Obama Resistance judges gonna rule for their team, regardless of the facts of the case.
A clear lie about OAN is clear defamation - but fanatical partisan Democrat Federal judges never let the facts get in the way of subverting the law in their courtrooms...
1 posted on
05/22/2020 6:08:43 PM PDT by
kiryandil
We’ll see how much Trump has reshaped the Ninth Circuit...
2 posted on
05/22/2020 6:10:48 PM PDT by
kiryandil
(Chris Wallace: Because someone has to drive the Clown Car)
To: kiryandil
3 posted on
05/22/2020 6:12:08 PM PDT by
Jeff Chandler
(BLACK LIVES MAGA)
To: kiryandil
Is that judge agreeing with Madcow?
4 posted on
05/22/2020 6:13:12 PM PDT by
arthurus
( covfefe glrn)
To: kiryandil
An Obama judge. I wonder whose side she is on?
5 posted on
05/22/2020 6:14:29 PM PDT by
yarddog
( For I am persuaded.)
>> MSNBC is Comcast
Malicious telecom is destroying the Country.
6 posted on
05/22/2020 6:14:33 PM PDT by
Gene Eric
( Don't be a statist!)
To: kiryandil
Just remember OAN is going to appeal.
10 posted on
05/22/2020 6:22:01 PM PDT by
Dacula
(Day 28 of Georgia opening up and I am still alive)
To: kiryandil
Current media are no longer subtle about their intent. I used to say the front page of any newspaper is actually the opinion page, never realizing it is now true. So it is with these clowns who call themselves "journalists," or "news reporters." What a joke! They are nothing more than disinformation propagandists, reporting an agenda to brainwash the useful idiots about their "soup de jour." Never let the truth get in the way of the agenda.
12 posted on
05/22/2020 6:29:20 PM PDT by
Fungi
To: kiryandil
These judges are way out of control. They answer to no one. It’s ridiculous.
14 posted on
05/22/2020 6:37:19 PM PDT by
Luke21
To: kiryandil
It is really hard to win a case against a media defendant; the law is so stacked in their favor.
That said, this case seems to me to have merit. It is a flat out statement of fact that is a lie. She can't claim ignorance or mistake. This can't be construed as hyperbole or opinion.
Hopefully the new 9th will reverse this.
To: kiryandil
So, it’ll play out something like this...
Prosecutor - “Your Honor, the plaintiff was stabbed, shot, ran over twice and then tazzed by the defendant, on video... recorded by 10 separate witnesses and captured by 4 police officer body cameras!”
Judge - “Unfortunately, there’s not enough evidence to substantiate a crime; case dismissed.”
To: kiryandil
One day, this judge will have to lay prostate before THE JUDGE, and give an account for her abuse of power God gave her, when people went before her seeking justice.
17 posted on
05/22/2020 6:56:51 PM PDT by
Dogbert41
(Jerusalem is the city of the Great King!!!)
To: kiryandil
U.S. District Judge Cynthia Bashant dismissed Herring Networks suit with prejudice, ruling there is no set of facts that could support a claim for defamation based on Maddows statement
Well, thats obviously not true
18 posted on
05/22/2020 6:59:12 PM PDT by
lepton
("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
To: kiryandil
I believe she ruled that the average person would not assume Madcow was telling the truth.
19 posted on
05/22/2020 7:10:14 PM PDT by
gogeo
(It isn't just time to open America up again: It's time to be America again.)
To: kiryandil
[Madcow], the liberal host told her viewers that the Trump-friendly conservative network really literally is paid Russian propaganda.
U.S. District Judge Cynthia Bashant dismissed Herring Networks suit with prejudice, ruling there is no set of facts that could support a claim for defamation based on Maddows statement, So, Madcow presented evidence that the network really is paid for by the Russians?
24 posted on
05/22/2020 9:13:17 PM PDT by
libertylover
(Socialism will always look good to those who think they can get something for nothing.)
To: kiryandil
So, according to her ruling, if I were to say that U.S. District Judge Cynthia Ann Bashant really literally is a whore for the DNC that’s cool because it’s just an opinion.
25 posted on
05/22/2020 9:14:50 PM PDT by
Do_Tar
(Do I really need a /sarc?)
To: kiryandil
there is no set of facts that could support a claim for defamation based on Maddows statement.This judge is either ruling that it's impossible for Maddow's statement to be false or that it's impossible for that Maddow was deliberately lying. Of course exploring those questions is the very purpose of going to trial. This loon is essentially claiming to be omniscient, if we take her statement literally.
26 posted on
05/22/2020 9:52:01 PM PDT by
lasereye
To: kiryandil
OAN should have done a much better job of judge shopping before filing this lawsuit.
29 posted on
05/23/2020 1:58:24 AM PDT by
KyCats
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson