It is interesting that as it relates to Sydney Powell, her defense in the Dominion defamation case was this:
"Determining whether a statement is protected involves a two-step inquiry," Powell's lawyers wrote in the filing in Washington federal court. "Is the statement one which can be proved true or false? And would reasonable people conclude that the statement is one of fact, in light of its phrasing, context and the circumstances surrounding its publication."
"Analyzed under these factors ... no reasonable person would conclude that the statements were truly statements of fact," the lawyers argued.
The motion to dismiss included a raft of legal precedent supporting the view that political speech "lies at the core of First Amendment protection."
"Additionally, in light of all the circumstances surrounding the statements, their context, and the availability of the facts on which the statements were based, it was clear to reasonable persons that Powell's claims were her opinions and legal theories on a matter of utmost public concern," the lawyers argued.
These are some of her claims that hopeful Patriots clung to and repeated often:
...promising that she would "release the kraken" and reveal proof of her conspiracies. "It will be biblical,"
Who's bad?
Good luck figuring that out right now.
But...
It is interesting that as it relates to Sydney Powell, her defense in the Dominion defamation case was this:
"Determining whether a statement is protected involves a two-step inquiry," Powell's lawyers wrote in the filing in Washington federal court. "Is the statement one which can be proved true or false? And would reasonable people conclude that the statement is one of fact, in light of its phrasing, context and the circumstances surrounding its publication."
"Analyzed under these factors ... no reasonable person would conclude that the statements were truly statements of fact," the lawyers argued.
The motion to dismiss included a raft of legal precedent supporting the view that political speech "lies at the core of First Amendment protection."
"Additionally, in light of all the circumstances surrounding the statements, their context, and the availability of the facts on which the statements were based, it was clear to reasonable persons that Powell's claims were her opinions and legal theories on a matter of utmost public concern," the lawyers argued.
These are some of her claims that hopeful Patriots clung to and repeated often:
...promising that she would "release the kraken" and reveal proof of her conspiracies. "It will be biblical,"
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2021/03/23/pro-trump-lawyer-sidney-powell-election-theft-claims-not-statements-of-fact.html