Skip to comments.
Project Veritas loses jury verdict to Democratic consulting firm
Reuters ^
| 9/23/2022
| Jonathan Stempel
Posted on 09/23/2022 9:43:39 AM PDT by semimojo
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-51 next last
1
posted on
09/23/2022 9:43:39 AM PDT
by
semimojo
To: semimojo
Who’s representing PV, Lionel Hutz, the attorney from the Simpson’s?
2
posted on
09/23/2022 9:48:08 AM PDT
by
subterfuge
(I'm a pure-blood!)
To: semimojo
3
posted on
09/23/2022 9:48:09 AM PDT
by
Fai Mao
(Stop feeding the beast, and steal its food!)
To: semimojo
4
posted on
09/23/2022 9:49:12 AM PDT
by
Signalman
To: Fai Mao
$120k is low given the claim was at least $500k. This is a DC jury in a political case. Do those ever go against Democrats?
5
posted on
09/23/2022 9:50:54 AM PDT
by
newzjunkey
(Giant meteor 2022!!!)
To: semimojo
"...A federal jury has found Project Veritas, a conservative group often accused of using deceptive tactics..." Filthy Leftists, every single one of them. All of them. A monkeypox on every single one of them.
Lets not focus on the fact that they bragged about sending mentally ill people and union thugs to conservative events to stir up violence, which is (IIRC) what they found in THAT event. I despise these people that Veritas infiltrated.
6
posted on
09/23/2022 9:52:37 AM PDT
by
rlmorel
(Nolnah's Razor: Never attribute to incompetence that which is adequately explained by malice.)
To: semimojo
Americans can’t win in the courts in this country. It’s ignorant to even try.
7
posted on
09/23/2022 9:52:41 AM PDT
by
FlingWingFlyer
(Josef Bidenov is out to take out your children. Keep them protected from Bidenov goons.)
To: semimojo
Will be overturned, especially if they keep taking hot until the SC hears it. These judges on lower courts are allowing anything without holding back, but limiting the defendants like PV their right to a fair defense.
This will be appealed and eventually over turned.
Yet the left could care less if it is, it is the optics and the ability to uses the verdict to scare others from doing what PV does.
8
posted on
09/23/2022 9:53:45 AM PDT
by
OneVike
(Just another Christian waiting to go home)
To: semimojo
Gee, no mention of Hillary paying Robert Creamer to hire union thugs to beat up Trump supporters at his rallies.
9
posted on
09/23/2022 9:53:49 AM PDT
by
Jacquerie
(ArticleVBlog.com)
To: Jacquerie
Creamers was/is married to rat congresswoman Jan Shakowsky (sp?) of Chicago.
10
posted on
09/23/2022 9:54:53 AM PDT
by
Jacquerie
(ArticleVBlog.com)
To: semimojo
Jurors in Washington ..............................
11
posted on
09/23/2022 9:56:16 AM PDT
by
Red Badger
(Homeless veterans camp in the streets while illegal aliens are put up in hotels.....................)
To: semimojo
The only person they can find peers for in a DC jury is Stepin Fetchit.
12
posted on
09/23/2022 9:56:32 AM PDT
by
Sequoyah101
(Politicians are only marginally good at one thing, being politicians. Otherwise they are fools.)
To: semimojo
Dems and Deep State always win sadly..
13
posted on
09/23/2022 9:57:09 AM PDT
by
navysealdad
(http://drdavehouseoffun.com/)
To: Signalman
Jurors Democrats in Washington... fixed it...
14
posted on
09/23/2022 9:59:26 AM PDT
by
kiryandil
(China Joe and Paycheck Hunter - the Chink in America's defenses)
To: OneVike
To: semimojo
The firm and Creamer said Project Veritas used "heavily
edited" footage in videos that falsely suggested they
conspired to incite violence at then-Republican candidate
Donald Trump's rallies and schemed to promote voter fraud. The heavily edited video was sliced up as a clip and
delivered to the public, because it contained the
infraction.
Why should they show a half hour clip that didn't
exonerate the culprits.
D. C. Juries are a disaster waiting to happen.
They could charge Trump with anything they liked, and get
a conviction there.
16
posted on
09/23/2022 10:06:22 AM PDT
by
DoughtyOne
(I pledge allegiance the flag of the U S of A, and to the REPUBLIC for which stands.)
To: semimojo
James is already appealing. no worries. go Project Veritas!
17
posted on
09/23/2022 10:07:30 AM PDT
by
dadfly
To: semimojo
Hypothetical example only:
If a video was 15 minutes long, and only 30 seconds of it
showed a person shooting a business owner, his attorney
would say it was heavily edited to show a very biased
untruth.
A D.C. jury would vote not guilty.
18
posted on
09/23/2022 10:09:55 AM PDT
by
DoughtyOne
(I pledge allegiance the flag of the U S of A, and to the REPUBLIC for which stands.)
To: DoughtyOne
Can Trump’s team get the trial moved outside of DC?
I’m now assuming they’ll indict him, though don’t know what for.
19
posted on
09/23/2022 10:11:54 AM PDT
by
tsomer
To: dadfly
He’ll win. Undercover journalism is protected under the 1st Amendment.
The jury somehow found that journalist have a “fiduciary responsibility” to those they interview. It’ll get overturned, most likely with a directed verdict, in my opinion.
20
posted on
09/23/2022 10:11:57 AM PDT
by
Nathan _in_Arkansas
(Hoist the black flag and begin slitting throats. )
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-51 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson