Trumpite Americans, when will you finally acknowledge that you’re traitorous assholes?

Taking things seriously for a second and with the obvious disclaimer that I don't do defamation law and that I just took a quick skim at what was up on Twitter, there is some logic to her defense. It doesn't seem winning logic, but there's some logic.

To be fair, she is not admitting that she lied, nor that her statements were actually wrong.

What she is saying in its fairest terms is the following:

1. Everything I said in my lawsuits and my press conferences was opinion rather than truly fact, and people would have understood it at such.

2. Under the 1st Amendment you can't sue someone for having an "incorrect" political opinion since the core of the 1st Amendment is to protect political opinion.

3. I put those claims out there not as an example of what was true or not, but as opinions, and thus let people make up their minds or await what would happen in the courts.

4. I actually believe the things that I said were true so it would be unfair to hold me accountable for the statements since I didn't know that they were false and I didn't act with reckless disregard for the truth.

The obvious problems with her assertions:

A. The difference between what is put out as opinion and what is put out as fact is (I presume) fairly clear. Saying "Donald Trump is the best president ever!" is a matter of opinion. Saying "Dominion rigged the election by doing X, Y, Z" is a matter of fact that can be proven or disproven.

B. Also, clearly people did not understand it as such, as there are people who still believe that the election was fixed and Dominion fixed it.

C. The 1st Amendment offers some protection against defamation suits, but certainly not absolute protection. And again, what you put forth were purportedly facts. She presumably even labeled these things as facts in her lawsuits.

D. Trying to portray her purported facts as mere opinions does not seem likely to save her because it would collapse defamation law in on itself. Any incorrect fact could be framed as an opinion for which someone had immunity.

E. She attempts to borrow from the level of protections journalists receive under the standard of absolute malice. She isn't entitled to that because she's not a journalist, and she's not talking about a public figure.

Peddling absolute bullshit with a straight face is an occupational hazard when a lawyer is representing a guilty client, but it's pretty amazing when you see a lawyer trying to defend her own actions that way.

Three lawyers signed their names to the motion to dismiss, which is 54 pages. At least in the federal court I'm familiar with, the default maximum length for a filing is 15 pages without asking (and getting) permission from the court to go over that limit. I cannot imagine that any court would look favorably on a motion that was that long and that full of BS.

She said she had evidence. Doesn't that destroy her "opinion" argument?

Yes, but we don't even have to go to that level of things.

She is playing games with what is meant by "fact" versus "opinion" in the first place. "I think Dominion is an anti-American company and should be shut down" is an opinion. Even if we werr4e to come to a consensus as to what metrics were to be used for being an "anti-American company" and to evaluate them the same way, there would probably be some room for argument as to whether it could be agreed on that it was objectively "anti-American."

"I think Dominion is an anti-American company because it rigged this election and should be shut down" is an opinion based on a purported fact -- that it rigged the election. Either Dominion rigged the election or it didn't. It is objectively provable or disprovable. The allegation of the fact at the heart of the opinion is still actionable.

Similarly, "I have proof that Dominion rigged the election" is something that is provable or disprovable. And it also undermines the position of "well, this was merely my opinion and reasonable people should have understood it as such." She clearly was holding out the information about Dominion as objectively true, and of course, it wasn't.

Fox News Is Learning That Going Fully Off the Cliff Into Paranoid Delusion Programming Has Its Drawbacks
Dominion Voting Systems has filed a $1.6 billion lawsuit against the network over its election-fraud claims.

How does Dominion Voting Systems not have Jeffrey Combs as a spokesperson??!

Quark would be perfect for Fox.

I am beginning to understand why D&D was bad. These people really believe in their role playing. I did not realize so many people would retreat into pure fantasy.

Maybe there is a way to put a surgeon general's warning on the screen?

It's a side effect of so many using INT and/or CHA as a dump stat.

This will turn out well, I'm sure.

I was wondering when the grifting would happen in earnest. Can't be THAT many potential pillow customers, he clearly needed another angle.

This is about as unsurprising as it gets.

Such a huge waste of money ...

bamboo fibers? That's some Columbo shit right there!

China is the top paper-producing country in the world and Japan is the third. I have no idea if they use bamboo fibers in it or not, but the odds are pretty good that some U.S. ballot printers get some of their supply from Asia. Basically, they're declaring that a completely meaningless thing, if found, will prove fraud, and they've chosen something that's fairly likely. It's a pretty stunning level of dishonesty. Not that that's any surprise from Trump loyalists.

Lin Wood says Trump is still President, military would call him if they needed to use nukes.

The idea that Trump can remember any passcode more complicated than maga2020 seems absurd.

Lin Wood is a unique individual to say the least. Entertaining in a train wreck way, but I wouldn't want him as my lawyer.

is maga uppercase or lower case? That can always be a curveball in a stressful situation.

Does he remind anyone else...a LOT...of Jim Jones?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/wanted-trump-win-husband-charged-154252003.html


‘I Wanted Trump to Win’: Husband Charged in Wife’s Murder Also Used Her Name to Vote

Bonus villainry - his wife was likely killed on Mother's Day.

I want to take this at face value (because it's interesting), but without an Economist subscription I can't tell what measures went into the "health metric" they used. It's always fishy when there is a combination of values to create a single metric that hasn't been vetted by other researchers. So for example, one could create a metric that weights different factors more or less in order to create this fit.

Can't edit my post, but the Economist works without JavaScript enabled. https://www.economist.com/united-states/2016/11/19/illness-as-indicator

Still would be interesting to understand their model better.

Interesting. Could it be that the more miserable you are, the more likely you are to be drawn to a demagogue who will tell you that everything is some hated Other's fault?

Yup. It's why I recommend folks read The True Believer by Eric Hoffer. He spelled it out more than 50 years ago. The US has been ripe for someone like Trump for quite some time.