Here We Go!! – Gabbard Lawyers DEMAND Retraction of Queen Hillary's "DEFAMATION"

Homepage | Forums | Main Forums | General Discussion | Here We Go!! – Gabbard Lawyers DEMAND Retraction of Queen Hillary's "DEFAMATION"

  • Author
    Posts
  • #219828

    Segami
    Member
    • Total Posts: 3,298
    @segami

     

     

     

    Here We Go!! – Gabbard Lawyers DEMAND Retraction of Queen Hillary’s “DEFAMATION”

     

    -snip-

     

    “…..Lawyers representing Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii) on Monday called on Hillary Clinton to retract her comments alleging that the 2020 hopeful was a favorite candidate of the Russians, accusing the 2016 Democratic nominee of defamation. “Your statement is defamatory, and we demand that you retract it immediately,” Gabbard’s lawyer wrote in a letter, demanding that Clinton “immediately” verbally retract the comments, in addition to posting the retraction on Twitter.

     

     

    The Hill has reached out to Clinton’s spokesman for comment. Clinton made the remarks last month on the Campaign HQ podcast. “She’s the favorite of the Russians. They have a bunch of sites and bots and other ways of supporting her, so far,” Clinton said, without referring to Gabbard by name.

    …………….

     

    “It appears you may now be claiming that this statement is about Republicans (not Russians) grooming Gabbard,” Gabbard’s lawyer wrote in the letter.”But this makes no sense in light of what you actually said. After you made the statement linking Congresswoman Gabbard to the Russians, you (through your spokesman) doubled down on it with the Russian nesting dolls remark.” Gabbard has consistently denied she is interested in a third party White House bid….”

     

     

    Medicare For All | The Gold Standard Health Care Plan

  • #219830

    xyzse
    Member
    • Total Posts: 925
    @xyzse

    Good.

    Doubt she’d win, cuz “Clinton”, but I find this as much needed.

  • #219834

    NV Wino
    Moderator
    • Total Posts: 3,149
    @nvwino

    Doesn’t stand a chance. Hillary didn’t actually name Tulsi.

    “As we act, let us not become the evil that we deplore.” Barbara Lee
    “Politicians and pro athletes: The only people who still get paid when they lose.” William Rivers Pitt

    • #219979

      JonLP
      Donor
      • Total Posts: 874
      @jonlp

      She made her comments after her ex-surrogates & media have been smearing her the same way so it is easy based on the process of elimination to figure out who she was talking about plus her spokesperson confirmed by saying “if the nesting doll fits”. I guess courts are much more technical which is why some criminals speak in codes.

      Tulsi Gabbard - "Not only are they saying that about me, they are basically sending this message out to every veteran in this country, every service member, every American, anyone watching at home fighting for peace and who was calling for an end to these regime change wars ... they are saying that you are also a Russian asset, that you are also a traitor to this country,"

      • #219990

        Cold Mountain Trail
        Member
        • Total Posts: 4,900
        @coldmountaintrail

        yep.  hill’s a lawyer; generally they know where the line is for ‘actionable’ v not.

  • #219837

    djean111
    Member
    • Total Posts: 2,430
    @djean111

    Hillary did not NAME Gabbard – but perhaps Hillary would like to share with us if she meant Klobuchar or Harris or Williamson, then….

    I will not vote for a Vichy Dem. Period. As always, I decide who is a Vichy Dem.

    Bernie's ISSUES or Bust!

    • #219841

      Segami
      Member
      • Total Posts: 3,298
      @segami

       

       

      @djean111

       

       

      I think at the very minimum, the Queen could be legally forced to explain & reveal exactly WHO (of the female candidates) was she referring to……..A republican judge could turn this case into a circus……

       

      Medicare For All | The Gold Standard Health Care Plan

  • #219838

    incognito
    Donor
    • Total Posts: 1,900
    @incognito

    THIS is exactly how you have to deal with these unconscionable, vile, incideous, corrupt assholes! Especially Hillary McCarthy the Warmongering Felon!

    Well done you, Tulsi!

  • #219842

    gordyfl
    Member
    • Total Posts: 536
    @jamesgordon

    Okay, Hillary, it’s your move.

