DNC Responds To Carter Page Lawsuit, Claiming Steele Dossier Is ‘Substantially True’

Daily Caller ^ | 03/21/20 | Chuck Ross

[Chewbarkah]

I haven’t read Page’s lawsuit, but from the reporting about it, it seems a complicated and expensive case to prove. AFAIK, under US law, claims of libel and slander require proof that the Defendant intended to cause the Plaintiff harm, and knew the allegations they were making or spreading to be false. Here we have a conspiracy where the DNC paid lawyers to pay Fusion GPS to pay Steele to at least pretend to have been told various injurious things, promulgate them in the media, and involve the FBI/DoJ so it could be reported that those agencies were looking into it.

The person they intended to harm was Donald Trump. Page was just an instrument. The only ways for Page to prove a case is for one or more of the conspirators to talk, or for documents to be discovered that show the malign intent. If the Judge allows discovery and depositions, there is a tiny chance of finding something interesting. But lawyers planned this operation with layers after layer of dodges to protect themselves, likely made few written memorials about any of it, and have destroyed anything incriminating already.

The most useful things would be finding out who actually wrote the Steele Dossier, and when; who the “sources” were; who else created “dossiers” (Blumenthal?), etc.

[Svartalfiar]

It depends upon what the meaning of the word ‘substantially’ is

I would say a supermajority is a substantial amount. So around 67%?

But that really doesn't matter - if they published ten facts and nine were true (90%), that last fact (10%) is still defamation, and it doesn't matter what the rest of them were. Defamation is still defamation. There is no partial about it. It's true or not true.