• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Rudy Giuliani Sued by Dominion Voting Systems Over False Election Claims

Ole Giuliani will be very busy dealing with his own lawsuits and being a witness at the senate impeachment trial. Fox News will be extremely busy as well starting Feb 8.
 
They can not sue for what he said a legislative hearings. Those are protected from libel/slander lawsuits. You can say just about anything about anyone and anything in formal government and court proceedings.
However, for the rest they can sue because anyone can - but it is problematical for Dominion. The lawsuit gives Rudy access to every email, every memo, every communication of any kind, all computer software, all computers, all computer records, and all voting machines of Dominion. He also can get all their financial information of any kind in regards to their claimed lost income.
Dominion will have to prove that Rudy KNEW his statements were false, since he did not accuse them of any criminal activity. He does not have to prove his claims. All he has to show is that he believed what he said is true. Dominion will have to prove Rudy knew in fact what he was saying is false. That is not easy to do.
Because this involved politics as the law clearly favors free speech for anything about politics as a necessity of democracy, so it is a high mountain for Dominion to climb, while makes everything about their company subject to discovery. Because of attorney-client privilege, there is little discovery they could do against Rudy in return. The burden of proof is on Dominion not only to prove what he said is false, but to prove he KNEW what he said is false.
I hope Rudy has the funds to completely open up Dominion's books, computers, software, emails, all communications, software, and investors. This could prove to be a terrible mistake by Dominion. Rudy should file a counter lawsuit.
Dominion better be squeaky clean and have no secrets they don't want divulged - nor any of its investors - because Rudy will have discovery rights to everything they got.

Dominion can demonstrate that Giuliani knew his claims were false by demonstrating that he made them without sufficient and credible evidence to support them.
 
Rudy Giuliani Sued by Dominion Voting Systems Over False Election Claims
Dominion Voting Systems filed a defamation lawsuit on Monday against Rudolph W. Giuliani, the lawyer for Donald J. Trump and former mayor of New York City who played a key role in the former president’s monthslong effort to subvert the 2020 election.

The 107-page lawsuit, filed in the Federal District Court in Washington, accuses Mr. Giuliani of carrying out “a viral disinformation campaign about Dominion” made up of “demonstrably false” allegations, in part to enrich himself through legal fees and his podcast.

The suit seeks damages of more than $1.3 billion and is based on more than 50 statements Mr. Giuliani made at legislative hearings, on Twitter, on his podcast and in the conservative news media, where he spun a fictitious narrative of a plot by one of the biggest voting machine manufacturers in the country to flip votes to President Biden.

=========
I think they have a very solid case. Giuliani made lots of claims, such the company was founded in Venezuela to fix elections for Hugo Chávez, and he can't backup those claims with evidence. Meanwhile, the public and customers lost confidence in Dominion hardware and software resulting in loss of good will and monetary damages.

Everyone Trump touches is ultimately hurt.
What a shame that Trump isn't around to protect Giuliani any longer. In fact I guarantee that, when asked about him Trump will answer, 'who, never met him?'.
 
Individuals such as Sidney Powell and Rudy Giuliani inflicted severe damage on Dominion’s brand and reputation with their willful malicious and false claims. They should be held accountable and compensate the company for the injury they knowingly caused.
No, it's not that easy. Dominion has to prove they KNEW what they were saying was false, not just if it was.
The risk seems greater to Dominion. For example, it was claimed the voting machines could not access the Internet, yet many people say they could. If it turns out any Dominion voting machine could go online, who has the winning lawsuit as a counter lawsuit is Powell and Giuliani - as just one example. If any computer tested alters one vote, Powell and Guiliani win - and could win a counter lawsuit. They only have to show one flaw of any kind, while Dominion not only has to prove perfection, but also prove Powell and Guiliani were knowingly lying - rather than relying on false information they were told.
Dominion also has to prove that it was Powell and Guiliani only who harmed them, not the other 100,001 people including on TV, the Internet and radio attacking Dominion. In fact, both Powell and Guiliani could present news commentators attacking Dominion as to why they believed the accusations.
Nothing either one said at any governmental meeting can be sued over. Those are highly protected from litigation.
 
No, it's not that easy. Dominion has to prove they KNEW what they were saying was false, not just if it was.
The risk seems greater to Dominion. For example, it was claimed the voting machines could not access the Internet, yet many people say they could. If it turns out any Dominion voting machine could go online, who has the winning lawsuit as a counter lawsuit is Powell and Giuliani - as just one example. If any computer tested alters one vote, Powell and Guiliani win - and could win a counter lawsuit. They only have to show one flaw of any kind, while Dominion not only has to prove perfection, but also prove Powell and Guiliani were knowingly lying - rather than relying on false information they were told.
Dominion also has to prove that it was Powell and Guiliani only who harmed them, not the other 100,001 people including on TV, the Internet and radio attacking Dominion. In fact, both Powell and Guiliani could present news commentators attacking Dominion as to why they believed the accusations.
Nothing either one said at any governmental meeting can be sued over. Those are highly protected from litigation.
I imagine Dominion's lawyers have considered all the points you make. They wouldn't go to litigation without a solid case. No competent lawyer would-and that's the reason why every case Giuliani brought during the election fiasco was tossed.
 
