Whither the GOP? (post-Trump edition)

User avatar
D.A. Ridgely
Posts: 21195
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:09
Location: The Other Side

Re: Whither the GOP? (post-Trump edition)

Post by D.A. Ridgely »

Jadagul wrote: 23 Mar 2021, 22:52
Jennifer wrote: 23 Mar 2021, 21:24 Is there a chance in hell of that defense even working to dismiss a slander or libel suit? I thought the hyperbole defense only applied to things like, if I tell everybody you're a "stupid motherfucker" you can't sue me for alleging that you've literally had sexual relations with your mom.
The standard is exactly what she articulates there: would a reasonable person take it to be a provable statement of fact.
So far, so good. But context is important. The question isn't whether the jurors, all of whom consider themselves reasonable people, now hearing those claims in court would conclude they were assertions of provable fact. The question is whether the average reasonable Fox News viewer or Trump rally goer -- and no, the court will not take judicial notice that these are oxymorons -- would have taken them as provable facts when she uttered them in those contexts.

As for Jennifer's basic question, pleadings in the alternative are routine defenses. Plaintiff: You stole my teapot and broke it!. Defendant: I didn't steal it, I borrowed it. You gave me permission to break it. I didn't break it. It was broken when I received it. Etc. Who knows what, if anything, will stick but the defense is going to throw out any and every defense it can come up with and hope that at least one sticks.
User avatar
Jadagul
Posts: 7849
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 18:51

Re: Whither the GOP? (post-Trump edition)

Post by Jadagul »

D.A. Ridgely wrote: 24 Mar 2021, 01:09
Jadagul wrote: 23 Mar 2021, 22:52
Jennifer wrote: 23 Mar 2021, 21:24 Is there a chance in hell of that defense even working to dismiss a slander or libel suit? I thought the hyperbole defense only applied to things like, if I tell everybody you're a "stupid motherfucker" you can't sue me for alleging that you've literally had sexual relations with your mom.
The standard is exactly what she articulates there: would a reasonable person take it to be a provable statement of fact.
So far, so good. But context is important. The question isn't whether the jurors, all of whom consider themselves reasonable people, now hearing those claims in court would conclude they were assertions of provable fact. The question is whether the average reasonable Fox News viewer or Trump rally goer -- and no, the court will not take judicial notice that these are oxymorons -- would have taken them as provable facts when she uttered them in those contexts.

As for Jennifer's basic question, pleadings in the alternative are routine defenses. Plaintiff: You stole my teapot and broke it!. Defendant: I didn't steal it, I borrowed it. You gave me permission to break it. I didn't break it. It was broken when I received it. Etc. Who knows what, if anything, will stick but the defense is going to throw out any and every defense it can come up with and hope that at least one sticks.
Oh yeah, I'm not saying the defense will work. But the defense is a lot broader than I think Jennifer was thinking. (And in general that's a good thing.)
User avatar
Shem
Posts: 8944
Joined: 27 Apr 2010, 00:27

Re: Whither the GOP? (post-Trump edition)

Post by Shem »

D.A. Ridgely wrote: 24 Mar 2021, 01:01
Pham Nuwen wrote: 23 Mar 2021, 23:33 She brought these arguments and statements into a court of law. I can't see how she survives that.
Assertions made in judicial proceedings, even if knowingly false, usually fall under an absolute privilege rule protecting the defamer.
Does that apply if one just repeats the comments they made in court outside it?
"VOTE SHEMOCRACY! You will only have to do it once!" -Loyalty Officer Aresen
User avatar
D.A. Ridgely
Posts: 21195
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:09
Location: The Other Side

Re: Whither the GOP? (post-Trump edition)

Post by D.A. Ridgely »

Shem wrote: 24 Mar 2021, 02:52
D.A. Ridgely wrote: 24 Mar 2021, 01:01
Pham Nuwen wrote: 23 Mar 2021, 23:33 She brought these arguments and statements into a court of law. I can't see how she survives that.
Assertions made in judicial proceedings, even if knowingly false, usually fall under an absolute privilege rule protecting the defamer.
Does that apply if one just repeats the comments they made in court outside it?
No, it only applies to statements made in court.
User avatar
lunchstealer
Posts: 19576
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:25
Location: The Local Fluff in the Local Bubble

Re: Whither the GOP? (post-Trump edition)

Post by lunchstealer »

thoreau wrote: 23 Mar 2021, 23:43 So if I say that she is correct when I say that nobody should believe her, it seems like there's a paradox in play here.
It's not a question of whether every reasonable person would believer her, but whether a reasonable person would believe that she was trying to state a fact, not engage in hyperbole. There were a lot of people who believed that she was genuinely trying to convince people that what she was saying was true. Whether or not the people who actually believed she was not only trying to state truth but was factually correct were in fact reasonable people isn't mentioned in any of the primers I can find. I, of course, ANAL.

It's not as if Powell had, as of the time she brought her suits, a reputation as a performative provocateur. She's not Milo or Alex Jones or even John Oliver.

BTW, 'actual malice' in these legal proceedings seems to be (and Popehat explicitly says so) not evil intent but that the speaker knew or should have known that what they were saying wasn't true.

