Not really a surprise. Whenever facts actually matter, right wingers go home devastated. Case in point: the 50+ election fraud lawsuits dismissed by state and federal judges.
Not really a surprise. Whenever facts actually matter, right wingers go home devastated. Case in point: the 50+ election fraud lawsuits dismissed by state and federal judges.
The facts were on her side here... the NYT lied. Only question was whether they could prove enough damage to warrant libel.
Not really a surprise. Whenever facts actually matter, right wingers go home devastated. Case in point: the 50+ election fraud lawsuits dismissed by state and federal judges.
The facts were on her side here... the NYT lied. Only question was whether they could prove enough damage to warrant libel.
I did not follow this very much but I have a hard time finding credibility in this ruling. The judge allows this to go trial, is going to allow a jury to give a verdict, but has already said publicly that he will throw out the case? Reeks of some level of BS. There definately seems to be a level of credibility to the claim Palin is making here. If this were 20 years ago this offense to journalistic standards by the Times would be seen as a major issue by a wide swath of Americans, but the fact that we see this as an ordinary occurrence by our media shows how little credibility they have.
Looking for a legal experts thoughts. But since the judge publicly stated he is throwing out the case doesn't this give Palin an even stronger case on appeal? This seems like a pretty obvious situation where the judge has prejudiced the jury even if the jury sides with the Times. It seems the judge should have told both the defendant and team Palin in private that this was his direction and not made it public.
Not really a surprise. Whenever facts actually matter, right wingers go home devastated. Case in point: the 50+ election fraud lawsuits dismissed by state and federal judges.
The facts were on her side here... the NYT lied. Only question was whether they could prove enough damage to warrant libel.
one of these years a case will make it's way to the supreme court where the libel law interpretation may be tightened
It used to be that a decent, J. Christ-fearing man could get a fair shake of the ball in America. Now, you are thwarted in the pursuit of happiness if you refuse to coddle the darkness of liberalism and its progeny.
The judge was a far left Bill Clinton appointee on SDNY. Those people always protect their own, no matter the law, precedent, reason, logic, facts, or evidence.
Whenever facts actually matter, LEFT wingers go home devastated and lie. Case in point: the 50+ election fraud lawsuits dismissed by state and federal judges were righteous but us on the LEFT knew the gig was up, we clearly cheated and stole 4 swing states in the middle of the night, 134,000+ votes in Michigan alone. We cry if we don't get our way and I suspect we won't be able to steal votes again in 2024, so this may be it for our sad party of liars.
Totally agree with the above statement by the sad vaxxer.
The verdict came a day after the judge said he planned to dismiss the case, ruling that Ms. Palin’s legal team had failed to prove that the newspaper defamed her.
Congrats for being one of the most clueless ones on this entire site. The NYT knew what they were doing and knew they'd get away with it. That's how the media works these days.
NEW YORK—Following a lengthy five-year legal battle, sources confirmed Tuesday that a federal judge had dismissed a libel suit brought against The New York Times by cannibal terrorist Sarah Palin. “The law sets a very high st...