King of Bain

Winning our Future ^ | 11 January 2012

[John Valentine]

http://www.kingofbain.com/

[wtd]

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/10/picture-of-the-day-mitt-romneys-money-shot/246658/

[Clyde5445]

[DTxAg]

his was anyone else, accusations of criminal conduct would be defamation per se. EVEN if a public figure.

Well, as I understand it, defamation per se simply means that the defamed person doesn't have to prove actual damages. I believe that in a normal defamation case, you have to prove that a defamatory statement was made and that it harmed your reputation. If something is defamatory per se, you don't need to prove reputational harm. BUT, that doesn't change the "actual malice" standard for a public official, you'd still need to prove actual knowledge of untruthfulness or reckless disregard (whatever the standard is).

[Clyde5445]

Thanks.

[Clyde5445]

So do I.

[DJ MacWoW]

The Most Electable?!

Click The Pic To Donate

He Faced Voters 22 Times And Lost 17 Of Those Times

Support FR, The Truth Serum

[longtermmemmory]

This entire video is irrelevant to the debate on that issue.

It is a distraction that only helps Romney’s business “cred.”

The real debate should focus on the deficit, protecting marriage from sexual deviants, US power as first in global competition, and reducing taxes.

[DJ MacWoW]

The video pointed out Romneys ethical deficiencies and our focus should be getting rid of him. He is the GOP elites pick and the Dems like him too. They'll chew him up and spit him out.

Are you a Romney booster?

[longtermmemmory]

not when you make a specific accusation of a criminal act. An accusation of a criminal act without proof or conviction is summary jusdgment liability territory. This is why reporters do the “alleged” whatever or “accused” whatever.

Insider trading is a very specific criminal act. The video with some of the pump and dump accusations steps squarely on that legal criminal nuance.

It is just plain stupid on the part of these video makers.

With all the real video out there with romney statements, this propagandumentary elects to use cheep dramatic handshakes, sob story anectdotes, and ominous music with black and white pictures.

The liability is crystal clear.

Similar was when Trump made Odunuts back down and appologize when she said Trump filed bankruptcy. That was clearly false.

in this case showing an accusation of a criminal act, with no criminal investigation or even conviction, is a just add courtroom level of instant liability. (it does not matter if public or private figure)

[DTxAg]

not when you make a specific accusation of a criminal act.

Again, as I understand it (and I am no expert here), defamation per se just creates the presumption that your reputation has been harmed. It's not absolute proof, and the presumption can be rebutted. I don't believe this changes the actual malice standard for public figures. It'd been different if reporters were reporting on Joe Blow (a non-public figure) accused of a crime.

[longtermmemmory]

Did romney change his stand on marriage, second amendment, homosexuals infesting the military?

just checking...

[DJ MacWoW]

"In the work that I had, we started a number of businesses, invested in many others and that overall created tens of thousands of jobs. So, I'm pretty proud of that record. And, by the way, in the general election, I'll be pointing out that the president took the reins of General Motors and Chrysler, closed factories, closed dealerships, laid off thousands and thousands of workers. He did it to try to save the business. We also had, on occasion, to do things that are tough to try and save a business."

Click The Pic To Donate

Support FR, The Truth Serum

[longtermmemmory]

the criminal act accusation changes all that.

there is no public/private distinction when discussing that specific situation.

the fact we are discussion a public figure does not enter this equation.

[onyx]

B T T T ! ! ! ©

[moehoward]

"It is a distraction that only helps Romney’s business “cred.”

The real debate should focus on the deficit, protecting marriage from sexual deviants, US power as first in global competition, and reducing taxes."

Wait, you think this Bain discussion helps him? And I don't see jobs in your list of important focus issues. It leads most polls at like 90%. Perhaps "global competition" includes domestic jobs?

[org.whodat]

Good but the only bailout I know of was tarp, and newt supported that one, so what is your definition of bailout.

[org.whodat]

Good but the only bailout I know of was tarp, and newt supported that one, so what is your definition of bailout.

[McGavin999]

You’d better do some investigating then. Go look at the ads Kennedy was going to put out, they were very well substantiated these were bailout before they were called bailouts. Mitt and his minions stuffed their pockets, fired the workers, and stuck the taxpayers for $10 million dollars. I do believe 1994 was before the TARP, and as to Newt, I don’t really care what he supported.

[McGavin999]

what is your definition of bailout.

Taxpayers back a loan via federal government to save a company, slickster takes that money, strips the assets from a company, fires the workers, pays his investors $4 million and sticks the taxpayers with $10 million in debt he ran up. Is that good for you? Give you a little tingle right up your leg?

[moehoward]

"With all the real video out there with romney statements, this propagandumentary elects to use cheep dramatic handshakes, sob story anectdotes, and ominous music with black and white pictures."

I'll grant you there's a lot of polish on this footage. It rubs uncomfortably close to the same kind of class warfare verbiage we get from husseins administration. But this is targeted to all those out there that don't pay as close attention as we do, and it will hit the mark squarely.

"The liability is crystal clear."

Not if I'm on the jury.