Rudy has something to do in retirement

[Jolly]

Anybody can file suit. Now, let's see where it goes.

[jon-nyc]

@jolly

Jolly you were very clearly a proponent of Nicolas Sandman's suits against networks and columnists.

Can we infer from that that you are rooting for Dominion to prevail in these suits?

[Doctor Phibes]

@jon-nyc said in Rudy has something to do in retirement:

Expensive cult indeed.

At $20,000 a day, you're very nearly right.

[Loki]

I guess this is likely the last we will hear of this until it goes to court or is settled.

[Renauda]

@doctor-phibes said in Rudy has something to do in retirement:

@jon-nyc said in Rudy has something to do in retirement:

Expensive cult indeed.

At $20,000 a day, you're very nearly right.

Just maybe that Rudy can get Trump to pay for it.

[Doctor Phibes]

@renauda said in Rudy has something to do in retirement:

@doctor-phibes said in Rudy has something to do in retirement:

@jon-nyc said in Rudy has something to do in retirement:

Expensive cult indeed.

At $20,000 a day, you're very nearly right.

Just maybe that Rudy can get Trump to pay for it.

Maybe he can use the wall money that Mexico owes him.

[Renauda]

@doctor-phibes

Now there's a thought!

[xenon]

Here's some lawyer on twitter discussing it in a thread.

The hard part here is proving malice.

[George K]

The process is the punishment.

[jon-nyc]

@george-k said in Rudy has something to do in retirement:

The process is the punishment.

I don’t think so. I think he’ll have to pay a lot of money.

[jon-nyc]

This is fun.

He knew it was doubtful enough that they didn't want to be pushing it in a federal court filing.

That's pretty much element for element the definition of actual malice by reckless disregard for the truth: Saying something you have real subjective doubt is true.

[jon-nyc]

And he grifted off of it. Selling cigars and home title insurance on his podcast dedicated to trashing Dominion.

[Aqua Letifer]

Question for the True Believers out there: why would you make claims on your own podcast that you felt you had to actively discredit during a court hearing? What's the reasonable answer, beside Dominion = The Barge?

[jon-nyc]

I think the more interesting question is why so many people who cheered on Nick Sandman in his lawsuits would be silent about or hostile to Dominion’s.

@George-K ?
@Mik ?
@Loki ?
@Jolly ?

[George K]

@jon-nyc

1. Because the defamation of Sandmann occurred in several news outlets, as opposed to one person making allegedly defamatory statements.

2. Because I really didn't follow Giuliani's statements about Dominion. Call me ignorant, if you wish, but I thought his comments, as little as I heard, were, well, unusual.

3. Because I'm not a defender of Giuliani.

4. You have yet to see me defend Giuliani's comments about Dominion.

5. Rudy's turned into a whacko (as I posted a few weeks ago. You'll not find me defending him.

6. Go to court. Prove the allegations. Sandmann won settlements from some large outfits. either because the litigation would be too expensive, or it's a tacit admission of guilt. It'll be interesting to see what discovery will show in this case.

7. I think Giuliani's defense is weak. He made lots of allegations with, apparently, no basis in fact. Sandmann's case was bolstered by video, print, etc. Totally different.

[George K]

And another thing. The fact that someone is silent on the issue doesn't necessarily mean they agree with the issue. That's presumptuous on your part. Silence is not assent, at least not on an internet forum.

Many people here don't comment on things, not because they agree/disagree, but because they just don't know. Or, perhaps they don't want to express an opinion.

[Loki]

I’m not sure I ever went on record supporting Giuliani. I think I said the opposite. If dominion has a case they should nail him to the wall for sure.

With CNN and others I could see for my very eyes exactly everything that happened. It was an open and shut case. Not so clear with Giuliani, yet.

[jon-nyc]

This isn’t just a Giuliani case. It’s several media outlets, Trump’s dream team Giuliani, Lin Wood, and Powell.

Six-two-and-even Trump will join them soon as a defendant.

Note that the Sandman case was also against media outlets and specific personalities. Though they were pundits, not lawyers.

More later on your specific comments.

[jon-nyc]

I wonder if Lou Dobbs will get to play.

[Horace]

It's not too surprising to me that lots of folk will be more motivated to speak out against the MSM and pop culture mob attempting to destroy an innocent young man's life in order to propagate their favorite narrative, than they would be to speak out against whatever it is that Giuliani said about this faceless corporation. But if the faceless corporation has a case, let them bring it. Maybe it will provide us more clarity about the foundations of whatever these claims of fraud were in the first place. Like the vast majority here, I didn't follow them closely and counted on the systems holding up.