Posted on 08/08/2016 2:38:09 PM PDT by RayofHope
Correct, but I don’t think her defaming the character of the families after she left office is protected conduct?
Correct, but I don’t think her defaming the character of the families after she left office is protected conduct?
Sorry, guys! I have no clue how multiples posted! Rats!
No, not protected by governmental immunity. The defamation claim will probably be bounced on other grounds, but Hillary or her campaign will have to come up with a private lawyer to make that motion.
But are they suing her for her acts as a government official or her comments about them during her campaign?
Both.
I’m sure there are many many others lining up right behind you....
Good!
Sue the lying bastards in civil courts!
Lighten up, Francis.
Hellry is NOT Satan.
Satan reports to Hellry...
God be with them :)
How can Assange assist?
I think public officials lose their immunity if they do something that falls outside of their sphere of responsibility.
Maybe wikileaks Julian will release the emails regarding the video that caused the Benghazi incident. Surely he must have the ones that will indicte Hilliary.
Who is Nakoula Basseley Nakoula?
Aljazeera ^ | 15 Sep 2012 22:37 | Ben Piven
Posted on May 20, 2013 at 12:40:06 AM CDT by Rabin
The Innocence of Muslims film, (Desert Warrior) describes it as a “historical Arabian Desert adventure film.” By, Sam Bassiel, Sam Bacile, Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, a filmmaker with ties to Coptic Christian groups; which cost $100,000 to produce, co-ordinated by Joseph Nasrallah Abdelmasih’s Media for Christ nonprofit. Directed by soft pornographer Alan Roberts, an industry veteran whose prior work was dominated by titles like “Happy Hooker Goes
Larry Klayman of Judicial Watch (who has led the way on most of the revelations about the Clintons both recently and back in the 90”s) is no fool but has been known to tilt at windmills on occasion. If he can prove that she unlawfully lied to or libeled the parents while acting in her official capacity as Secretary of State without a legitimate national security reason to do so then they may have a chance before a jury. She would have to answer before a judge why she had a presence in Benghazi and why they were not adequately protected as well as why she told the truth to her daunter but lies to the families and the American people. Worst case scenario is it keeps the issue alive through the election and forces her to defend giving the parents some measure of justice.
I can't wait for the depositions.
As stated in the article, "During her campaign for President, Defendant Clinton has negligently, recklessly, and/or maliciously defamed Plaintiffs by either directly calling them liars, or by strongly implying that they are liars, in order to protect and enhance her public image and intimidate and emotionally harm and silence them not to speak up about the Benghazi attack on at least four separate occasions."
Good. She was negligent in her duty as SOS. She sure as hell should not get a promotion!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.