It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Sublimecraft
a reply to: 727Sky
That's the one.
originally posted by: MystikMushroom
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn
a reply to: schuyler
Sanders wrote about rape.
Trump committed rape.
Wow - you do know you can get sued for your statement here right?
Suggest you alter the words.
Well, let's see how lawyers would look at it...
Facts vs. Opinion To be considered defamation, the statement must be one of fact, not opinion. The reason for this distinction is that the First Amendment protects opinions. Distinguishing fact from opinion, however, can be difficult and often depends upon the context and circumstances as a whole. For example, just because the defamatory speaker uses words like "I think" or "in my opinion" does not mean the statements were merely opinion. Courts will look beyond the actual words used to see whether a reasonable reader or listener could understand the statement as asserting a statement of verifiable fact, i.e., that the statement can be proven to be true or false. Some courts have even stated that statements made on message boards or in chatrooms are probably opinions or hyperbole, unless the context proves otherwise.
Now, Trump is a public figure, so that comes into play:
Generally, public figures must overcome a higher standard to prove that they have been defamed. Public figures have to prove that the defamer published the statement with "actual malice." Actual malice means that the defamer published the statement with either knowledge of its falsity, or in reckless disregard for the truth.
alllaw.com
I'm not a lawyer, so...but I think if someone can call Obama a Muslim, gay, or any of the other horrible things conservatives constantly have been accusing him of being (or doing) over the last 7 years...I'm pretty sure someone can take Ivanna's words and reasonably form the opinion stated above. And, opinion isn't fact.
originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn
a reply to: UKTruth
I don't think I can be sued for stating a hyperbolic opinion.
Besides, to do so would go against Trump's "Non-PC" campaign.
Hilariously, he's actually my No. 2 pick for president, anyway.
originally posted by: UKTruth
The problem with this poll is that it is completely biased, Drudge report appeals to those that want to seek out a broad spectrum of news and are very much skewed towards anti establishment. This is a poll of drudgereport visitors.
It's a similar effect to the one we saw in 2012 with Ron Paul - he won a lot of online polls but got nowhere near the presidency.
In all polls like this anti establishment always wins big.
In my view the president will come from one of Clinton, Bush, Rubio.
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn
a reply to: UKTruth
I don't think I can be sued for stating a hyperbolic opinion.
Besides, to do so would go against Trump's "Non-PC" campaign.
Hilariously, he's actually my No. 2 pick for president, anyway.
You didnt offer an opinion, you stated a fact.
You said 'Trump committed rape'. No other context, just that statement.
Its not about being PC or not PC. If his lawyers saw your post and decided to make an example of you, you'd be in trouble.
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: MystikMushroom
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn
a reply to: schuyler
Sanders wrote about rape.
Trump committed rape.
Wow - you do know you can get sued for your statement here right?
Suggest you alter the words.
Well, let's see how lawyers would look at it...
Facts vs. Opinion To be considered defamation, the statement must be one of fact, not opinion. The reason for this distinction is that the First Amendment protects opinions. Distinguishing fact from opinion, however, can be difficult and often depends upon the context and circumstances as a whole. For example, just because the defamatory speaker uses words like "I think" or "in my opinion" does not mean the statements were merely opinion. Courts will look beyond the actual words used to see whether a reasonable reader or listener could understand the statement as asserting a statement of verifiable fact, i.e., that the statement can be proven to be true or false. Some courts have even stated that statements made on message boards or in chatrooms are probably opinions or hyperbole, unless the context proves otherwise.
Now, Trump is a public figure, so that comes into play:
Generally, public figures must overcome a higher standard to prove that they have been defamed. Public figures have to prove that the defamer published the statement with "actual malice." Actual malice means that the defamer published the statement with either knowledge of its falsity, or in reckless disregard for the truth.
alllaw.com
I'm not a lawyer, so...but I think if someone can call Obama a Muslim, gay, or any of the other horrible things conservatives constantly have been accusing him of being (or doing) over the last 7 years...I'm pretty sure someone can take Ivanna's words and reasonably form the opinion stated above. And, opinion isn't fact.
Opinion shoud be stated as opinion - that is not what happened here.
Outright calling trump a rapist when he has never even been charged or convicted of such is very dangerous ground in my opinion. What people choose to say about Obama has nothing to do with it. In your first example, what was said would ceratinly fall into the category of defamation in my view.
originally posted by: stevieray
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn
a reply to: UKTruth
I don't think I can be sued for stating a hyperbolic opinion.