  • #219843

    closeupready
    Member
    • Total Posts: 761
    @closeupready

    Excellent.  The point is not to ‘win’ a defamation lawsuit – the point is to get Her to demonstrate publicly and on-the-record how vile her rhetoric has become, how totally un-American and vicious she is, not by counter-slandering, but just by forcing Hillary to explain herself.

    Hillary (and the DNC, for that matter) has become the Boy Who Cried Wolf.

    The opinions and personal views expressed herein are solely those of the author, and should never be taken seriously.

  • #219908

    Ohio Barbarian
    Moderator
    • Total Posts: 7,686
    @ohiobarbarian

    Tulsi’s got a great defamation case. Might as well go for it. Your move, Hillary, Queen of the Warmongers. We await your royal decision with baited breath.

    We know now that Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob.--Franklin Delano Roosevelt

    With Bernie Sanders, we have the receipts. --Nina Turner

  • #219916

    salemcourt
    Member
    • Total Posts: 564
    @salemcourt

    I hope Jill Stein also joins the lawsuit.

    • #219982

      game meat
      Member
      • Total Posts: 821
      @gamemeat

      If anyone has a case of any kind, it would be Jill. Hillary called out Jill Stein by name, but didn’t with Tulsi. There’s no plausible deniability there.

      This is the sort of lawsuit that isn’t actually expected to go anywhere; it’s just meant to irritate. Vindictive spite, tbh, the litigious version of an extended middle finger.

      Usually I’d be against such a thing on general principle, but I make an exception in this case because no one has it coming like the queen of warmongers. Shillary has gone beyond the pale.

      • #219989

        JonLP
        Donor
        • Total Posts: 874
        @jonlp

        I think it is up to her lawyers if she has a case or not. I don’t think a cop out like that will work as well as it did on Hillary Clinton supporters as it would in court and I’m sure her lawyers can easily argue their way around it.

         

        The only thing that would make me say she doesn’t have a case is that Tulsi Gabbard is a public figure but as far defamation the damage is still the same. A whole bunch of people took Hillary’s smears and went half or full crazy with it.

        Tulsi Gabbard - "Not only are they saying that about me, they are basically sending this message out to every veteran in this country, every service member, every American, anyone watching at home fighting for peace and who was calling for an end to these regime change wars ... they are saying that you are also a Russian asset, that you are also a traitor to this country,"

        • #219998

          game meat
          Member
          • Total Posts: 821
          @gamemeat

          Lawsuits, or the threat of them, are frequently strategic where the goal is not to actually win, but to intimidate or make a statement. This stuff happens all the time. It’s obvious that’s what’s going on here. At best, the legal threat may intimidate Clinton into retracting her statement, but I think her ego is far too big to even consider it.

          But I’ll tell ya what: If at some point down the line Clinton is found guilty of anything related to this, I’ll be the first one to enthusiastically admit how wrong I was.

          • #220057

            JonLP
            Donor
            • Total Posts: 874
            @jonlp

            I wasn’t saying you were right or wrong just that her lawyers should have a good understanding (I was making the same argument when people were saying Kaepernick doesn’t have a case against the NFL) of what kind of a case she has and that they could easily argue around the plausible deniability because anyone with half a brain can make the connection between her statement and Tulsi. The only thing obvious to me is Hillary Clinton defamed Gabbard & Jill Stein.

            Tulsi Gabbard - "Not only are they saying that about me, they are basically sending this message out to every veteran in this country, every service member, every American, anyone watching at home fighting for peace and who was calling for an end to these regime change wars ... they are saying that you are also a Russian asset, that you are also a traitor to this country,"

  • #219980

    Segami
    Member
    • Total Posts: 3,298
    @segami

     

     

     

    Tulsi Gabbard’s campaign legal counsel released the following letter today concerning Queen Hillary’s defamation of Tulsi Gabbard

     

     

     

    Medicare For All | The Gold Standard Health Care Plan

    • #220055

      xyzse
      Member
      • Total Posts: 925
      @xyzse

      @segami Oh well, that’s great.

      Doubt anything will come out of it, but, I think this is necessary.

    • #220215

      incognito
      Donor
      • Total Posts: 1,900
      @incognito

      Not a chance in hell that arrogant Mccarthyite will call a press conference and read that statement.

      She will never admit she was wrong.

      I hope Tulsi’s ready to take this to court because I that’s where it’s headed.

