Fox News/Giuliani/Powell Sued for $2.7 Billion!

#26
#26
Delmar said:
I’m afraid of aliens with space lasers. And Marjorie Taylor Greene. She’s batshite crazy. She’s like one of those dates you had that became a coyote date. You know when you chew your arm off so you don’t wake her up when you leave. That’s MTG.
Click to expand...
And just so I don’t appear “hypocritical”, I figure AOC would be a coyote date too. She’s just better looking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and Carl Pickens
#27
#27
Delmar said:
I’m afraid of aliens with space lasers. And Marjorie Taylor Greene. She’s batshite crazy. She’s like one of those dates you had that became a coyote date. You know when you chew your arm off so you don’t wake her up when you leave. That’s MTG.
Click to expand...

She is definitely a weird one no doubt
 
#28
#28
luthervol said:
I do. One of the fairest in history.
Do you honestly believe it was not a fair election?
Click to expand...

No I don’t. Tons of affidavits. Video evidence. It wasn’t even investigated properly. Your side stammered on about the 2016 election was stolen and there wasn’t a shred of evidence to back that up.

Yet we have sworn testimony and video evidence that showed it was not even close to being fair. I realize because it’s Trump you will vehemently disagree. But that just shows your utter distaste and a lack of common sense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and VolinWayne
#29
#29
BigOrangeTrain said:
No I don’t. Tons of affidavits. Video evidence. It wasn’t even investigated properly. Your side stammered on about the 2016 election was stolen and there wasn’t a shred of evidence to back that up.

Yet we have sworn testimony and video evidence that showed it was not even close to being fair. I realize because it’s Trump you will vehemently disagree. But that just shows your utter distaste and a lack of common sense.
Click to expand...
And Trump and his team are so inept that even with tons of affidavits and video evidence they cannot get Trump appointed judges to give them a fair hearing?
 
  • Like
Reactions: ClearwaterVol
#30
#30
BigOrangeTrain said:
No I don’t. Tons of affidavits. Video evidence. It wasn’t even investigated properly. Your side stammered on about the 2016 election was stolen and there wasn’t a shred of evidence to back that up.

Yet we have sworn testimony and video evidence that showed it was not even close to being fair. I realize because it’s Trump you will vehemently disagree. But that just shows your utter distaste and a lack of common sense.
Click to expand...


I agree 100 percent. The fraud is so obvious to anybody who does a little bit of research it's almost comical hearing people try to defend it and say there was no fraud. I mean we have what, a couple thousand signed affidavits and yet we are supposed to believe that these people are all lying. And this after 4 years of all of the Russia lies!
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#31
#31
VolinWayne said:
I agree 100 percent. The fraud is so obvious to anybody who does a little bit of research it's almost comical hearing people try to defend it and say there was no fraud. I mean we have what, a couple thousand signed affidavits and yet we are supposed to believe that these people are all lying. And this after 4 years of all of the Russia lies!
Click to expand...
Do you hear yourself?
It's so obvious BUT Trump (as president) and his team of lawyers couldn't prove anything. Shot down in 64 courts by conservative judges appointed by Trump. Does that make any sense to you?
 
#32
#32
lawgator1 said:
In a lawsuit like this they want to prove that the Defendants made statements they knew to be false. So, they make it a point to talk about the obvious falseness of the statements made. I'm not impressed by it. Everybody knows there is a qualitative difference between knowing the Earth's shape versus the same level of certainty as to an election with a ton of moving parts.

In my view, the lawsuit should focus on the lack of evidence behind the claims made by the Defendants. That they knew the evidence was not there but acted recklessly in making the statements out of personal motive. That's an easy case to prove in this instance.
Click to expand...

I would honestly feel insulted if I was a judge and someone dropped this in front of me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#34
#34
luthervol said:
Do you hear yourself?
It's so obvious BUT Trump (as president) and his team of lawyers couldn't prove anything. Shot down in 64 courts by conservative judges appointed by Trump. Does that make any sense to you?
Click to expand...

This election will forever have an asterisk beside it. Biden didn’t come close to winning fair and square.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolinWayne and AM64
#35
#35
luthervol said:
And Trump and his team are so inept that even with tons of affidavits and video evidence they cannot get Trump appointed judges to give them a fair hearing?
Click to expand...

In some ways I agree with you, but mostly not. If Trump could have gotten away from the marketing/showman dumbazzery long enough to find a professional legal team, things might have gone better. However, I think it was amply demonstrated that not one single court wanted to deal with election fraud probably from fear of outright revolution. However, many of the cases your side keeps citing were not brought by Trump; and most were certainly going down in flames over standing, and the rejection had nothing whatsoever to do with merit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolinWayne
#38
#38
BigOrangeTrain said:
No I don’t. Tons of affidavits. Video evidence. It wasn’t even investigated properly. Your side stammered on about the 2016 election was stolen and there wasn’t a shred of evidence to back that up.

Yet we have sworn testimony and video evidence that showed it was not even close to being fair. I realize because it’s Trump you will vehemently disagree. But that just shows your utter distaste and a lack of common sense.
Click to expand...

LOL to all of that 👆.
 
#39
#39
BigOrangeTrain said:
No I don’t. Tons of affidavits. Video evidence. It wasn’t even investigated properly. Your side stammered on about the 2016 election was stolen and there wasn’t a shred of evidence to back that up.