You also have to show damages, which comes closer to the 'reasonable person believed her' standard but even there it's not so much that the person believed it so much as acted on it in a way that was or will be damaging to the plaintiff. I think that's easy to prove. Reasonable or not, every time Dominion attempts to land a contract for its voting machine business, they'll be faced with a barrage of people showing up to protest and companies not targeted by Powell won't face the same problems. That's bound to cause at least some elections officials to favor making other companies the finalists just to avoid the stupid spectacle of kooks crawling out of the woodwork.
"Dude she's the Purdue Pharma of the black pill." - JasonL

"This thread is like a dog park where everyone lets their preconceptions and biases run around and sniff each others butts." - Hugh Akston

"That's just tokenism with extra steps." - Jake
User avatar
Aresen
Posts: 17882
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 20:18
Location: Great White Pacific Northwest

Re: Whither the GOP? (post-Trump edition)

Post by Aresen »

Legal standards aside, I would love to see Powell get her just desserts.
If Trump supporters wanted a tough guy, why did they elect such a whiny bitch? - Mo

Those who know history are doomed to deja vu. - the innominate one

Never bring a knife to a joke fight" - dhex
User avatar
Pham Nuwen
Posts: 9366
Joined: 27 Apr 2010, 02:17

Re: Whither the GOP? (post-Trump edition)

Post by Pham Nuwen »

Aresen wrote: 24 Mar 2021, 12:27 Legal standards aside, I would love to see Powell get her just desserts.
That's a lefty socialist talk point ... you commie.
Goddamn libertarian message board. Hugh Akston

leave me to my mescaline smoothie in peace, please. dhex
User avatar
Ellie
Posts: 13780
Joined: 21 Apr 2010, 18:34

Re: Whither the GOP? (post-Trump edition)

Post by Ellie »

Like baptists at the glory hole

"oh dear" they mutter, unzipping their pants

-dhex
User avatar
Eric the .5b
Posts: 15736
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:29

Re: Whither the GOP? (post-Trump edition)

Post by Eric the .5b »

I'm not sure which is worse, one of the major parties collapsing into frothing authoritarianism or it collapsing into shameless, feral grift.

It doesn't seem like Team Red can do both effectively, or else Jan 6 might have succeeded... So I guess griftopocalypse is a better way for Team Red to die, if it can't turn around?

(In which case, the Trumps might serve a public service out of office, relieving pro-fascist dipshits of money that might otherwise go to more competent people.)
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
Cet animal est très méchant / Quand on l'attaque il se défend.
User avatar
dhex
Posts: 16657
Joined: 05 May 2010, 16:05
Location: 'murica

Re: Whither the GOP? (post-Trump edition)

Post by dhex »

Grift over mania but neither tastes great.
"i ran over the cat and didnt stop just carried on with tears in my eyes joose driving my way to work." - God
User avatar
D.A. Ridgely
Posts: 21195
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:09
Location: The Other Side

Re: Whither the GOP? (post-Trump edition)

Post by D.A. Ridgely »

Grifting is an integral part of party politics; it's a jobs program. Ideology is just something you wave at the suckers to get them to contribute to the grift. But, yeah, when the grifters start buying their own lines, fascist or socialist authoritarianism becomes much more likely and thus much more dangerous.
User avatar
dead_elvis
Posts: 2000
Joined: 01 May 2010, 15:26

Re: Whither the GOP? (post-Trump edition)

Post by dead_elvis »

lol, what a pathetic creature.

"Never forget: a war on undocumented immigrants by necessity is a war on all of our freedoms of association and movement."
User avatar
Hugh Akston
Posts: 20320
Joined: 05 May 2010, 15:51
Location: Elev. 5280 ft

Re: Whither the GOP? (post-Trump edition)

Post by Hugh Akston »

Smuggler's Handbook wrote:Rule #3: Always stop to taunt law enforcement before delivering your contraband. Use a flashlight to let them know exactly where the taunts are coming from.
"Is a Lulztopia the best we can hope for?!?" ~Taktix®
"Well if they're blaming libertarians again then things must be going back to normal." ~dbcooper
User avatar
D.A. Ridgely
Posts: 21195
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:09
Location: The Other Side

Re: Whither the GOP? (post-Trump edition)

Post by D.A. Ridgely »

It's hard to come to grips with, but it's just possible that the post-Trump Republican Party will be even further removed from even a nodding acquaintance with reality.

User avatar
Aresen
Posts: 17882
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 20:18
Location: Great White Pacific Northwest

Re: Whither the GOP? (post-Trump edition)

Post by Aresen »

D.A. Ridgely wrote: 09 Apr 2021, 23:21 It's hard to come to grips with, but it's just possible that the post-Trump Republican Party will be even further removed from even a nodding acquaintance with reality.

I agree with her. Except I would not mean "respected like we were when Trump was in office" in the same way she would.
If Trump supporters wanted a tough guy, why did they elect such a whiny bitch? - Mo

Those who know history are doomed to deja vu. - the innominate one

Never bring a knife to a joke fight" - dhex
Post Reply