Hopefully, Gabbard has a good security team around her.
You go girl. Sue the pantsuit off her.
Hope she sues her pant suits off.
I hope Gabbard wins big. It’s mind boggling how people on the left can just make stuff up, very damaging stuff, and not get challenged.
Look at me! Look at me! Nuisance lawsuit given that Rep. Gabbard is a public figure.
If smearing a public figure’s reputation is suit-worthy, the list of plaintiffs against Trump would be 30 blocks long.
Nothing! Its a publicity thing, it will be a quick out of court settlement. Hoping for Hillary’s 127M is fantasy. Hillary will apologize (sincerely of course) and the feud will end. That’s my take.
good.
This stunt goes nowhere.
Hillary will say she didn’t mean that Tulsi was a Russian asset in the sense of being a controlled operative; rather, she was an unwitting tool on the “plus” side of the Russian agitation ledger. If it gets that far, which it won’t.
Nothing Burger
Surfing the swamp, beachgirl?
Hillary! was saddened to hear of the untimely suicide of Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, next Thursday.
Going nowhere. The “public figure” nonsense factor will end this quickly.
In New York Times v. Sullivan, the Supreme Court recognized that the strict liability rules in defamation cases would lead to undesirable results when members of the press report on the activities of public officials. Under the strict liability rules of common law, a public official would not have to prove that a reporter was aware that a particular statement about the official was false in order to recover from the reporter. This could have the effect of deterring members of the press from commenting on the activities of a public official.
Under the rules set forth in Sullivan, a public official cannot recover from a person who publishes a communication about a public officials conduct or fitness unless the defendant knew that the statement was false or acted in reckless disregard of the statements truth or falsity. This standard is referred to as actual malice, although malice in this sense does not mean ill-will. Instead, the actual malice standard refers to the defendants knowledge of the truth or falsity of the statement. Public officials generally include employees of the government who have responsibility over affairs of the government. In order for the First Amendment rule to apply to the public official, the communication must concern a matter related directly to the office.
Later cases expanded the rule to apply to public figures. A public figure is someone who has gained a significant degree of fame or notoriety in general or in the context of a particular issue or controversy. Even though these figures have no official role in government affairs, they often hold considerable influence over decisions made by the government or by the public. Examples of public figures are numerous and could include, for instance, celebrities, prominent athletes, or advocates who involve themselves in a public debate.
Ha—because Gabbarb, like Mayor Pete, is obviously a CIA asset...
Tulsi is still hanging in while others have dropped out for lack of money. Filing a lawsuit, particularly one against Hillary Clinton, is an expensive proposition. Whose pocketbook is funding Tulsi Gabbard.
In today’s world, the key to understanding a politician is knowing who owns the politician.
You go girl!!! Oh wait, she’ll be found expired on a park bench!
Tulsi did not kill herself!
Just thought that needed to be put out there.