Candace Owens Getting Sued
(www.forbes.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (87)
sorted by:
Whats disallowed discovery phase?
It's where a kangaroo court doesn't allow the defense it's rightful discovery as defined by law. I've been there myself.
Its funny. The same people who say "If you don't get sued then everything you say MUST be truth", also immediately jump up and say "If you get sued and you cant prove your case, it must be because it was a Kangaroo court".
This case is VERY specific. It is whether the security guy was in the base that Candace was claiming, meeting the military folks planning the assassination of Charlie Kirk.
And regardless of what Candace has convinced her Candies, she wont be allowed discovery regarding anything thats not relevant to this case. And she can easily prove if this was real because as an "investigative journalist", one would assume that she had proof for things she claims.
Here is a good breakdown of what she is allowed and what she isn't allowed. Pretty much everything she thinks she is allowed is probably not allowed. Not because of kangaroo court but because thats how the law works.
Where are these people who say this? Can you provide a link? Not that I care or believe 'they' exist. It's an extreme strawman statement nobody needs to or shoud defend or protect. Of course discovery is only for things relative to the case unless you're the prosecution (true jest). Thing is.....She's being accused of lying and slander. She's allowed any information that proves or disproves the point and the burden of 'lying' is on the accuser, not the defense.....the defense uses discovery FACTS to defend the charge. I don't know anything about people who jump up and say.....but I do know that disallowing the discovery phase in court and playing to Court TV (Google) is a Kangaroo Court. A good breakdown of what she is allowed doesn't exist outside of the wording of the law, .......but is ultimately decided by a judge....anyway.
The burden is usually fulfilled by providing evidence contrary to the claim by the defendant. In this case it would be something like "The plaintiff was in Dallas Texas on that day".
She can use discovery to prove this evidence wrong, or she can provide independant evidence proving the plaintiff's evidence is wrong (Like a video from the base or witnesses from the base as example). If that kind of discovery is disallowed then of course one would agree this is a kangaroo court.
However, my prediction, that is not what happens. She will try to go on a fishing expedition and she would be disallowed, and rightfully so.
She will then claim this was a kangaroo court.
And boom - all her followers will take this as the gospel and will forever believe that everything she said is true and she has been suppressed by the "system".
And nothing anyone can ever say will change their mind, and we will have yet another "split" belief system.
Sorry what are you asking for? Are you talking about "If you don't get sued then everything you say MUST be truth" or something else?
You want me to provide the transcripts of the trial? It's public information. Google or Grok "Discovery Phase/Alex Jones trial and see what pops up.
You might want to check the transcripts of his divorce proceedings also where his lawyer admitted to 'AJ's ex-wife's claim that 'Alex Jones' is a Live Action Role Playing character.
Next: Who/What is Stratfor? Thanks for your questions.
Yes I want you to provide the link in the trial documents where Alex Jones tried to submit evidence backing his claims.
And no, I dont care about his wife or who is stratfor unless you explain how it ties to his defense.
And I also want to hear why you think he agreed that the SH was 100% Real in the court under oath.
Americans have been lost at sea and subject to Admiralty Law for a very long time
Continuing from here since that thread is too deep.
Hahaha, nice try, trying to save yourself from your ignorant mistake. Clearly your two years of failed law school attempt did not teach you what Slander is and what Defamation is.
Hahaha, you are so ignorant that you are not even aware that Macron has already sued, nor did you even bother to peruse the complaint.
Here is a question: Do these actions make you look more ignorant or less ignorant?Answer here ________
Here is another question: Are you trying to convince me that you are not ignorant, or yourself? Answer here _________
Man, you make this simply too funny.
And no, you are not gonna try and change the topic. We are on this topic until you explain why back up your original statement "Charges would be Slander" OR you humbly accept that you were ignorant when you made that comment.
(And you can scream at me in a million responses every time I call you out, but it only shows you are angry at yourself for allowing yourself in this situation and not finding a way out. There is a simple way out. Just accept your limitations and I might even respect you a little)
Macron is said to have FILED a suit. Whether that's true or not, doesn't mean it will come to court. Ha......ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. "You're so ignorant" that you assumed too much and didn't listen to or answer the question, did you?
And now you pretend that taking the subject back to the original one is 'changing the subject'. If it did go to actual trial, would she be allowed a true discovery, without farce, as opposed to the Jones trial? Same question, same points.
You're afraid. Afraid to answer the questions with actual prediction because your conscience knows you don't know. You defraud. You misrepresent. You obfuscate. Look that word up.You don't answer a single thing. You OBFUSCATE and your whining tone makes it humorous. You WISH you could upset me, that's hilarious, but it's you who is 1) Whining and upset 2) Defeated without acceptance 3) Refusing to answer questions or put his money where his projection hole is by predicting.
Not ONE question (the answers already known to me) was answered. And I knew that would happen also. Sophomoric hall monitors do not run the school, they only attempt to be a gatekeeper. It's usually indication of sub-conscious inferiority complex, and/or power trip. In this case, it's a fishing trip.
Isn't it? Place answer here ______________.
You feel threatened because you have no authority over things you don't understand.
Good luck trying to fake your way through life with this attitude.
Here you go: "I don't want to continue this discussion any further"
You claimed that would stop your pointless harassment and insults.
Let's see how honest you are now.
Wow, the only person worse than an ignorant person is a dishonest ignorant person who continues to make lamest excuses.
You didn't even bother to explain slander and yet have the audacity to write a wall of text to distract?
And took you 2 days to come up with this vomit?
Nope, we are not changing the subject until you acknowledge that you were completely ignorant about the Macron case.
And just in case its not clear - there is no such thing as "disallowed discovery". AJ choosing to throw his defence is not the same as "discovery was disallowed". I sent you tons of evidence to this, you did not send me even ONE evidence, but then your ignorance is so deep that you cannot even differentiate between FACT and OPINION.
But its funny that the guy who wants to "move on" just cannot stop coming back for more punishment.
HAHAHA, nice try. If you really want this torture to end dont come back with MORE arguments! I already told you this, but then you are too ignorant to understand basic words.