The Amateur Message Boards of the World Famous VoyeurWeb

Well it looks like Sidney Powell, Trump's attorney who went on a crusade by spreading debunked conspiracy theories about voting 'irregularities' and so on, has just gone to the court system to get the lawsuit against her dismissed.

Her lawyers stated.....

"Even [assuming] that each of the statements alleged in the Complaint could be proved true or false, no reasonable person would conclude that the statements were truly statements of fact"

Her attorneys are basically saying that her conspiracy theories are so nonsensical that nobody would ever take them seriously. And apparently all of you Trumpers who went around spreading this bullshit and storming Capitol Hill are a bunch of gullible tools.

I'm not going to argue about that!!!

LMFAO!!!!

Wait a minute.... isn't what she said about Dominion voting machines EXACTLY what johnforbes has been saying to us about the Dominion machines?

I think johnforbes has a credible slander and libel suit against Powell's lawyer. He makes johnny look pretty bad.

Thoughts, johnny....? Are you going to sit there and simply take it from some scumbag lawyer?

Oh, sorry, "scumbag lawyer" is redundant, isn't it.

What I would do is actually inform myself by reading the papers in that case.

Most media reports on lawsuits tend not to be fully accurate as to the actual issues.

You don't need to read the lawsuit itself, dummy.


"Her lawyers stated.....
"Even [assuming] that each of the statements alleged in the Complaint could be proved true or false, no reasonable person would conclude that the statements were truly statements of fact"

That statement was made outside of the lawsuit. Regardless of the lawsuit's content, she clearly slandered you publicly. She said in so many words that you are not a reasonable person.

Unless she's right....then it's not slander, is it.

Oh no, you ALWAYS have to.

That is one of the first things you learn.

I can't even tell you how many cases seemed impossible to sort out, but a half hour of reading the actual file made things simple.

ALWAYS go to the primarhy source -- not what some prejudiced person told you it says, or what some low IQ person thought it said.

Take notes to assemble citations to exhibits (and the pages within).

The source of what?

Sidney Powell pretty much claimed what she was said was bullshit that nobody would have believed anyway in court filings. She never presented any evidence for the courts. Attorneys are supposed to be the gatekeepers of the legal system. They are the ones who are supposed to be vetting the evidence that will be presented to the courts.

And now Powell wants to have the court dismiss the Dominion lawsuit against her for defamation because when she said that Dominion had participated in election fraud that nobody with any intelligence should've believed her?

Go figure........

No court has held an evidentiary hearing.

There is enormous evidence of voter fraud.

Just one example: Ballot rejection rates were THIRTY TIMES LESS THAN NORMAL.

Why?

Given millions more mail ballots, common sense would point to MORE ERRORS.

We know why.

Democrat volunteer vote-counters in key swing states "found" the needed votes for Biden at 3 am.

Just one example: Ballot rejection rates were THIRTY TIMES LESS THAN NORMAL.

Got a link for that?

Given millions more mail ballots, common sense would point to MORE ERRORS.


In absolute terms but not necessarily in relative terms.

Democrat volunteer vote-counters in key swing states "found" the needed votes for Biden at 3 am.

Got a link for that?