• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Defamation lawyer's immunity

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Litigator22

Active Member
Anyone interested in commenting on this recent pronouncement on the laws of defamation; curtsey of Rudy Giuliani (presently a New York practicing attorney.) (Some paraphrasing.)

"The First Amendment affords a lawyer total immunity from legal reprisal due to the uttering and causing to be published false defamatory statements impeaching the reputation of any person or entity; provided, that it is done in the course of vigorously defending his client."
_____________________________________

(Otherwise, Rudy might say that his mouth was "zip tied".)
___________________________________

Trivia:
Reporter: Mr. Giuliani, have you been doing something with your hair again?
Rudy: (Visibly agitated) What do you mean something? What do you mean again?
Reporter: (Hesitantly) I don't know . . . it just seems to look better . . . in places
.
 


quincy

Senior Member
Anyone interested in commenting on this recent pronouncement on the laws of defamation; curtsey of Rudy Giuliani (presently a New York practicing attorney.) (Some paraphrasing.)

"The First Amendment affords a lawyer total immunity from legal reprisal due to the uttering and causing to be published false defamatory statements impeaching the reputation of any person or entity; provided, that it is done in the course of vigorously defending his client."
_____________________________________

(Otherwise, Rudy might say that his mouth was "zip tied".)
___________________________________

Trivia:
Reporter: Mr. Giuliani, have you been doing something with your hair again?
Rudy: (Visibly agitated) What do you mean something? What do you mean again?
Reporter: (Hesitantly) I don't know . . . it just seems to look better . . . in places
.
My comment: It is a rubbish defense.
 

Ohiogal

Queen Bee
Anyone interested in commenting on this recent pronouncement on the laws of defamation; curtsey of Rudy Giuliani (presently a New York practicing attorney.) (Some paraphrasing.)

"The First Amendment affords a lawyer total immunity from legal reprisal due to the uttering and causing to be published false defamatory statements impeaching the reputation of any person or entity; provided, that it is done in the course of vigorously defending his client."
_____________________________________

(Otherwise, Rudy might say that his mouth was "zip tied".)
___________________________________

Trivia:
Reporter: Mr. Giuliani, have you been doing something with your hair again?
Rudy: (Visibly agitated) What do you mean something? What do you mean again?
Reporter: (Hesitantly) I don't know . . . it just seems to look better . . . in places
.
Rudy has issues. And I do like the typo you made.
 

quincy

Senior Member
The defamation suits filed by Dominion (voting system used by many states in the presidential election) are over (false) claims made by Giuliani and Sidney Powell and “the Pillow Guy” and Trump (and others) that the voting systems were rigged so that Biden would win.

No election irregularities were found to exist, and nothing was found amiss with the Dominion machines, as determined by judges (some of whom were Trump installed) and the U.S. Supreme Court, in any of the 64 cases that were filed by Trump’s attorneys.

The current $1.3bn defamation suits filed against Powell and Giuliani are not the only ones Dominion plans to file - and Dominion has not ruled out suing Trump.

Neither a First Amendment defense nor a defense claiming absolute privilege are likely to succeed. No false claims about Dominion were made in the court filings. The false claims were made in online postings, in TV interviews, in public appearances.
 
Last edited:

Redemptionman1

Active Member
Yeah since when is it a good idea to have any election tabulation software in any election process in the United States especially something open to obvious manipulation and located on servers outside the USA sovereign borders? I believe in elections with valid state issued IDs held to only USA born citizens, period. Regardless of Trump and you all hatred for him. This is still America.

First and Second Amendments of the Constitutional Rights of the United States include the freedom of speech and the right to bare arms. It specifically states that neither of these rights shall be infringed upon. I realize what you all mainly want and I have my escape plan.
 
Last edited:

Taxing Matters

Overtaxed Member
Yeah since when is it a good idea to have any election tabulation software in any election process in the United States especially something open to obvious manipulation and located on servers outside the USA sovereign borders? I believe in elections with valid state issued IDs held to only USA born citizens, period.
So you reject technology just because there is a prospect that some software might be hacked at some point? You do realize that paper ballots are also subject to fraud too, right?

And you think only American born citizens should be allowed to vote? Naturalized citizens are every bit as much a citizen as those born here, and they have the right to vote, too. Lots of our founders would not have have been able to vote under your idea because, surprise, a lot of them were not born in what is now America, either.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top