Yet we have sworn testimony and video evidence that showed it was not even close to being fair. I realize because it’s Trump you will vehemently disagree. But that just shows your utter distaste and a lack of common sense.
Click to expand...
Yea Trump is such a cuck for giving up
 
#40
#40
luthervol said:
Do you hear yourself?
It's so obvious BUT Trump (as president) and his team of lawyers couldn't prove anything. Shot down in 64 courts by conservative judges appointed by Trump. Does that make any sense to you?
Click to expand...


No it does not make any sense to me at all. They are a bunch of cowards who probably fear pissing off the establishment.
 
#43
#43
BigOrangeTrain said:
No I don’t. Tons of affidavits. Video evidence. It wasn’t even investigated properly. Your side stammered on about the 2016 election was stolen and there wasn’t a shred of evidence to back that up.

Yet we have sworn testimony and video evidence that showed it was not even close to being fair. I realize because it’s Trump you will vehemently disagree. But that just shows your utter distaste and a lack of common sense.
Click to expand...
Sworn affidavits by themselves are not proof of fraud (see item 1 below), and the various examples of video "evidence" presented by those seeking to promote the belief that there was fraud, have all been widely discredited (see item 2 below). I would refer you to the video which Fox News ran during Lou Dobbs Tonight, Judge Jeanine and Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo last month, which completely debunked the network's own accusations against both Smartmatic and Dominion. That video has been posted here many times.

(1) One of the more well chronicled people in those sworn affidavits is the now infamous Jesse Richard Morgan, the US Postal Service driver. Morgan has a lengthy history of drug abuse, involuntary commitments to mental institutions and domestic abuse. His lies were easily debunked.

(2) Per a Snopes fact check:

Donald Trump claimed during a rally in Valdosta, Georgia on December 5th that a video circulating on social media was proof that Georgia poll workers illegally stuffed and counted ballots at the State Farm Arena on Election Day. That is where absentee and military ballots were counted in the state. The minute-long clip he referenced, which was uploaded to Trump's personal YouTube account from an OAN broadcast - was also included at a Trump Team hearing in Georgia. The video in question claims to show poll workers actively stuffing ballots from suitcases hidden under a table covered by a black cloth. That is a lie.

That surveillance video, which comprises four security camera feeds - shows no irregularities, illegal behavior or evidence of malfeasance on behalf of those poll workers. The supposed "suitcases" were repeatedly identified by election officials as the standard boxes used in Fulton County to transport and store ballots. The video also fails to show any act of hiding or obscuring any ballots or election materials. Finally, the video shown doesn't prove the Trump campaign's assertion that GOP monitors were told to leave the counting room in order for poll workers to engage in illegal ballot counting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: luthervol
#44
#44
#45
#45
BigOrangeTrain said:
Seems like your response is coming more from just Trump hate then actual rational thought. But to each his own.
Click to expand...
The Trump legal team never even alleged fraud on the part of Smartmatic and Dominion voting systems in court filings... as they did on Fox News. They knew they couldn't prove it, and they didn't want to risk their law licenses over these false accusations. From the beginning, these allegations of fraud, were completely about pandering to the Trump base in order to protect Trump's ego.
 
  • Like
Reactions: luthervol
#47
#47
BigOrangeTrain said:
Let what you just said sink in. Irrefutable evidence. Yet courts refused to hear it. Why?
Click to expand...
Not true. The Trump legal team refused to present it. Why? Because they knew it wouldn't hold up under scrutiny in a court of law. Judge Stephanos Bibas, a Trump appointee from the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in Pennsylvania, was willing to allow new witnesses to be called and for any evidence of fraud to be presented in his court. Giuliani and Company took a pass... and Judge Bibas rejected their case on it's failed merits. He even specifically used the words "failed on its merits" in his ruling.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sin City Vol
#48
#48
Grand Vol said:
Complaint went full potato.

@lawgator1 @ClearwaterVol

Is the absurdly stupid language in the introduction normally used in such complaints?
Click to expand...

I am a litigator and I have never used such language in my court pleadings. I stick to very basic dry pleadings. Any theatrics are reserved for the jury and courtroom. In this case, however, Plaintiff's counsel knew the filing would generate an immense amount of publicity so they are grandstanding for the public and potential jurors. This is designed to get more publicity, be it good or bad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Velo Vol
#49
#49
BowlBrother85 said:
Not true. The Trump legal team refused to present it. Why? Because they knew it wouldn't hold up under scrutiny in a court of law. Judge Stephanos Bibas, a Trump appointee from the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in Pennsylvania, was willing to allow new witnesses to be called and for any evidence of fraud to be presented in his court. Giuliani and Company took a pass... and Judge Bibas rejected their case on it's failed merits. He even specifically used the words "failed on its merits" in his ruling.
Click to expand...

The reason they refused was because to answer affirmatively regarding evidence of fraud and then provide none would place their licenses in jeopardy. They have more strict ethical obligations within the courtroom that are not as constraining on their twitter feeds.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BowlBrother85
#50
#50
BowlBrother85 said:
Are you aware that Fox News ran a video during 3 of their shows which completely debunked accusations against Smartmatic and Dominion that had previously been made on those same shows? They absolutely did.
Click to expand...


So was Clinton Curtis lying when he testified to congress in 2006?? 2020 is not the first this has been brought up....Also, would you care to share this video that debunks all of this please.

Edit- I pulled it up myself. Fox News changed their tune only after being threatened by Smartmatic. The only debunking I see is the opinion of Eddie Perez. That does not debunk anything. He lost all credibility when he said this was the most secure election ever....What makes his "expert opinion" and more of a fact then the many other experts who are alleging this??

I would consider Mr. Pullitzer to definitely be an expert. They guy invented bar codes and somehow his opinion doesn't count
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top