Trump sues Des Moines Register and pollster J. Ann Selzer for ‘brazen election interference’ over poll showing Harris victory in Iowa

NY Post ^ | 12/17/2024 | Diana Glebova

[cgbg]

The discovery documents produced from this lawsuit should be stunning—that alone makes it worthwhile.

[bigbob]

I suspect it will be difficult to win this one but I’m tickled that he’s going hard after the Rag and this arrogant bish. Will cost them $ to fight it and maybe they will just write a check to avoid discovery.

[BenLurkin]

Media manipulation is a major reason the Democrat Party has a firm clench on power.

[lgjhn23]

JB Pritzker also needs to be sued for this and for also calling Trump a “rapist”.
Trump’s legal teams need to go after these communist demons with a vengence.....

[WeaslesRippedMyFlesh]

nice

[PeterPrinciple]

battles are won with lots of small skirmishes.

This is needed for accountability.

[Biblebelter]

Never pick a fight with a guy who loves to fight.

Even after WINNING, he keeps on fighting to settle unsettled scores.

[bert]

The article was a First Amendment cavalry attack on the Trump flank.

Can the first amendment be weaponized?

[ConservativeMind]

There are so many liberals and Deep Staters to target.

[Dilbert San Diego]

Yes discovery should be quite enlightening.

The lawsuit over a poll probably has little chance of success. The defendants would say ,,well , based on their polling methodology,these are the results they had.

But the discovery process, of how this poll was produced, and why it was produced at the time, could reveal some things they don’t want to reveal.

This could be whyABC and George S. Settled a case with Trump, rather than risk the discovery of how ABC conducts its operations.

[KarlInOhio]

There's a chance that this is a statistical anomaly, like "polling" your bag of M&Ms, pulling out 5 pieces and getting all blue ones. This one had that usual "95% likely to be within 3.4% based in 808 likely voters" disclaimer. Was this not merely part of the 5%, but at the 0.001% level? Or, more likely in my opinion because it was the very last poll before the election, was this tweaked to get a result in Iowa 16% (9.4 standard deviations) off from the actual vote to try to affect the election.

It is hard to create this big of error without leaving a bunch of fingerprints like editing call lists to eliminate Republicans or just outright ignoring call results and making soup numbers. Discovery should be interesting.

[MayflowerMadam]

“I suspect it will be difficult to win this one”

Discovery could have an enormous impact on that. Texts and emails could be devastating to her and her co-conspirators.

[KamperKen]

“Will cost them $ to fight it and maybe they will just write a check to avoid discovery.”

This is the key; make them have to bear the cost of defending themselves. In addition to cost they now have the risk that they’ll lose. This will set an example that will certainly deter others.

[KarlInOhio]

Especially with recent reports that (allegedly) the legal department told the producers and the producers told Stephanopoulos three times “ don’t say rape”.

[Liz]

........the flawed findings hours before the Iowa poll dropped — was done to do “as much harm to the electoral process as possible”...........

---

She falsified election data.

How much was she paid for this heinous act?

[libertylover]

“Selzer’s polling ‘miss’ was not an astonishing coincidence — it was intentional,” the suit states. “As President Trump observed: ‘She knew exactly what she was doing.'”

I believe this 100%, but I also believe it will be hard to prove unless there's possibly real polling data that no real poster would conclude that Trump would be trounced.

[KarlInOhio]

Making soup -> making up

No soup for me!

[bray]

The gloves are off.

[bray]

They will settle out of court since the manipulation had to be huge.