      • #220778

        Voltairine
        Member
        • Total Posts: 1,163
        @voltairine

        The last paragraph of the statement demanded from HRC is pure gold trolling.

        Aloha!

  • #219996

    Voltairine
    Member
    • Total Posts: 1,163
    @voltairine

    SV heads explode?

    Aloha!

    • #220578

      Ohio Barbarian
      Moderator
      • Total Posts: 7,686
      @ohiobarbarian

      @voltairine No, they’re too busy exploding at Bernie because he criticized the military coup in Bolivia. “Socialist supports evil totalitarian dictator!!!” is what the worst of them are screaming.

      I wonder if it even occurs to them that they are supporting the Trump Administration by saying such things. Well, they are neoliberals, and neoliberals wallow in hypocrisy.

      We know now that Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob.--Franklin Delano Roosevelt

      With Bernie Sanders, we have the receipts. --Nina Turner

      • #220779

        Voltairine
        Member
        • Total Posts: 1,163
        @voltairine

        Good for Bernie. But I also agree that Morales stepping down was the right thing to do. Not me, us.

        Aloha!

  • #220052

    Babel 17
    Donor
    • Total Posts: 1,950
    @babel17

    I like it as it compels Clinton to own her words and deeds, and it might even compel her to stand by them in court, by way of her lawyers.

    And thus we get memorialized into history Congresswoman/Hawaii National Guard Major/combat veteran Tulsi Gabbard’s epic response to the Queen of Warmongers.

    And Gabbard might be compelling the moderators of the November debate, and thus everyone on stage, to deal with the reality that there has been an ongoing Forever War, and it’s been waged in part by a Democratic administration, and most notably a sociopathic former Secretary of State who also cheated her way into being the Democratic nominee for President 2016.

    And so now, maybe, we can finally get Senator Warren’s opinion on that ongoing war, and maybe Joe Biden can get called out on his lies about his having opposed the illegally instigated Iraq invasion once he learned the truth of it.

    And that would serve as an excellent time for Senator Sanders to remind the voters that he opposed that invasion, and that he notably questioned Secretary Clinton’s judgement regarding her propensity to wage more war, the last time around that he was up on a debate stage for the Democratic Presidential nomination.

    https://www.tulsi2020.com/

  • #220065

    Ransom Stoddard
    Member
    • Total Posts: 79
    @ransomstoddard

    There are two problems for Tulsi in litigation.  First, Tulsi is a “public figure” and thus she must prove “malice” in order to prevail.  Once upon a time I was the Plaintiff in my own defamation suit.  Most of the lawyers I spoke with at the time thought (or at least said they thought) that malice is just too high of a burden of persuasion.  I ignored them, and proceeded pro se, and eventually got a sizable settlement.  (I did go to law school and was licensed to practice at the time).  In Tulsi’s case, I would consider proving malice to be a tactical benefit, as it will be impossible to find jurors who don’t already have a strong opinion about Her — and the majority of those strong opinions will be extremely negative.

    The other problem is that Tulsi cannot prove any damage.  In fact, Hillary has helped her political prospects by deigning to mention a lowly Kids Table candidate at all.  That is was a vicious and idiotic smear helps Tulsi even more.  It got her on The View.  And there is no way that Gabbard can credibly argue that having Hillary insulting her costs her money — and money is the only thing a jury can award.

    If I were representing her, I would name the damages at One Dollar and frankly tell the world that this is About the Principle of Being Accused of Treason.

     

    This letter is a media event, probably successful, as it keeps the dispute with Hillary in the media.  It is not so cool for Bernie Sanders, but things are breaking pretty well from him.

    • #220066

      JonLP
      Donor
      • Total Posts: 874
      @jonlp

      I agree with your points. The “public figure” is why she has a difficult case.

      Tulsi Gabbard - "Not only are they saying that about me, they are basically sending this message out to every veteran in this country, every service member, every American, anyone watching at home fighting for peace and who was calling for an end to these regime change wars ... they are saying that you are also a Russian asset, that you are also a traitor to this country,"

    • #220077

      Babel 17
      Donor
      • Total Posts: 1,950
      @babel17

      The damage would be the time Tulsi spends on defending herself from Clinton’s smears.

      Gabbard’s rise in the polls is not proof of no harm; Gabbard can credibly claim that her message resonates irrespective of Clinton, her making the first two debates proving that, and that if she weren’t defending herself she could be promoting herself.

