Quote (thesnipa @ Mar 23 2021 01:03pm)

the fact that she'd want it dismissed at all is more relevant than the move, especially as i dont care about the move. move it to texas, i could care less. i have reasons i think that's silly and funny, but i dont care.

again tho, for maybe the 10th time, i havent quoted the article even once. i did post it, but havent quoted it, at all. i have quoted the motion tho, maybe 6 times or so.

anyways, pm'd a mod, you're clearly trolling now. no surprise, its all u have.

Quote (TiStuff @ Mar 23 2021 03:05pm)

ok when your ready make your argument with the court document and not the TV document

Quote

Both the United States and Colorado Supreme Courts also recognize that, in order to be
actionable, a statement must be capable of being proven true or false. “[A] statement of opinion
relating to matters of public concern which does not contain a provably false factual connotation,
or which cannot reasonably [be] interpreted as stating actual facts about an individual, continues
to receive full constitutional protection.” Keohane v. Stewart, 882 P.2d 1293, 1299 (Colo. 1994)
(quoting Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co., 497 U.S. 1, 18, 20 (1990)) (internal quotes and citations
omitted).
In Keohane, the Colorado Supreme Court identified a two-step inquiry to determine
whether a statement is protected. The first is whether the statement is “sufficiently factual to be
susceptible of being proved true or false.”

Quote (thesnipa @ Mar 23 2021 01:20pm)

translation: powell is claiming that she cant be sued for defamation, because her statements are mere opinion, and cant be proven true or false. ok, so the package of evidence she presented, and subsequently presented in actual court cases in several states, cant be verified factually, and are just opinions for people to draw their own conclusions from.

her words, not mine.

Quote (TiStuff @ Mar 23 2021 03:49pm)

even if true it just sounds like maneuvering and not any kind of admission.

Quote (thesnipa @ Mar 23 2021 01:56pm)

she's literally saying she can't be sued for defamation because her public and in court releases of information dont fit the criteria because they're not verifiable. its a literal blocked out section of her motion. she says it should be dismissed because the claims against her (that her evidence is fake and defamation) can't be proven true or false. and a few months back she said the case was so strong that the US supreme court should overturn the election results based on her case.

translation:

2 months ago: this case is so strong the USSC needs to overturn the election, Trump clearly won.

Today: it is just my opinion that readers can draw their own conclusions from, nothing i said can be proven true or false.


glad u dropped the act tho, good job buddy.

Quote (TiStuff @ Mar 23 2021 03:59pm)

they should brought it to court then they could of got her huh?

ya sure its an act

Quote (thesnipa @ Mar 23 2021 02:02pm)

thats literally what they're doing now.

powell tried to bring it to court, and was thrown out because her evidence wasnt strong enough for a case, now they're suing her because she had such a flimsy case but spouted off on news networks saying her case was rock solid and making claims that she couldnt prove.

so you're right i guess lol, u just clearly dont know whats going on.

Quote (TiStuff @ Mar 23 2021 04:09pm)

to bad she wasnt in court the first time huh then they could of really counter sued her. Why didnt the go after her then? why now? you know evidence seems to weaken over time i betting alot of stuff been cleaned up. you cant see its sketchy?

you remember the holocaust in ww2? nobody denied it then. but give it some time and what happens?

Quote (thesnipa @ Mar 23 2021 02:55pm)

The first case was criminal u can't counter sure in criminal court

You're lost

Quote (TiStuff @ Mar 23 2021 05:00pm)

immune to legal action huh?