The Disease of Leftism

[dbair1967]

 

[dbair1967]

 

[dbair1967]

 

[dbair1967]

 

[dbair1967]

 

[dbair1967]

 

[Creeper]

Alex Jones was sued for billions of dollars for a lie. Kimmel is lucky he just got fired.

The networks in general are reading the writing on the wall. Trump has won numerous lawsuits already. Kirk's wife has filed lawsuits that she will almost assuredly win.

Yes, Alex Jones was sued for a lie, and the verdict in his case, as well as the penalty were both egregiously wrong. What Jones said was horrible for the people of Sandy Hook who lost children, but he has a first amendment right to say it. He didn't slander the families. He may have hurt their feelings but that is not a reason for a finding against him, although I am sure the jury felt bad for the parents. The idea that offensive speech is punishable is the opposite of freedom of speech.

But this is my point. Just because they did it doesn't me we should do it too. We should do the opposite and not tolerate violations of our constitutional rights. The constitution protects our right to say things like what Alex Jones said and what Jimmy Kimmel said. Either we stand for the first amendment or we don't, but the slippery slope is real and once you go down that slide there is no getting back up.

Again, I have no problem with Kimmel getting fired by his employers. My issue is with the Chair of the FCC threatening the employers to take action.

 

[Creeper]

His show was terrible and so were his ratings...if it were booming, he wouldn't be off the air.

This isnt "tit for tat"

The other issue he didn't even issue an "opinion", he blatantly lied on the air, which creates a legal situation for the network. They knew they were going to get crushed in court and lose millions (if not billion/s) more than they already were.

Agreed and if the network took action without the FCC Chair getting involved I would agree with you. But the FCC Chair had no business threatening the network about Kimmel's lie. If Kirk's wife or the shooter's family threatened them, that would be another matter. The government should not get into personal libel or slander cases. We have libel laws for that.

 

[Creeper]

I believe they said "scientific evidence" would be presented in court. They already provided photographic evidence and of course Candace and her band of lunatics claimed it was all doctored.

We'll have to see what evidence the Macron's produce, but all they really have to do is bring her brother into the courtroom with her.

Honestly, I don't think this is ever going to see a courtroom. How do you hold a trial involving the President of France and his wife without it becoming a circus, which I am pretty sure Candace's lawyers will try to do if this goes to court. But she has already filed a motion to dismiss the case, which I think will fail. A good judge will try to force a settlement based on evidence he will see or hear alone in his chambers. My guess is, if Macron provides evidence to the judge that she is a woman and not her brother, the judge will pressure Candace to settle by issuing a public apology and vowing never to mention this macron's again. I doubt the Macrons really want her money which I am sure she has protected by now.

I also don't think that it is necessary to do a DNA test in front of the judge or in the courtroom as a public spectacle. There are ways to get it done and satisfy the rules of evidence. Remember, this is a lawsuit not a criminal trial. Preponderance of evidence is the standard.