Why Are democrats So Obsessed With Keeping Kanye Off the Ballot?

[TheDoctorIsIn]

@zantax

We shall see.

Yes, we will.

[zantax]

@Jezcoe

@zantax

@Jezcoe

@zantax

Either that Jones case ruling gets struck down or the entire media is about to be bankrupted using the same tactic and precedent.

The ruling against Jones is not getting struck down since he failed to mount a defense in the first place.

He didn’t fail to mount one, he was denied being allowed to present one.

He had every opportunity to mount a defense.

He didn’t.

That is why a judgement was ruled against him.

He continually refused to provide the court what was asked of him for a few years.

Might want to look into it, what you saw on tv wasn’t a trial on the merits, it was the damage portion after he was found guilty by the judge on a technicality, that he failed to comply fully with discovery. He never had a chance to mount a defense in front of a jury.

[Jezcoe]

@TheDoctorIsIn

@zantax

He didn’t fail to mount one, he was denied being allowed to present one.

No, he wasn’t “denied” anything. The default judgment was due entiely to his own actions.

Yep… when the court orders to send a corporate representative and that they should be able to speak about A, B, and C and they come in completely unprepared… there are only so many times that one can get away with that before the judge gets annoyed.

[zantax]

@TheDoctorIsIn

@zantax

He didn’t fail to mount one, he was denied being allowed to present one.

No, he wasn’t “denied” anything. The default judgment was due entiely to his own actions.

His alleged actions, which he was never allowed to defend in front of a jury. The same thing can be done to ABC etc going forward, all it takes is the right judge.

[TheDoctorIsIn]

@zantax

Pretty sure the Texas law covers political viewpoints, not ad hominem.

[Jezcoe]

@zantax

@Jezcoe

@zantax

@Jezcoe

@zantax

Either that Jones case ruling gets struck down or the entire media is about to be bankrupted using the same tactic and precedent.

The ruling against Jones is not getting struck down since he failed to mount a defense in the first place.

He didn’t fail to mount one, he was denied being allowed to present one.

He had every opportunity to mount a defense.

He didn’t.

That is why a judgement was ruled against him.

He continually refused to provide the court what was asked of him for a few years.

Might want to look into it, what you saw on tv wasn’t a trial on the merits, it was the damage portion after he was found guilty by the judge on a technicality, that he failed to comply fully with discovery. He never had a chance to mount a defense in front of a jury.

The judgement was laid against Jones because he willfully failed to mount a defense.

That is why there was a judgement against him and they went to damages.

[PurpnGold]

@zantax

@PurpnGold

@zantax

@Oryx

Do you agree that the government should prevent Twitter and other private social media companies from banning people? What about this board? Should the government step in to make sure the Hannity moderators aren’t trampling my free speech?

I am fine with the Texas law limiting it to large platforms, it would be a giant waste of resources to police small forums like this.

Why do you want to punish large companies by forcing to carry speech they don’t like on their platform?

Because the right to free speech outweighs their commercial concerns. Not to mention we have ample evidence some of it is being done at government direction.

Then why not just have the government take over social media?

[TheDoctorIsIn]

@zantax

His alleged actions, which he was never allowed to defend in front of a jury. The same thing can be done to ABC etc going forward, all it takes is the right judge.

When you try to cheat, you forfeit the game.

This wasn’t a surprising result. It isn’t controversial.

[zantax]

@Jezcoe

@zantax

@Jezcoe

@zantax

@Jezcoe

@zantax

Either that Jones case ruling gets struck down or the entire media is about to be bankrupted using the same tactic and precedent.

The ruling against Jones is not getting struck down since he failed to mount a defense in the first place.

He didn’t fail to mount one, he was denied being allowed to present one.

He had every opportunity to mount a defense.

He didn’t.

That is why a judgement was ruled against him.

He continually refused to provide the court what was asked of him for a few years.

Might want to look into it, what you saw on tv wasn’t a trial on the merits, it was the damage portion after he was found guilty by the judge on a technicality, that he failed to comply fully with discovery. He never had a chance to mount a defense in front of a jury.

The judgement was laid against Jones because he willfully failed to mount a defense.

That is why there was a judgement against him and they went to damages.

Incorrect, he got a default judgement because he allegedly failed to turn over items during discovery. He wouldn’t have lost the case on the merits if Brandenburg was fairly applied to his actions. Or I should say shouldn’t have because the wrong jury can hang anyone. But this wasn’t even a free speech case, they are doing some creative application of business/advertising law. If it is allowed to stand expect every major media outlet to be bankrupted.

[TheDoctorIsIn]

@zantax

Incorrect, he got a default judgement because he allegedly failed to turn over items during discovery.

There’s nothing “alleged” about it. He failed to respond to discovery requests - and he did so in bad faith.

[Jezcoe]

@zantax

Incorrect, he got a default judgement because he allegedly failed to turn over items during discovery.

He didn’t “allegedly fail” he actually failed.

@zantax

He wouldn’t have lost the case on the merits if Brandenburg was fairly applied to his actions. Or I should say shouldn’t have because the wrong jury can hang anyone.

When one actually listens to the depositions… they are pretty damning.

@zantax

But this wasn’t even a free speech case,

Correct… it was a libel case.

@zantax

they are doing some creative application of business/advertising law.

They aren’t.

@zantax

If it is allowed to stand expect every major media outlet to be bankrupted.

No … not really. Jones harrassed the parents of murdered children for years to create content to drive traffic to his site so he could profit by selling supplements.

That is a rather high bar to reach.

[Jezcoe]

I for one can’t wait for Ye to be interviewed on Infowars.

[TheDoctorIsIn]

@zantax

If it is allowed to stand expect every major media outlet to be bankrupted.

It will stand - that’s not really in question. And your “prediction” is nonsense.

[FreeAndClear]

A Motion to strike an answer and proceed to a trial on damages resulted in an order. That order was fully appealable. Was it?

[TheDoctorIsIn]

@zantax

Might want to look into it, what you saw on tv wasn’t a trial on the merits, it was the damage portion after he was found guilty by the judge on a technicality, that he failed to comply fully with discovery. He never had a chance to mount a defense in front of a jury.

The “technicality” you speak of fundemental to our judicial system - and a sanction of default judgment for that “technicality” is neither innappropriate, nor unheard of.

In the last few years, my firm has gotten default judgments due to discovery violations in 4 or 5 cases.

[zantax]

@FreeAndClear

A Motion to strike an answer and proceed to a trial on damages resulted in an order. That order was fully appealable. Was it?

Looks like it won’t be overturned, just looked, Supreme Court already refused to take his appeal. Can’t wait to see who is next.

[Jezcoe]

@zantax

@FreeAndClear

A Motion to strike an answer and proceed to a trial on damages resulted in an order. That order was fully appealable. Was it?

Looks like it won’t be overturned, just looked, Supreme Court already refused to take his appeal. Can’t wait to see who is next.

The time to appeal the judgement has passed. Jones had every opportunity to mount a defense and he refused to do so.

The only appeal that he has is to reduce the damages.

[zantax]

@Jezcoe

@zantax

@FreeAndClear

A Motion to strike an answer and proceed to a trial on damages resulted in an order. That order was fully appealable. Was it?

Looks like it won’t be overturned, just looked, Supreme Court already refused to take his appeal. Can’t wait to see who is next.

The time to appeal the judgement has passed. Jones had every opportunity to mount a defense and he refused to do so.

The only appeal that he has is to reduce the damages.

Supreme Court nixes Alex Jones' appeal in Newtown shooting case

HARTFORD, Conn. — The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear an appeal by Infowars host and conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, who was fighting a Connecticut court sanction in a defamation lawsuit brought by relatives of some of the victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting.

[Jezcoe]

@zantax

@Jezcoe

@zantax

@FreeAndClear

A Motion to strike an answer and proceed to a trial on damages resulted in an order. That order was fully appealable. Was it?

Looks like it won’t be overturned, just looked, Supreme Court already refused to take his appeal. Can’t wait to see who is next.

The time to appeal the judgement has passed. Jones had every opportunity to mount a defense and he refused to do so.

The only appeal that he has is to reduce the damages.

Supreme Court nixes Alex Jones' appeal in Newtown shooting case

HARTFORD, Conn. — The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear an appeal by Infowars host and conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, who was fighting a Connecticut court sanction in a defamation lawsuit brought by relatives of some of the victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting.

Yeah… he should have tried appealing things before he got to damages.

Better yet… he should have taken it seriously and actually mounted a defense… that whole actually defending yourself would have helped him out a lot.

[FreeAndClear]

@zantax

@FreeAndClear

A Motion to strike an answer and proceed to a trial on damages resulted in an order. That order was fully appealable. Was it?

Looks like it won’t be overturned, just looked, Supreme Court already refused to take his appeal. Can’t wait to see who is next.

So it wasn’t because of some bad judge…. If it were he could have won on appeal. Everyone against him?

Who is next for what? To be sued as a consequence of his actions? Or to be persecuted?