You guys...settle the hell down. Your interpretation is not reality here. First, I am in the case file right now and I don't even see that Powell has filed an answer. All I have is a motion to dismiss with supporting memo.
You can't take this so literally. The legal elements of defamation law are not quite like what we would presume those words mean. I will quote of her supporting memo:
Of particular importance in evaluating the actionability of a statement is whether the underlying facts on which it is based have been disclosed. In NBC Subsidiary, decided the same day as Keohane, the Colorado Supreme Court applied this test in determining that two broadcasts stating that the plaintiff’s living-will package was a “scam,” and that plaintiff’s customers had been “totally taken” were not actionable. 879 P.2d at 7-8. Discussing the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Milkovich, the Colorado Supreme Court noted that the statements were based on facts disclosed during the broadcasts. The Court thus concluded:
[Milkovich] unquestionably excludes from defamation liability not only statements of rhetorical hyperbole – the type of speech at issue in the Bressler-Letter Carriers-Falwell cases – but also statements clearly recognizable as pure opinion because their factual premises are revealed. Both type of assertions have an identical impact on readers – neither reasonably appearing factual – and hence are protected equally under the principles espoused in Milkovich.
Id. at 12 (brackets in original) (citing Phantom Touring, Inc. v. Affiliated Publications, 953 F.2d 724, 731 n.13 (1st Cir. 1992)).
She is not saying that she was just fucking around, full of shit etc. She is saying that under the law, what she said is protected speech. Jesus. The doom is strong in here today.
Plus, she is moving to dismiss because this case is in the DC Circuit. Do you think Powell will get a friendly jury in DC for this case? Hell fucking no. And there is hardly any connection for either party to the DC Circuit, so she has a good argument that if this court won't dismiss the case, it should be moved to Texas, where she is headquartered because the DC Circuit lacks jurisdiction over her. This is a necessary move, both for now and down the road. It is grounds to appeal an adverse decision later, and also grounds to not have a shit jury right now.
I get the national uniparty...but how about at the state legislature level? Shouldn't "We The People" have much more say at this level of government?
I think this is why they have made such a big deal about Jan 6 and the fence and going after people who were in DC. It is to make us afraid to go to our state capitols and protest our legislatures to change election laws. And it is working. There are no protests. We are standing by. I am hoping Trump will spring back into action and not accept this horse shit inaction by these states. But there I go depending on someone else to do this for me. Ugh...
hah! years ago I bought giant surplus crates of warsaw pact country surplus 7.62 ammo. It has steel cases and berdan primers...but it can stay submerged in 30 feet of water for 50 years and still fire! My wife cannot stand these stacks being in the closet. I asked where she would prefer they go...crickets...heh
Pretty sure they could simply repeal the laws that put this in place and revert back to the old system. And that would require a 1 page bill + a vote. Solved. But I also have the luxury of having witnessed a Trump presidency. So I know the method you describe is called stalling and fucking around, not actually doing something.
But that steel cased ammo is triggering me
Say...that's a nice bike
I said this earlier and my comment just doesn’t show up. But anyhow, the whole “no relief” has to do with enjoining the defendants. It does NOT have to do with the merits of the case. Of course an injunction would have been nice, but if scotus timely dealt with these rogue states, an injunction wouldn’t have been required. There are ZERO courts that say “I want to completely and totally hear your controversy, but I’m telling you in advance I won’t do shit about it.” You don’t have to be super knowledgeable about the legal system, but a little common sense goes a long way here.
We really don’t do ourselves any favors with fake news stories like this. This judge did NOT rule as such. This was a summary hearing on a motion to dismiss. They are routine in civil litigation. The judge was not tasked with assessing the credibility of the evidence, but whether, when viewed in a light most favorable to the plaintiff, the alleged facts could support the pleadings. The determination was yes. That is not to say the facts cannot be rebutted. This occurs at trial. There was zero holding by this court that NYT used actual malice, or any other such nonsense. I wish people wouldnt write sensational bullshit headlines like this.
There are zero courts that say "I want to fully and completely hear your controversy, but I'm telling you in advance I won't do shit about it." So please, even if you do not understand the legal system, some common sense goes a long way here.
That is not at all what they meant by not granting relief. By not granting the relief, they were talking about injunctions. That does not mean they would not have done something after hearing the merits. In the petition, there was a request to enjoin the certification. They would not have granted this request. It has no bearing on what they would have done after hearing the case. While an injunction would have been nice, it would not have been necessary should the court have timely dealt with this case and put these rogue states in check.
