554
this post was submitted on 18 Mar 2025
554 points (98.9% liked)
politics
22105 readers
5236 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I am not sure this is going to be looked at this way by a jury or judge in the case of a summary judgement. I think the operational word here is purporting.
""Purport" focuses on the substance or essence of a legal document, rather than its literal wording. "
Was he saying something meant to be considered factual in an attempt to defame. I think most reasonable people would agree with this statement.
Also, you must consider this will be a civil trial not a criminal one. The don't need to prove mens rea here so instead of beyond a shadow it is what side is more believable.
On a personal level, I find it disturbing that for one, an aid to the POTUS talks to the media to begin with. Two, that this aid likes to freak the fuck out and make an ass of himself on national broadcast media. Three, that he is clearly a Neo-Nazi.
Any one of these things would have prevented someone from being part of our government in the past...yet here we are discussing whether or not he is defaming. Just seems odd.
Haha, no. Nobody's going to think that hurling insults is meant to be factual statements. Find me any defamation case where insults were considered to be factual statements and someone was found liable for defamation.
Sure, Stephen Miller is an awful gremlin, and it's if the presidency had any dignity, sending out someone like that as a spokesman would destroy it. But, Trump's white house has done away with integrity, dignity, even good manners.
Still, it's insults, insults aren't defamation, they're opinion not fact.
You ignore the fact that it is a senior adviser to the President. His words have a lot of weight to them and he is definitely setting himself up to be sued. Why these people are so stupid is beyond me
He also accused them of a crime. Hardly just a run of the mill insult. Accusing someone of a crime of moral turpitude when in a position of authority is a criminal act in some jurisdictions.
You really lose that it doesn't matter what the fuck I say when you are in a position like he is. But he don't care and so far not enough people do I guess. It is past time for the other two branches to check these clowns.
Of course I do, because that's not relevant.
No he didn't.
What you say when I'm in a position? WTF are you talking about.
It is very relevant, you can't even consider what he says without the context of who he is and his position.
He definitely accused them of aiding and abetting murderers and rapists.
The last bit was in reference to the fact that when you are a senior official you can't just say whatever the fuck you want without consequences.
I am going to go ahead and block you because I don't really care for the whole devil's advocate bullshit and you seem pretty unhinged to begin with.
You're going to block me because you know your argument is wrong and don't want to risk being exposed further.