Election workers sue gateway pundit

[Into the Night]

Ignorance is Strength, etc.

The GOP has been captured by a pathologically lying ignoramus and his dumb-as-dirt cultists.

This can only end badly. The question is, how much damage can they do to the country before they go down the tubes.

It is the Democrats that destroyed the United States.

 

[Nomad]

It is the Democrats that destroyed the United States.

Why don't you go destroy what little is left of your brain that probably wasn't much to begin with anyway.

 

[Nordberg]

Isn't Gateway being sued by the Sandy Hook parents for relating lies about that case?

 

[jessica3421]

Excellent. As the National Enquirer learned, more than once, telling lies and defaming people -- "free speech" -- comes with consequences.

From your link:

"Two Georgia election workers targeted by former U.S. President Donald Trump in a vote-rigging conspiracy theory have sued a far-right website that trumpeted the false story, alleging it incited months of death threats and harassment against them.

"The defamation suit against The Gateway Pundit was filed Thursday by Wandrea “Shaye” Moss, a voter registration officer in the Fulton County elections office, and her mother, Ruby Freeman, who was a temp worker for the 2020 election. The women were featured in a Reuters report published Wednesday on their ordeal.

"The lawsuit names the Pundit, its founder and editor Jim Hoft, and his brother, writer Joe Hoft. It alleges they repeatedly published demonstrably false claims that portrayed the women as “traitors” who conspired to “steal the presidential election in Georgia.”"

I hope they own the place when all is said and done.

Thank you for sharing this information

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Already did. RQAA.

You can't make the evidence go away by saying anyone is making up crap.

You can't make the evidence appear by simply saying "already did" when someone asks you to show them the evidence. It certainly won't work in any court to do that and it shows reasonable people that your evidence doesn't exist. The problem you have is all the "evidence" has already been presented to more than one court. The courts looked at the "evidence" and found it lacking in credibility. In fact they found it so lacking that they questioned the lawyers about the "evidence" and the lawyers admitted they hadn't verified any of it. The court then sanctioned those lawyers for presenting the court "evidence" that was not factual.

 

[Stringfellow Hawk]

Excellent. As the National Enquirer learned, more than once, telling lies and defaming people -- "free speech" -- comes with consequences.

From your link:

"Two Georgia election workers targeted by former U.S. President Donald Trump in a vote-rigging conspiracy theory have sued a far-right website that trumpeted the false story, alleging it incited months of death threats and harassment against them.

"The defamation suit against The Gateway Pundit was filed Thursday by Wandrea “Shaye” Moss, a voter registration officer in the Fulton County elections office, and her mother, Ruby Freeman, who was a temp worker for the 2020 election. The women were featured in a Reuters report published Wednesday on their ordeal.

"The lawsuit names the Pundit, its founder and editor Jim Hoft, and his brother, writer Joe Hoft. It alleges they repeatedly published demonstrably false claims that portrayed the women as “traitors” who conspired to “steal the presidential election in Georgia.”"

I hope they own the place when all is said and done.

they will lose badly and be out lots of money

 

[AProudLefty]

It is the Democrats that destroyed the United States.

SHUT THE FUCK UP, DONNY!

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

they will lose badly and be out lots of money

I don't think so. If they can show harm, which they evidently can, they have an actionable tort. Looks like that scurrilous site is facing a number of other legal actions, as well.

https://money.cnn.com/2018/03/30/me...s-lawsuits-infowars-gateway-pundit/index.html

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Evidence does not require a court.

Courts do require evidence.

And the courts have said that the crap given to the courts by the Trump lawyers is not factual evidence of any voter fraud or other election malfeasance. It is a bunch of speculative affidavits by people that are unfamiliar with the process. Unless you can present us with evidence that wasn't already given to the courts and dismissed as being not factual evidence you have nothing but your ipse dixit bullshit.

 

[Stringfellow Hawk]

I don't think so. If they can show harm, which they evidently can, they have an actionable tort. Looks like that scurrilous site is facing a number of other legal actions, as well.

https://money.cnn.com/2018/03/30/me...s-lawsuits-infowars-gateway-pundit/index.html

Wait till GP attorneys show irregularities in the way the voting process was handled there, a false water break that flooded the room, didn't happen, the kept poll observers out. They stopped the count to see how many votes needed to be found. It was a sad day in our fair election process.

