardly just a run of the mill insult. Accusing someone of a crime of moral turpitude when in a position of authority is a criminal act in some jurisdictions.

You really lose that it doesn't matter what the fuck I say when you are in a position like he is. But he don't care and so far not enough people do I guess. It is past time for the other two branches to check these clowns.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago (5 children)

I am not sure this is going to be looked at this way by a jury or judge in the case of a summary judgement. I think the operational word here is purporting.

""Purport" focuses on the substance or essence of a legal document, rather than its literal wording. "

Was he saying something meant to be considered factual in an attempt to defame. I think most reasonable people would agree with this statement.

Also, you must consider this will be a civil trial not a criminal one. The don't need to prove mens rea here so instead of beyond a shadow it is what side is more believable.

On a personal level, I find it disturbing that for one, an aid to the POTUS talks to the media to begin with. Two, that this aid likes to freak the fuck out and make an ass of himself on national broadcast media. Three, that he is clearly a Neo-Nazi.

Any one of these things would have prevented someone from being part of our government in the past...yet here we are discussing whether or not he is defaming. Just seems odd.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago (7 children)

Don't even play, your original statement was nonsensical to defining defamation.

While defamation is hard to prove in some circumstances, in this case it is pretty cut and dry.

"prove prima facie defamation, a plaintiff must show four things: 1) a false statement purporting to be fact; 2) publication or communication of that statement to a third person; 3) fault amounting to at least negligence ; and 4) damages , or some harm caused to the reputation of the person or entity who is the subject of the statement."

We have three of the conditions already. The plaintiff would need to prove harm for the last. With an actual tort I think this case could be successful, but there are a lot of variables.

What do you think?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago (9 children)

Thanks for your law degree!

I think you are getting confused as telling the truth is generally not considered defamation. Telling a lie that causes a tort (or an injury, now that you have lost your license) is the definition of defamation.

Please just stop with your opinion nonsense.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago (11 children)

"Defamation is a statement that injures a third party's reputation. The tort of defamation includes both libel (written statements) and slander (spoken statements). State common law and statutory law governs defamation actions, and each state varies in their standards for defamation and potential damages ."

I will also be waiting for you to turn in your law license.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

I am sorry, they stopped requiring civics in highschool a long time ago.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

->Musk's team launches the most expensive firework ever blowing up and disrupting air traffic and destroying the environment again for the eighth time

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 week ago

Starlink is everything to Felon now. This is the only way to break him now. Starlink has to be stomped out of existence or nationalized at this point. Anything less will allow Muskrat to continue playing dictator.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

We live in a literal death cult where we lose as many Americans as we would to a war every year. I think it is over a thousand children and approaching almost 50k Americans every year now.

This is totally bonkers and no one seems to give a fuck. We have lost close to a million Americans in the last twenty years to gun violence.

We can ban DEI, woke, transgender, USAID, abortions, Antifa, books, etc. but we can't ban guns!?

This is all counting deaths, we are not even talking about injuries, maiming, and the psychological effect of a war against our own people. Over a million women have been shot by their partner and almost five million have been threatened with a gun.

95% of Murder suicides are perpetrated by men. Tens of millions of Americans fear for their life on a daily basis. The problem we have is so bad and at the same time so completely ignored that it is already beyond any semblance of sanity.

We are truly fucked, and the only solution is to go buy a gun to protect yourself!?

view more: next ›