6 ms·

Similarly, if I understand it, in the recent Sidney Powell filing and partial representations thereof. Out of a 60(?) page filing, presumably offering point aft

by a9h74j 6y ago

Similarly, if I understand it, in the recent Sidney Powell filing and partial representations thereof. Out of a 60(?) page filing, presumably offering point after point after point after point, one point apparently offers [rhetorical hyperbole] for consideration. And I hear this on the progressive radio I follow as [the fact of] "Powell's admission that nothing she said is to be taken seriously."

Natsu 6y ago
This happens every single time someone argues rhetorical hyperbole. I use it as a filter to know who not to take seriously on any legal analysis.
vmh1928 6y ago
Here's the motion to dismiss. Point after point after point but none of them, that I saw, attempted to say that what Powell said about Dominion was true. https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/20519858/3-22-21-sidney-powell-defending-the-republic-motion-to-dismiss-dominion.pdf https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/20519858/3-22-21-...
- Natsu 6y ago
  > none of them, that I saw, attempted to say that what Powell said about Dominion was true. She argued that her beliefs were based on disclosed facts (sworn depositions by others), which is a credible defense against defamation. Inasmuch as you're claiming that she doesn't argue truth as a defense, that's appears to be true based on skimming this brief, but it's also quite common simply because that puts the burden of proof on you and it's much, much easier to argue most other defenses. So even when a person truly believes that they're right, they often won't argue this point in court, especially not on a contentious political topic. So failing to argue that point isn't quite the indicator one might normally assume it should be, even if it does tend to appear in slam dunk cases. N.B. I don't think her allegations here are actually true.

6 ms·

Similarly, if I understand it, in the recent Sidney Powell filing and partial representations thereof. Out of a 60(?) page filing, presumably offering point aft

by a9h74j 6y ago

Natsu 6y ago
This happens every single time someone argues rhetorical hyperbole. I use it as a filter to know who not to take seriously on any legal analysis.
vmh1928 6y ago
Here's the motion to dismiss. Point after point after point but none of them, that I saw, attempted to say that what Powell said about Dominion was true. https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/20519858/3-22-21-sidney-powell-defending-the-republic-motion-to-dismiss-dominion.pdf https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/20519858/3-22-21-...
- Natsu 6y ago
  > none of them, that I saw, attempted to say that what Powell said about Dominion was true. She argued that her beliefs were based on disclosed facts (sworn depositions by others), which is a credible defense against defamation. Inasmuch as you're claiming that she doesn't argue truth as a defense, that's appears to be true based on skimming this brief, but it's also quite common simply because that puts the burden of proof on you and it's much, much easier to argue most other defenses. So even when a person truly believes that they're right, they often won't argue this point in court, especially not on a contentious political topic. So failing to argue that point isn't quite the indicator one might normally assume it should be, even if it does tend to appear in slam dunk cases. N.B. I don't think her allegations here are actually true.