      “What didn’t kill her made her stronger” doesn’t strike me as excusing defamation.

      https://www.tulsi2020.com/

  • #220067

    MizzGrizz
    Member
    • Total Posts: 454
    @mizzgrizz

    Hurray for Tulsi.Somebody had to step up and call that Russiagate stuff to account.Glad it’s her.

    Hope Jill Stein joins the lawsuit also.Tulsi looks to be the John Henry Faulk of her generation.There could be no higher honor.

  • #220079

    Babel 17
    Donor
    • Total Posts: 1,950
    @babel17

    “What Clinton says doesn’t matter”

    I’m looking forward to that essentially being the crux of her lawyer’s argument. That, and also the argument that Clinton’s opinion was indecipherable.

     

    https://www.tulsi2020.com/

  • #220144

    Lord Thomas
    Donor
    • Total Posts: 868
    @lordthomas

    I think the lawsuit is not expected to go anywhere.

    Politicians think differently.

    I believe it’s about “Name Recognition” which Tulsi started without a lot in that area. Now goes on Fox, the View, calls out Clinton and has a running spat with her, now a possible law suit. To many things to list.

    Very smart Lady. Now lots of people who never knew her name, want to know what’s up with Tulsi. When they search for her they find a nice, well spoken young lady warrior. Who stands up to the powers that be.

    I love it well played. 

    • #220156

      MistaP
      Member
      • Total Posts: 1,872
      @mistap

      plus regardless of the outcome they can still push pretty deep into the Clinton woods on this: while the Brockshits are running around yelling “Clinton never said her name!” the suit can point out the total intertwining of the party and the media with this one asshole, and repeat how “Russia!” was cooked up by DWS and Mook while Mother was having another box-wine break–and again it’s not like the amount of publicly-availably info about Russiagate … gate is going to shrink; a lot can happen in 12 months (has it been that long already, FUCK)

    • #220161

      Ohio Barbarian
      Moderator
      • Total Posts: 7,686
      @ohiobarbarian

      Well-played indeed. I’m not sure what Tulsi Gabbard is really after; I’m not sure she’s sure of what she’s really after, but she sure is getting a lot more attention and she’s one smart, beautiful, poised, and tough lady. If she’s after a VP slot or a cabinet position she hasn’t hurt her cause at all by taking advantage of Hillary’s unforced error.

      Or was it unforced?

      I mean, one interpretation of something that Tulsi said at a debate was that she was baiting Hillary to say something stupid, which Hillary promptly did. Did Tulsi play Hillary? I don’t know, but if she did it’s brilliant. More power to her. @lordthomas

      We know now that Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob.--Franklin Delano Roosevelt

      With Bernie Sanders, we have the receipts. --Nina Turner

  • #220272

    Segami
    Member
    • Total Posts: 3,298
    @segami

     

     

     

    Are there any lawyers here who can walk us through this lawsuit’s early stage procedures before moving to a trial (if warranted)?

     

    I would imagine the Queen’s lawyers (first move) would be to file a motion to have this lawsuit quashed (for whatever legal grounds). If the judge is convinced that this lawsuit is frivolous (or whatever other legal precedent), then the sitting judge would throw this case out…..

     

    BUT……..if Tulsi’s lawyers present a strong legal argument (citing case precedent) that this case has merit and should advance to a trial, what is the next procedural phase we can expect?………Is there a ‘discoveries’ phase? Are sworn affidavit statements (under penalty of perjury) taken from both sides before advancing to a trial?………Any lawyers here that can help clarify what we could expect from this lawsuit?

     

    I know many here say that this lawsuit doesn’t have the legal legs to go far……….BUT a while back, with all the cards working against them, lawyers, Jared & Elizabeth Beck  forced DNC lawyers to admit into court that the DNC/Party was in a sense, a privately run association……..this is AFTER the DNC lawyers, filed every possible motion to have this lawsuit quashed.

     

     

     

    Medicare For All | The Gold Standard Health Care Plan

  • #220330

    Robot X
    Member
    • Total Posts: 263
    @robotx

    Damages will be awarded in the court of public opinion. The more Clinton or her reps comment on this issue (or any issue really) the more the public will be disgusted by her. Make the Queen of Warmongers double down and own it. The more this topic stays in the news the worse the Clintons look and that’s a good thing.

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.