It is actually equally as difficult to charge a depraved heart murder here as is their gambit of getting a violent felony conviction to elevate the charge to second degree murder. Which, if you weren’t aware, is what the AG is attempting. Minnesota as a jurisdiction is fairly unique in that although second degree murder is very much like most jurisdictions, they have a subset of second degree murder that I’ve not seen elsewhere that elevates violent felonies resulting in death even without intent to become second degree murder. This gambit is a Hail Mary and one that they likely regret pursuing. This judge already previously rejected the reinstatement. Court of appeals said the judge had to consider the Noor case, which he considered bad law. That case may be overturned by the MN Supreme Court. And I agree that the Noor case is not depraved heart murder. We shall see what their supremes say. To convict on depraved heart murder, they must show that he (1) engaged in conduct that had a high risk of danger to others; (2) where the risk was obviously apparent; (3) and where the risk had little to no social value. This type of homicide arises out of the common law. Originally, all homicide was a capital offense. As it evolved, some homicides were deemed eligible for “benefit of clergy” where you could have an ecclesiastic jury and not necessarily receive a death sentence. This is where manslaughter developed. Murder, under the common law, had “malice aforethought” which mostly encompasses what it sounds like: some type of intent to kill. This malice aforethought was the dividing line between murder and manslaughter. As the common law evolved, malice was applied to other types of killings. Murder became divided into 2 categories: (1) express malice and (2) implied malice. Depraved heart murder is implied malice. In People v. Knoller, which wasn’t too long ago out of California, the court had this to say about the test to find implied malice, “Malice is implied when the killing is proximately caused by ‘ “an act, the natural consequences of which are dangerous to human life, which act was deliberately performed by a person who knows that his conduct endangers the life of another and who acts with disregard for life.’ “ In short, implied malice requires a defendant’s awareness of engaging in conduct that endangers the life of another....” The judge in the Floyd case did not view the facts as applicable to third degree murder under MN law. And he would be right. But for the Noor case, that door was shut tight. The type of conduct is reckless in general, and not aimed at an individual in particular. Playing Russian roulette with friends, shooting a firearm in the sky for New Years that ends up killing someone 3 blocks over, having known dangerous dogs that kill someone, and other such activities are what constitute depraved heart murder. It is an elevated reckless homicide. Only a rigged jury could return a guilty verdict on third degree murder with these facts. And if they rig it, why not rig second degree? This AG is likely to cause us all a bunch of problems with inevitable riots should the jury faithfully uphold the law in this case and find Chauvin not guilty of these ridiculous charges.
Eric Holder's DOJ was involved in Dominion purchasing a Nebraska electronic voting company in 2010ish I believe. Would not be surprised if that had something to do with district 2 going Biden. Sarpy County numbers are flagrantly horse shit. Biden did not win district 2. Might also explain the fraud denying Ben Ass and Don Bacon.
SCOTUS actually heard a case out of Louisiana a few months ago making similar arguments. It involved a police officer suing the organizer of a protest for negligence from the officer being hit and injured by a brick. The case was before SCOTUS on some questions of Louisiana law, so the outcome has not yet been determined that I have seen.
As a general rule, intentional criminal acts are not typically considered foreseeable. There are occasions where this is not so. But even if we give Farticus the benefit of the doubt, the security failure/willful allowance of entry will best case be an intervening superseding cause, and worst case be contributory negligence. Washington DC is a contributory negligence jurisdiction, which bars recovery if the Plaintiff is found to be even 1% negligent.
Whether or not Farticus is considered part of the apparatus that could have exercised some power over security measures, I do not know. But if I were defense counsel, the first thing I would do is add Pelosi, McConnell, Schumer, and Capitol Police as third party defendants. Then discovery would get real damn interesting fast.
And the students in Hibbing's class are forced to buy Hibbing's book as part of it. This is indoctrination at its finest.
And Iran has been fucking around with the supply of the 11th spice. WAR!
It was a fake news NYT classic "McConnell privately admitted supporting impeachment according to sources familiar with their thinking" or some other bogus bullshit they do. Any time there are not names and direct quotes, 100% chance fake news.
they have a tranny train stroking signal
they do. Nebraska district 2 went biden based on totally horse shit voting out of Sarpy county. Those numbers are obviously bogus.
The football program sure looks like democrats have been in charge of it for the last 20 years.
Another interesting tidbit: Democrats ate their own when it came to Sasse's opponent this November. They pretty much disavowed him for what is ordinarily a routine democrat resume enhancement - naughty texts with campaign staffers. They never could persuade him to step down in time to get someone else on the ballot. They just told everyone not to vote for him.
I always thought Nebraska Democrats were just morons and completely disorganized. But this looks more like organized make sure Sasse doesn't have an opponent to shoe him in type of move. Perhaps in exchange for district 2?
Maybe. But lets take what we can get. How about we get a dumbass like Cheney out of a position of leadership and install a non dumbass? That is better than a kick in the nuts. We have to stop this "everything we do is useless cuz muh rigged election" shit. One step at a time. To quote another dumbass, Don Rumsfeld said "You go to war with the army you got, not the army you wish you had."
I think they can keep it. AOC was keeping her cash away from DNC. Not sure how that works though.
That probably explains why they never allowed this to be presented publicly during the objections. This was dated Jan 5 and likely part of the show they were going to put on till the capitol was taken over.
Never get a defamation case without a specific claim made against a specific person. Might be able to get some kinda of oddball way tortious interference type of claim.
The best lawsuit will be the shareholders of big tech against management and the board for egregious mismanagement causing the tanking of shareholder value. I’ll really enjoy that one.
Well, I look at it like if you have built a house, and you find that a wall is twisted or crooked, do you tear the whole wall out and start again? Or do you do the easier thing and try your best to offset the issue in drywall?
For me, I'd rather do the easier thing. It is more cost effective and it solves the problem.