Folks, I have quite a bit of experience being a defendant in vexatious nuisance lawsuits alleging defamation (four LOLsuits each from Brett Kimberlin and Bill Schmalfeldt). Of course, I won all those suits. Seven were dismissed for various reasons. One went to trial, and my codefendants and I won when the judge stopped the trial after Kimberlin rested case because the plaintiff hadn’t shown that we had made any false statements about him and granted a directed verdict in our favor. I tend to have a bias in favor of defendants in defamation suits, but in this case … not so much.
IANAL, but my initial sense of Tulsi Gabbard’s suit against Hillary Clinton alleging defamation is that it’s interesting.
The complaint specifically quotes Clinton’s allegedly false and defamatory remarks, citing when and how they were published. As I understand it, the complaint claims that falsely stating that an Army National Guard officer is the asset of foreign power is defamatory per se because if that were true, the officer would be unfit for his or her professional duties as a soldier. Tulsi Gabbard is a major in the Hawaii National Guard. She’s also a member of the House Armed Services Committee, an assignment that requires access to classified defense information. Being a Russian asset should be similarly disqualifying in that professional role.
Congresswoman Gabbard’s case appears to be much stronger than anything her colleagues are presenting to the Senate. But being based on actual facts tends to make a case stronger. I don’t know how far her suit will go in court, but I’m ordering more popcorn.
The Russian Collusion Hoax had failed. The Mueller Report was a nothing burger. So the left wing of the House Democrats sold Nancy Pelosi a bill of goods that finally led to her allowing the Impeachment Hoax to go forward. And then it dawned on the Speaker that it would be Cocaine Mitch who would take charge of the action when the Impeachment reached the Senate.
Now, it may be that she had thought that 2019/202 would be like 1974 and that a group of Republican senators would go to the President and tell him to resign rather than face a trial. But 2020 isn’t 1974. In 1974 there was an underlying crime and a cover up of that crime. In 2020, there’s merely whining about Orange Man Bad. Indeed, it appears that there was significant criminal activity that tainted the 2016 election, but the President was among the victims of those crimes. In 2020, the Republicans in the Senate seem prepared to give the President an opportunity to present his defense, and the President seems to look forward to vindication rather than removal from office.
Hence, the Speaker’s problem. If the case goes forward to the Senate, more of the Truth about who did what is likely to come to light, and that is not likely to be beneficial to Pelosi, her allies, or Democrats as a whole. No wonder she’s having trouble articulating her talking points.
Everything is proceeding as I have foreseen.
Dread Deadbeat Protector Kimberlin has gotten around to something “new” at ptotectourelections dot org. It’s a repost ripoff of an article from Politico that tries to tie some buggy election software used in North Carolina during the 2016 election with Russian hackers.
The Gentle Reader may remember that The
Dread Deadbeat Pro-Se/Protector Kimberlin testified under oath in October, 2016, that he and his band of top-notch hackers were working with the DoJ to secure the 2016 elections. He mentioned hacking by the Russians.
If the Politico story is correct, it shows an example of TDPK’s failure to fully protect our election that year. OTOH, Hillary Clinton managed to get 78.9% of the vote in Durham County, so maybe TDPK doesn’t care.
Oh, look! TDPK has added a PayPal donate button to the site, but it turns out that it’s another example of his lack of attention to detail—it’s connected to a PayPal account that’s been closed. The NationBuilder link still takes you to a page that falsely claims that POE has 502(c)(3) tax exempt status. The organization used to have 501(c)(4) status, but that was revoked by the IRS several months ago.
This seems consistent with AG Barr’s behavior to date. We shall see.
Mueller: “Could you repeat the question?”
* * * * *
Robert Mueller: “I’m not familiar … with that”
Chabot: “It’s not a trick question. It was Fusion GPS”
* * * * *
Mueller: “I’d have to check the statute.”
Sensenbrenner: “I just read it to you.”
* * * * *
Mueller: “I can’t go into that.”
Jordan: “Yes you can, because you wrote about it.”
* * * * *
Mueller: “I’m not going to get into that.”
* * * * *
Mueller: “It’s still outside my purview.”
* * * * *
Mueller: “I don’t agree with your characterizations.”
Jordan: “I’m reading from your report.”
Later today, we’ll see if something that’s been lying out in the open for weeks is still sparkling or has gone flat.
Those are the questions that Robert Mueller is dodging.
I believe that the public deserves simple and honest answers to those questions.