Besides, to do so would go against Trump's "Non-PC" campaign.
Hilariously, he's actually my No. 2 pick for president, anyway.
You didnt offer an opinion, you stated a fact.
You said 'Trump committed rape'. No other context, just that statement.
Its not about being PC or not PC. If his lawyers saw your post and decided to make an example of you, you'd be in trouble.
It's amazing that some people want to claim "crimes" that didn't happen and have no proof....but blithely announce that real laws don't apply to them.
Ah well, it's how we got Clinton and Sanders representing one of the 2 parties.
originally posted by: stevieray
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: MystikMushroom
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn
a reply to: schuyler
Sanders wrote about rape.
Trump committed rape.
Wow - you do know you can get sued for your statement here right?
Suggest you alter the words.
Well, let's see how lawyers would look at it...
Facts vs. Opinion To be considered defamation, the statement must be one of fact, not opinion. The reason for this distinction is that the First Amendment protects opinions. Distinguishing fact from opinion, however, can be difficult and often depends upon the context and circumstances as a whole. For example, just because the defamatory speaker uses words like "I think" or "in my opinion" does not mean the statements were merely opinion. Courts will look beyond the actual words used to see whether a reasonable reader or listener could understand the statement as asserting a statement of verifiable fact, i.e., that the statement can be proven to be true or false. Some courts have even stated that statements made on message boards or in chatrooms are probably opinions or hyperbole, unless the context proves otherwise.
Now, Trump is a public figure, so that comes into play:
Generally, public figures must overcome a higher standard to prove that they have been defamed. Public figures have to prove that the defamer published the statement with "actual malice." Actual malice means that the defamer published the statement with either knowledge of its falsity, or in reckless disregard for the truth.
alllaw.com
I'm not a lawyer, so...but I think if someone can call Obama a Muslim, gay, or any of the other horrible things conservatives constantly have been accusing him of being (or doing) over the last 7 years...I'm pretty sure someone can take Ivanna's words and reasonably form the opinion stated above. And, opinion isn't fact.
Opinion shoud be stated as opinion - that is not what happened here.
Outright calling trump a rapist when he has never even been charged or convicted of such is very dangerous ground in my opinion. What people choose to say about Obama has nothing to do with it. In your first example, what was said would ceratinly fall into the category of defamation in my view.
lmao at somebody comparing "call him a muslim or gay" to "call him a rapist". And not understanding that opinion should be prefaced by "I believe..." or "I think..."
Egad I worry about the future of humanity.
originally posted by: UKTruth
The problem with this poll is that it is completely biased, Drudge report appeals to those that want to seek out a broad spectrum of news and are very much skewed towards anti establishment. This is a poll of drudgereport visitors.
It's a similar effect to the one we saw in 2012 with Ron Paul - he won a lot of online polls but got nowhere near the presidency.
In all polls like this anti establishment always wins big.
In my view the president will come from one of Clinton, Bush, Rubio.
originally posted by: muse7
originally posted by: ColeYounger
a reply to: muse7
All of these accusations So little proof No inditements False narrative maybe?
Yea. The email breaches didn't happen. The evil conservatives just made it all up.
To charge a former Secretary of State with a felony requires a fair amount of proof. Proof that obviously does not exist.
I think what the Conservatives are doing to Clinton is called "Swiftboating".
originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Sublimecraft
You can vote multiple times in that poll. Every time the page refreshes, vote again. So I wouldn't give it much credence. I lost track of how many times I voted.
originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn
a reply to: BatheInTheFountain
Oh my. Haven't you ever heard that any eye for an eye makes the whole world blind?
Tell you what, if I'm one day in Trump's exact situation, I'll consider it.
So Obama can be called treasonous, a terrorist. You can say he should be executed. You might not be in favor of that, I'd hope so, but I doubt most of the Don's base is so... Conscientious?
But the line is drawn at Trump?
Was I not PC enough? I mean, Trump himself has said/implied that all Muslims and Mexicans are rapists, I was just following his example. Should I have been more specific? Should I have said "Accused of rape?" Should I have should "Accused of rape and not found Guilty?" Well, both of these are warping things. The correct thing to say was "His wife said rape, but didn't really mean it."
I guess I should be all truthful and accurate and careful with my words, when it comes to the Don, but anything goes for Sanders. He's just a rape-fantasizing dirty Communist, right? Talk about a double standard.
Or is it a lack of standard?