Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: mnehring

“If he can prove the drop was directly related to the libel from people like Sharpton, Matthews, etc, he now can show a direct monetary damage which could reinforce a nice, fat lawsuit.”
__________

The left would be drooling all over themselves to get Rush under oath in discovery. Rush does not want to go under oath to answer questions about Oxycontin, Viagra, marriages, divorces and draft deferment and anything else that they could use as a smear.


46 posted on 10/14/2009 1:20:41 PM PDT by awake-n-angry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: awake-n-angry

Discovery would only apply to evidence either side plans to bring. The defense can ask for information on those things, however, if Rush’s legal team have no reason to bring any of that into evidence, they don’t have to release it in discovery.

The same thing with questioning, if it isn’t germane to the case, it doesn’t have to be answered.

There is a lot of bad information going around lately regarding discovery. Discovery doesn’t give the opposing side of a lawsuit free reign to any and all information on the opposing side. It only applies to evidence the opposing side plans to use in the case.


57 posted on 10/14/2009 1:23:23 PM PDT by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies ]

To: awake-n-angry

You are slow if you think that is the route it would go.


106 posted on 10/14/2009 1:41:29 PM PDT by Shanty Shaker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies ]

To: awake-n-angry
“If he can prove the drop was directly related to the libel from people like Sharpton, Matthews, etc, he now can show a direct monetary damage which could reinforce a nice, fat lawsuit.”

__________

The left would be drooling all over themselves to get Rush under oath in discovery. Rush does not want to go under oath to answer questions about Oxycontin, Viagra, marriages, divorces and draft deferment and anything else that they could use as a smear.

And how are such questions germain and relevant discovery? The slander and libel are about racism.

115 posted on 10/14/2009 1:44:59 PM PDT by jimfree (Freep and ye shall find! - I am Joe Wilson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies ]

To: awake-n-angry

And why would he have to answer any questions regarding any of those things? They have nothing to do with the case. You can’t just ask any questions you want during trial.


126 posted on 10/14/2009 1:52:58 PM PDT by beandog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies ]

To: awake-n-angry
The left would be drooling all over themselves to get Rush under oath in discovery. Rush does not want to go under oath to answer questions about Oxycontin, Viagra, marriages, divorces and draft deferment and anything else that they could use as a smear.

None of which would have much relevance to a suit as near as I can determine. Discovery of those items would seem to be quite a task.

171 posted on 10/14/2009 2:14:40 PM PDT by Colonel_Flagg (No apologies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies ]

To: awake-n-angry

>The left would be drooling all over themselves to get Rush under oath in discovery. Rush does not want to go under oath to answer questions about Oxycontin, Viagra, marriages, divorces and draft deferment and anything else that they could use as a smear.

Makes no matter. Since those are all lies and smears, the truth under oath would not hurt anyone but the scumbags on the left.

Been reading the DUmmy website eh?


409 posted on 10/14/2009 6:57:50 PM PDT by soycd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson