Fire and Fury lawyer responds to Trump's cease-and-desist letter: 'We are confident'

originally posted by: whywhynot

originally posted by: antiantonym

originally posted by: whywhynot

originally posted by: antiantonym

originally posted by: Kalixi
Goody, you've authored another Trump thread.

Paid per post it seems.

Experts are saying that the situation surrounding Fire and Fury is unprecedented in American history. The story I posted here is huge news. It is not speculation but verifiable fact.

What experts and is it unprecedented because the FBI has never used a political opposition research document to obtain a FISA warrant in its history?

Trump’s lawyer threatens unprecedented libel lawsuit against ‘Fire and Fury’ author, publisher

The "unprecedented" part isn't a matter of opinion as far as I can tell.

Oh my that is huge!!! Yawning.

So you haven’t read the book! That is what I thought.

I haven't read the book because I see it as tabloid-level drivel. The reason this thread is so important is because if President Trump sues the publisher, then that opinion of mine could change in a heartbeat. That would probably happen with millions of others around the world as well. Can you see why this thread is so important now?

Todays rumors from the book could become tomorrow's facts...with a lawsuit.

a reply to: antiantonym

Oh snap.

Should you pursue litigation against Henry Holt or Mr. Wolff, we are quite confident that documents related to the contents of the book in the possession of President Trump, his family members, his businesses, his campaign, and his administration will prove particularly relevant to our defense.

The ball is indeed in Trumps court.

originally posted by: antiantonym

originally posted by: whywhynot

originally posted by: antiantonym

originally posted by: whywhynot

originally posted by: antiantonym

originally posted by: Kalixi
Goody, you've authored another Trump thread.

Paid per post it seems.

Experts are saying that the situation surrounding Fire and Fury is unprecedented in American history. The story I posted here is huge news. It is not speculation but verifiable fact.

What experts and is it unprecedented because the FBI has never used a political opposition research document to obtain a FISA warrant in its history?

Trump’s lawyer threatens unprecedented libel lawsuit against ‘Fire and Fury’ author, publisher

The "unprecedented" part isn't a matter of opinion as far as I can tell.

Oh my that is huge!!! Yawning.

So you haven’t read the book! That is what I thought.

I haven't read the book because I see it as tabloid-level drivel. The reason this thread is so important is because if President Trump sues the publisher then that opinion of mine could change in a heartbeat. That would probably happen with millions of others around the world as well. Can you see why this thread is so important now?

Todays rumors from the book could become tomorrow's facts...with a lawsuit.

During the campaign trail Trump made a comment about "suing the # out of them, like they've never been sued before," and it was adamantly defended on ATS.

I just picture the false-outrage that Trump supporters would employ if a Democrat threatened to sue someone for libel (think Obama birther CT's, Hillary is dead and employs body doubles CT's).

Trump supporters in favor of censorship of things they don't want to hear?

Doesn't exactly come as shocking news. These are the same people that whine about "SJW political correctness," being shoved down their throats, not even realizing their own incessant (political) whining about "SJW's," is the exact same behavior that SJW's employ.

Just enjoy the circus

a reply to: RomeByFire

During the campaign trail Trump made a comment about "suing the # out of them, like they've never been sued before," and it was adamantly defended on ATS.

Funny.

Same people condemning Trump are the same people that defended Bernies Sanders law suit.

a reply to: carewemust

Lordy I hope there are tapes...

a reply to: whywhynot

Have you?

a reply to: RomeByFire

I can't recognize any principles among Trump supporters. Today Trump announced that he expects a deal on DACA to be done. That was a huge red line for Trump supporters before the election, but now they seem fine with keeping it.

They're fine with Trump's reversal of his position on the official story of 9/11, they're fine with Trump having endorsed the official story concerning the Las Vegas shooting immediately, and they're fine with Trump endorsing other official government positions that he used to be against.

Trump supporters are fine with Trump's failures on everything from Obamacare to draining the swamp.

I don't know what they're supporting, and I don't think they do either.

originally posted by: antiantonym
a reply to: RomeByFire

I can't recognize any principles among Trump supporters. Today Trump announced that he expects a deal on DACA to be done. That was a huge red line for Trump supporters before the election, but now they seem fine with keeping it.

They're fine with Trump's reversal of his position on the official story of 911, they're fine with Trump having endorsed the official story concerning the Las Vegas shooting immediately, and they're fine with Trump endorsing other official government positions that he used to be against.

Trump supporters are fine with Trump's failures on everything from Obamacare to draining the swamp.

I don't know what they're supporting, and I don't think they do either.

They support the (R).

That's really about it, as far as I'm concerned. And don't get me wrong, Democrats are no better.

But the chants of "Republican-controlled, Republican-majority," are no longer to be found and are replaced with "deep state, democrat obstruction, RINO's," etc

Hillary isn't locked up, the wall isn't happening, Trump's concerned with transgender military folks, kneeling NFL players, being triggered on Twitter, referring to himself in the third person and constantly playing the victim card, Russia defeated IS - not the US - and the list goes on.

They copy Trump's words and phrases. Repeat his slogans. Attack everyone who isn't "them."

.... why I refer to them as cultists. Obama supporters (on ATS) weren't nearly this radical.

originally posted by: olaru12
I wonder why the WH invited Wolff into the WH to archive the Trump transition from campaign to the presidency.

They only have themselves to blame for not vetting Wolff properly. You reap what you sow...apparently!

It's what happens when you let Jared and Don jr. run the show. Light weight dorks....

It's the Dunning-Kruger effect in action. They didn't realize how poorly they were doing. They probably thought they were doing a great job. That's what Trump keeps saying, and he apparently believes it. Why be ashamed when you think you're awesome?

Try Googling "The Dunning-Kruger President." New York magazine, Salon, and Politico have recently published articles on that theme. They're referring to Donald Trump and to the Dunning-Kruger effect, a psychological principle that is becoming a lot better known than it once was.

Named for Cornell psychologist David Dunning and his then-grad student Justin Kruger, this is the observation that people who are ignorant or unskilled in a given domain tend to believe they are much more competent than they are. Thus bad drivers believe they're good drivers, the humorless think they know what's funny, and people who've never held public office think they're make a terrific president. How hard can it be?
www.psychologytoday.com...

originally posted by: RomeByFire
.... why I refer to them as cultists. Obama supporters (on ATS) weren't nearly this radical.

Obama supporters believed that he was innocent and right in what he was doing. Trump supporters don't care either way.


www.youtube.com...

a reply to: Sillyolme

Don’t be silly of course I have or how else could I had made my assessment. You must not have read it or you wouldn’t had asked.

originally posted by: antiantonym

originally posted by: whywhynot

originally posted by: antiantonym

originally posted by: whywhynot

originally posted by: antiantonym

originally posted by: Kalixi
Goody, you've authored another Trump thread.

Paid per post it seems.

Experts are saying that the situation surrounding Fire and Fury is unprecedented in American history. The story I posted here is huge news. It is not speculation but verifiable fact.

What experts and is it unprecedented because the FBI has never used a political opposition research document to obtain a FISA warrant in its history?

Trump’s lawyer threatens unprecedented libel lawsuit against ‘Fire and Fury’ author, publisher

The "unprecedented" part isn't a matter of opinion as far as I can tell.

Oh my that is huge!!! Yawning.

So you haven’t read the book! That is what I thought.

I haven't read the book because I see it as tabloid-level drivel. The reason this thread is so important is because if President Trump sues the publisher, then that opinion of mine could change in a heartbeat. That would probably happen with millions of others around the world as well. Can you see why this thread is so important now?

Todays rumors from the book could become tomorrow's facts...with a lawsuit.

Hypocrite much? The rumors are from the left and the right that the book was never vetted and now that the vetting has begun it is fiction.

And as I said earlier it’s mostly about Bannon.

You make yourself look very silly. (No offense to Silly)

a reply to: RomeByFire

Obama didn't have to, he shut down the press when convenient. There are laws about free speech , but they don't extend to potential outright lies to hurt someone's reputation or brand for monetary gain.

a reply to: whywhynot

I haven't read it, but wondering the format? All out named interviews? Novelist interpretation mixed with select anonymous quoting or what?

originally posted by: TheLead
a reply to: whywhynot

I haven't read it, but wondering the format? All out named interviews? Novelist interpretation mixed with select anonymous quoting or what?

Good question, that is the most ridiculous part. It is a running narrative like a novel. No citations or footnotes. Very sloppy.

Now when the media finally gets around to vetting it the novel is filled with errors.

a reply to: whywhynot

Here's the rub to libel.

Nonfiction, which may be presented either objectively or subjectively, is traditionally one of the two main divisions of narratives (and, specifically, prose writing),

Nonfiction's specific factual assertions and descriptions may or may not be accurate, and can give either a true or a false account of the subject in question. However, authors of such accounts genuinely believe or claim them to be truthful at the time of their composition or, at least, pose them to a convinced audience as historically or empirically factual. Reporting the beliefs of others in a nonfiction format is not necessarily an endorsement of the ultimate veracity of those beliefs, it is simply saying it is true that people believe them (for such topics as mythology). 

He's not technically associated with his brand at this moment, not a large drop off supporters. What can he claim, emotional damages? To sue for libel you generally have to show it's direct negative impact on your livelihood and that as being the intent.

This seems to be a political move, they know he can't take it much further so the called his bluff and cast suggestion he his hiding something.

a reply to: TheLead

Libel suits never go anywhere. However, if you have a good faith reason to file one and you have a few million to spend you can make the defendant spend an equal amount. Now that’s punishment.

originally posted by: Shakawkaw
If Trump is this worried, you KNOW the things in the book are true. He's panicking.

What a load of crap.

Anyone whos reputation is sullied through outright nonsense would fight it.

What you say is absurd.

originally posted by: neo96
Their case got a whole lot weaker since Wolfe never interviewed anyone.

As long as they put it in the right section.

FICTION.

Naw , Fantasy.
Liberal Fairytale

Tapper: Trump, Wolff are unreliable narrators

This situation is beyond what I previously could have imagined possible.

In one corner, we have President Trump. Can he be believed about anything?

In the other corner, we have Michael Wolff. Can he be believed about anything?

None of that would mean a thing without the publisher of Fire and Fury being ready to take this case to court.

I have to go with the evidence right now and side with Wolff. We'll see what Trump does. This is all in flux of course.


www.youtube.com...