 
     |
| I agree 100% with her defense.. (Page 1/3) |
|
maryjane
|
MAR 23, 08:18 AM
|
|
'The Kraken's back trackin...'
|
|
|
2.5
|
MAR 23, 08:57 AM
|
|
Dominion sues Sidney Powell, seeks $1.3 billion
|
|
|
|
InTheLead
|
MAR 24, 12:51 AM
|
|
That isn't what she said, it's more edited propaganda as always.
The full quote:
"Reasonable people would not accept such statements as fact but view them only as claims that await testing by the courts through the adversary process,” her lawyers said in a motion (pdf) filed on March 22. “Sidney Powell disclosed the facts upon which her conclusions were based."
And a statement by her pertaining to the lies:
"The #FakeNews is lying to everyone about our filings in the Dominion case. My position has not changed. We will be taking them to the mat. Sidney"
https://t.me/SidneyPowell/452
|
|
|
maryjane
|
MAR 24, 03:59 AM
|
|
|
|
|
randye
|
MAR 24, 05:01 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by maryjane:
'The Kraken's back trackin...'
|
|
NOPE
No "Krakens". Just the crack head Leftist media lying again.
"As the actual filing in Powell’s defense stated, “Analyzed under these factors, and even assuming, arguendo, that each of the statements alleged in the Complaint could be proved true or false, no reasonable person would conclude that the statements were truly statements of fact.” In other words, Powell formed an opinion after reviewing the evidence, and then expressed that opinion. Whether another person would form the identical opinion after reviewing the same evidence is irrelevant, because Powell’s statements were her opinion, right or wrong.
“Reasonable people understand that the language of the political arena,” the defense filing asserts, “is often vituperative, abusive and inexact,” adding, “political statements are inherently prone to exaggeration and hyperbole.”
https://thenewamerican.com/...wells-libel-defense/
................................................
In addition to the Lying Lefties there remains the hugely problematic issue of Dominion's ability, or better yet, inability to prove their alleged >$1 Billion in claimed damages.
Anyone can claim whatever they wish within the 4 corners of a complaint but they then have to prove those claims.
Dominion's complaint for damages admits that they are speculative and projections of possible future sales.
NOTHING in their complaint specifies actual contemporary monetary damages.
NOTE: Both Dominion's original complaint and Ms. Powell's answer to that complaint and her motion to dismiss are easily available online where anyone can read what is actually said rather than the bullshit from CNN, Buzzfeed, and the other Leftist propagandists.[This message has been edited by randye (edited 03-24-2021).]
|
|
|
|
LitebulbwithaFiero
|
MAR 24, 07:46 AM
|
|
So they take high school/ mean nothing elections more serious then our presidential election...
|
|
|
|
Steel
|
MAR 24, 11:03 AM
|
|
|
and for his next trick, his teeth will fall out.
|
|
|
|
2.5
|
MAR 24, 11:25 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by InTheLead:
That isn't what she said, it's more edited propaganda as always.
The full quote:
"Reasonable people would not accept such statements as fact but view them only as claims that await testing by the courts through the adversary process,” her lawyers said in a motion (pdf) filed on March 22. “Sidney Powell disclosed the facts upon which her conclusions were based."
And a statement by her pertaining to the lies:
"The #FakeNews is lying to everyone about our filings in the Dominion case. My position has not changed. We will be taking them to the mat. Sidney"
https://t.me/SidneyPowell/452 |
|
Couple thoughts
Sadly, people will probably believe the headlines regardless.
Doesnt it seem like there should be a law against lying about what someone said in a news headline?
Wouldn't suing for 1.3 billion bring this whole thing to actual court?[This message has been edited by 2.5 (edited 03-24-2021).]
|
|
|
|
olejoedad
|
MAR 24, 12:46 PM
|
|
|
Nick Sandman agrees that headlines and reporting should be factual.
|
|
|
|
rinselberg
|
MAR 24, 01:26 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by 2.5:
Couple thoughts
Sadly, people will probably believe the headlines regardless.
Doesnt it seem like there should be a law against lying about what someone said in a news headline?
Wouldn't suing for 1.3 billion bring this whole thing to actual court? |
|
"A [new] law against lying about what someone said in a news headline?"
Libel is already a legal concept.
I added "new" to make it say "new law", because that is the implication.
I think I'll pass on that suggestion.
Caveat emptor. It's up to each and every consumer of news or news-style media to decide what to do with their time and money and which of the (many) media brands and venues to favor with their patronage.[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 03-24-2021).]
|
|
|
|