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

Wait till GP attorneys show irregularities in the way the voting process was handled there, a false water break that flooded the room, didn't happen, the kept poll observers out. They stopped the count to see how many votes needed to be found. It was a sad day in our fair election process.

They can show all the pretend "evidence" they like. It has to be proven that these election workers engaged in fraud. It cannot be proven because it did not happen. For their part, it is easy for the election workers to prove that they suffered harm and monetary loss (having to pay for security, among others) due to the defamatory and false allegations published by Holt.

 

[Stringfellow Hawk]

They can show all the pretend "evidence" they like. It has to be proven that these election workers engaged in fraud. It cannot be proven because it did not happen. For their part, it is easy for the election workers to prove that they suffered harm and monetary loss (having to pay for security, among others) due to the defamatory and false allegations published by Holt.

The minute they lied about the water break fraud was committed

 

[Into the Night]

Why don't you go destroy what little is left of your brain that probably wasn't much to begin with anyway.

Ah. The usual response for someone that has no counter-argument. Just insults. How lame.

 

[Into the Night]

You can't make the evidence appear by simply saying "already did" when someone asks you to show them the evidence.

RQAA. I have already shown you evidence. You simply choose to ignore it. Argument of the Stone fallacy. You cannot make the evidence disappear by using an argument of the Stone.

It certainly won't work in any court to do that

Evidence does not require a court.

and it shows reasonable people that your evidence doesn't exist.

It does. I've already shown some of it to you. You can't just make it disappear by wishing, dude.

The problem you have is all the "evidence" has already been presented to more than one court.

No court has looked at any evidence.

The courts looked at the "evidence" and found it lacking in credibility.

No court has looked at any evidence.

In fact they found it so lacking that they questioned the lawyers about the "evidence" and the lawyers admitted they hadn't verified any of it.

No court has looked at any evidence. Evidence does not require 'verification' by lawyers.

The court then sanctioned those lawyers for presenting the court "evidence" that was not factual.

Fiction. No court has sanctioned any lawyers since no court has ever looked at the evidence.

You can't wish the evidence away, dude.

 

[Into the Night]

they will lose badly and be out lots of money

Quite probably.

 

[Into the Night]

SHUT THE FUCK UP, DONNY!

Still talking to a movie I see.

 

[Into the Night]

I don't think so. If they can show harm, which they evidently can, they have an actionable tort. Looks like that scurrilous site is facing a number of other legal actions, as well.

https://money.cnn.com/2018/03/30/me...s-lawsuits-infowars-gateway-pundit/index.html

Takes more than that. They just also show the supposed slander is a lie.

You need to turn off CNN. It's fiction, not news.

 

[AProudLefty]

Still talking to a movie I see.

Donny, what did I say?

 

[Into the Night]

Courts do require evidence.

No, they don't. Evidence also does not require courts.

And the courts have said that the crap given to the courts by the Trump lawyers is not factual evidence of any voter fraud or other election malfeasance.

Evidence does not require courts.

It is a bunch of speculative affidavits

Affidavits are not speculations.

by people that are unfamiliar with the process.

Many affidavits are from election workers, both Republicans and Democrats.

Unless you can present us with evidence

I already did. RQAA.

that wasn't already given to the courts and dismissed as being not factual evidence

Courts not required. No court has looked at any evidence.

you have nothing but your ipse dixit bullshit.

Attempted proof by Stone.

 

[Into the Night]

They can show all the pretend "evidence" they like.

There is no such thing as 'pretend' evidence. There is evidence, or there is not. You cannot make evidence disappear by wishing.

It has to be proven that these election workers engaged in fraud.

That very well might happen.

It cannot be proven because it did not happen.

You cannot make the evidence disappear by wishing.

For their part, it is easy for the election workers to prove that they suffered harm and monetary loss (having to pay for security, among others) due to the defamatory and false allegations published by Holt.

Not good enough.