• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Official 2020 Republican National Convention Thread

The idea of a substantial settlement when no one can articulate a basis for damages is a fantasy in my opinion. Especially when literally zero discovery has been conducted. I'm not a defamation expert, but I've been involved in some pretty significant civil cases and this runs contrary to everything I have ever seen.
 
Some of my Trumpier facebook acquaintances loved that Sandmann video. Apparently, he Set the Internet on FIRE when he put on the MAGA hat at the end. Meanwhile, Dems trying to play 4d Chess are parsing how pleasant and warm Melania's speech was.
 
I can feel you beaming with pride through the computer. You and that kid should hang on the boat and get some pussy

On DADDY's BOAT??!! I love this idea

pWvVXCZ.gif
 
I presume Pilch wouldn't post what he did without a pretty good source. But its not going to be publicly available.

I have no idea if his source is any better or worse than RJ's re: Manning's buyout.
 
I presume Pilch wouldn't post what he did without a pretty good source. But its not going to be publicly available.

I have no idea if his source is any better or worse than RJ's re: Manning's buyout.

This. Pilch knows, bros. Or Pilch knows bros that knows, bros. Either way, his info is credible, unfortunately.
 
Sure i imagine the same. I also don’t work for multi billion dollar media companies who have broader image concerns than how much it costs to settle a suit with random kid suing them. That said defamation and libel are very difficult to prove and I don’t know that there’s going to be any evidence on the record preventing a grant of summary judgment here. I would’ve been pretty surprised to see any of these cases ever reaching a jury. For essentially the reasons laid out by the judge in dismissing all of the initial claims before reversing course on three remaining claims a little later.
 
The idea of a substantial settlement when no one can articulate a basis for damages is a fantasy in my opinion. Especially when literally zero discovery has been conducted. I'm not a defamation expert, but I've been involved in some pretty significant civil cases and this runs contrary to everything I have ever seen.

If it is true, WaPo and CNN have some shitty-ass lawyers.
 
If it is true, WaPo and CNN have some shitty-ass lawyers.

Or, so much money that they can throw this turd 9 million and it doesn't matter. It is not hard to believe that they made more off the add sales on Sandmann related articles and tv segments than $9 million.
 
Or, so much money that they can throw this turd 9 million and it doesn't matter. It is not hard to believe that they made more off the add sales on Sandmann related articles and tv segments than $9 million.

Yep, this is probably true, I just think if what Pilchard says is true, it was a bad decision that has backfired. Their lawyers probably told them what the worst case scenario is with a podunk KY jury and judge, what their fees will be through trial and appeal, and the higher ups made effectively a cost of defense decision based on that. It's a problem for a media company, though, because you'll see more of these types of cases filed when you don't fight them, even if they are obviously BS.
 
These giant media conglomerates would have liability insurance for such situations. The decision would be up to them.
 
Back
Top