Hillary Clinton refuses to be served Tulsi Gabbard’s defamation lawsuit
- Thread starter Banjo
- Start date
Apparently sitting almost presidents are above civil law.
Still a bullshit lawsuit claiming $50 million because HRC called her a russian asset....
In related news:
Warren releases plan to fight election disinformation
No doubt the fine print says it applies just to republicans.
Is attempting to smear a candidate by calling her a Russian asset a crime under her proposed legislation? Yes, if Trump did it. No, if Hillary did.
https://thehill.com/policy/technology/480505-warren-releases-plan-to-fight-election-disinformation
In your opinion what amount would be appropriate for a complaint and what amount would be just compensation?
Calling a politician who served in the military a Russian asset is pretty damn defamatory in my view.
Look what happened to Trump when the Clinton machine decided to call him a Russian collaborator?
Calling a politician who served in the military a Russian asset is pretty damn defamatory in my view.
Look what happened to Trump when the Clinton machine decided to call him a Russian collaborator?
Last edited:
There really isn't an amount due to the fact that public figures cannot really win damages in libel/slander suits. The real issue here is the arrogance of HRC in not accepting the service. She believes that she is untouchable. The ironic part of this is that she was the one that freaked out when Donald Trump said ---we'll see-- when asked if he would accept the election results---yet she has never accepted anything, including this service.
In that case the lawsuit is almost compulsory.
Retraction and cash or verdict may be the only endgame.
Retraction and cash or verdict may be the only endgame.
The burden is ungodly high but not impossible.
As the defendant found out when Jesse Ventura - former governor of Minn among other things- successfully sued someone who made false statements about his navy seal service.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actual_malice
In this case... proving actual malice should not be a challenge.
Hillary was obviously trying to damage Gabbard's campaign when she created that lie.
Hillary is probably going to need to have steele create a dossier.
In this case... proving actual malice should not be a challenge.
Hillary was obviously trying to damage Gabbard's campaign when she created that lie.
Hillary is probably going to need to have steele create a dossier.