This
This
24 comments
-
-
Only in USA you can be sued and lose for speaking thr truth. Freedom of speech my ass.
-
Truth is a complete defense to defamation in the US. The problem is SLAPP protections don't go far enough when there is a large disparity in resources.
It's especially problematic when the consequences to victims go beyond lawsuits (reputational, mental, and physical well-being are all potential threats.)
-
The problem isn't that they would lose, it's that it is expensive to litigate. Hiring a lawyer and fighting someone who will keep appealing no matter what gets very expensive very quickly. Not to mention, if it is someone with clout, they can drag your reputation through the mud while they're doing it.
-
You can't lose, really. But they can drown you in lawyer fees. Straight up, the letter of the law in usa we have some of the highest burdens of proof for showing defamation. You have to prove that not only the person knows they're lying about something, but also that significant damage was done. You'll find European countries have much lower bars.
-
Freedom of speech exist
But the problem is Freedom after speech. 👀
-
-
Did anyone else read the "survivors at our press conference" like it was saying people had died at the press conference?
-
the president did sortie air power.
the pilots should be ashamed of themselves.
-
Yeah I read it "survivors of our press conference" and remember the planes
-
I did
-
-
When republicans do a better job than democrats of pursuing the Epstein list...What even are most democrats other than seat fillers and creating an illusion of choice?
-
-
Massie who was the spearhead for that who is a republican so I don't see what is there to celebrate democrats about.
This is a topic where if republicans say no then the public repercussions for them will be low to none but if a democrat says no then that person will likely be publicly ostracized (unlike the Israel vote where opinion is more divided and more than %50 of democrats happily voted no) and many people would automatically assume that the person is in the list and hence that is why they have voted no. So it is not a big success imo to get democrats on board and not a big sacrifice for a democrat to vote yes for this.
On the other hand, there has been definitely more than 4 republicans who have voiced protests over Epstein files not being released since this ordeal has started. It is again a failure of democrats that they could not help muster two more republican votes for this, if they have even tried that is.
-
-
-
The Democrats should pull a Cato the Elder and bring up the Epstein list all the time, they aren't talking about it enough. Furthermore, the Epstein files must be released.
-
Is this 3D chess and he is making Republicans reevaluate their stance on homelessness?
24 comments
I can't believe one of the best hope to bring out the Epstein files and finally hit Trump where it hurts has to come from Marjorie Taylor fucking Greene. What a hopeless country...
If MTG and Massie are the only sources of that information, I would not count on it being reliable. I would not be surprised if their version of the Epstein files only included Democrats.
Yeah, this is the person who thought: fires out west, must be a space Lazer controlled by a Jewish weather cabal.
I don't even know that someone could guess what she may be on about. Democrats, cabals, the actual files. There's no telling what's going on in that noggin, but I sure wouldn't want to have to rely on it.
All the people named should be investigated and prosecuted. Especially the sitting president.
they won’t do it though. They’ll see the names and get a phone call from the oval office and suddenly the announcement in congress will be “the names are Obama, Biden, Clinton, etc etc.”