Posted on 08/10/2022 9:57:06 AM PDT by Subcutaneous Fishstick Blues
Lots of people say stupid, even very hurtful stuff, about other people.
I have been accused to being a “Putin Puffer”, “insane conspiracy theorist” etc.
Am I supposed to sue my accusers for defamation?
The whole thing is crazy and dangerous—blatant witch hunt.
Can you please provide us with a video of Jones saying it was a false flag? He never said it... not once. He had guests on who wanted to debate it. He explored a Daily Beast story that was discussing crisis actors, etc.
He never once said it was his opinion that it was fake.
That is why you cannot find a film clip of him saying that. Make sure you actually know what you -think- you know.
These libtard sociopaths are so devoid of intelligence or ability to recognize reality beyond their vile, evil, and perverted political worldview. None of these dumbasses seem to realize that they are guilty of the very same activity... pushing the Russian Dossier fraud for five years.
“It looks like that is what Jones did—he said all the parents were crisis actors, “
Yet, nobody, anywhere can provide the film clip from his broadcast show of him saying that.
I find that rather unusual since its the centerpiece of the “case”.
Right b/c MSNBC is the shinning light of truth.
How do we make it stop????
Sorry, defamation is very hard to prove in court. If Jones had fought this from the beginning, he would have probably won in court, if not then there’s a good chance he could have won on appeal.
Jones ignored subpoenaes, didn’t show up for depositions, didn’t hand over evidence. Finally default judgements were entered against him in both Texas and Connecticut. He got to the penalty phase and then tried to argue first amendment issues, but way too late for that.
In a final blow, last week he got caught on the witness stand bare faced lying about his phone texts and emails, which he said didn’t exist. The the plaintiffs’ attorney diplayed them on a video screen in front of the entire court and jury. One of the last things the jury saw of Jones was him sitting with his mouth hanging open staring at the ‘non-existant’ texts and emails.
Wow, finally someone who actually looked at both sides of the story! (As opposed to simply regurgitating the talking points of the MSM propagandists as if they were purveying “the facts”.)
see how easily they just move along to the next thing. No regret, no reflection, no apology. In their minds, the story telling they did for 3/4/5 years about Trump is all fine. This is why so many literally hate the MSM.
Speaking of said regurgitators, a near simul-post!
Russia Russia Russia
It’s still nonsense and absurd, like most everything leftists on MSNBC spout. They don’t suddenly start being truthful and making sense because their ranting happens to coincide with your persecution complex.
I think they also are angry at Alex, because remember he had that big show with Bill Clinton’s alleged illegitimate black son Danny? Drudge had that countdown for it.
I guess we could use it as a precedent to go after ABCNNBCCBS
Maybe in a world where there isn’t a one-sided system of “justice”.
“...this does set a new precedent. It means you can be sued when referring to an unincorporated group of people.”
Except it doesn’t set any new precedent. This is just one category of what is known as “defamation by implication”, and people have been getting sued over it for a long, long time. The courts have been given divided rulings on whether defamation by implication is actionable, with some saying yes, some saying no, and some saying “it depends”. As far as I know, the Supreme Court hasn’t issued a definitive answer yet, so whether you can sue for it depends on state law and the precedents that have been set by the district courts where you live.
The Jones case wasn’t a ruling on the merits of the case or this particular question, so it won’t even be added to the list of precedents that already exist on the question in that particular district.
Blah blah blah George Washington and most of the early Presidents were not born in the US...blah blah blah...say the critics. NO, but they were essential in the actual formation of the country. NOBODY could have been born of two American citizen parents and elected President until say 35 years after the Founding.
BTW I am supporting your opinion. There also should be NO government employees who are not citizens by that standard to serve in important positions. Only those who become citizens can work in lower positions, never to be in positions of power or importance. Only Citizens should be allowed to own land in this country. Let foreigners lease, but NEVER OWN.
“... other liars and conspiracy theorists in our society and our politics,” the MSNBC host said...” He should be a tad skerred.
The founders knew there could not be any natural born citizens for 35 years after the founding, that’s why they added the grandfather clause “or a citizen at the time of this Constitution”.
In Australia, where they still know what natural born citizen means, all members of Parliament are required to be natural born citizens.
They recently booted several of them when it was found they had other citizenships.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.