I would think Biden and the Democratic Party would NOT want this lawsuit. It opens up Dominion to total discovery and investigation. They can't claim confidentiality about anything. Unless their machines and everything about the company is 100% perfect and squeaky clean, it will again raise the question of the integrity of the election.
This may be a very bad idea for Dominion. Anyone can sue anyone. Doesn't mean they win.
 
No, it's not that easy. Dominion has to prove they KNEW what they were saying was false, not just if it was.
The risk seems greater to Dominion. For example, it was claimed the voting machines could not access the Internet, yet many people say they could. If it turns out any Dominion voting machine could go online, who has the winning lawsuit as a counter lawsuit is Powell and Giuliani - as just one example. If any computer tested alters one vote, Powell and Guiliani win - and could win a counter lawsuit. They only have to show one flaw of any kind, while Dominion not only has to prove perfection, but also prove Powell and Guiliani were knowingly lying - rather than relying on false information they were told.
Dominion also has to prove that it was Powell and Guiliani only who harmed them, not the other 100,001 people including on TV, the Internet and radio attacking Dominion. In fact, both Powell and Guiliani could present news commentators attacking Dominion as to why they believed the accusations.
Nothing either one said at any governmental meeting can be sued over. Those are highly protected from litigation.

Not exactly. If Dominion demonstrates that the unsubstantiated claims were made with reckless disregard over their veracity, that would be sufficient. Dominion is not a public figure, so the bar is somewhat lower than if Dominion were a public figure.

Would a reasonable person have made the claims Giuliani did without sufficient and credible evidence? If the answer is “no,” then Dominion will succeed in asserting that Giuliani made his claims with reckless disregard as to whether they were true.

Dominion has a strong case. That’s why a number of media outlets chose to accept the terms available to them in order to avoid litigation.
 
They can not sue for what he said a legislative hearings. Those are protected from libel/slander lawsuits. You can say just about anything about anyone and anything in formal government and court proceedings.
However, for the rest they can sue because anyone can - but it is problematical for Dominion. The lawsuit gives Rudy access to every email, every memo, every communication of any kind, all computer software, all computers, all computer records, and all voting machines of Dominion. He also can get all their financial information of any kind in regards to their claimed lost income.
Dominion will have to prove that Rudy KNEW his statements were false, since he did not accuse them of any criminal activity. He does not have to prove his claims. All he has to show is that he believed what he said is true. Dominion will have to prove Rudy knew in fact what he was saying is false. That is not easy to do.
Because this involved politics as the law clearly favors free speech for anything about politics as a necessity of democracy, so it is a high mountain for Dominion to climb, while makes everything about their company subject to discovery. Because of attorney-client privilege, there is little discovery they could do against Rudy in return. The burden of proof is on Dominion not only to prove what he said is false, but to prove he KNEW what he said is false.
I hope Rudy has the funds to completely open up Dominion's books, computers, software, emails, all communications, software, and investors. This could prove to be a terrible mistake by Dominion. Rudy should file a counter lawsuit.
Dominion better be squeaky clean and have no secrets they don't want divulged - nor any of its investors - because Rudy will have discovery rights to everything they got.

None of what you wrote is true.
 
Not exactly. If Dominion demonstrates that the unsubstantiated claims were made with reckless disregard over their veracity, that would be sufficient. Dominion is not a public figure, so the bar is somewhat lower than if Dominion were a public figure.

Would a reasonable person have made the claims Giuliani did without sufficient and credible evidence? If the answer is “no,” then Dominion will succeed in asserting that Giuliani made his claims with reckless disregard as to whether they were true.

Dominion has a strong case. That’s why a number of media outlets chose to accept the terms available to them in order to avoid litigation.

Hey don, youve been gone for a while, so let me fill you in. No matter what the news is, Joko's role is to push out the Q anon point of view.

Don't spend your time on those posts, let folks like me clean em up..
 
Hey don, youve been gone for a while, so let me fill you in. No matter what the news is, Joko's role is to push out the Q anon point of view.

Don't spend your time on those posts, let folks like me clean em up..

You are making me laugh more and more. Thank you. (y)
 
Rudy Giuliani Sued by Dominion Voting Systems Over False Election Claims
Dominion Voting Systems filed a defamation lawsuit on Monday against Rudolph W. Giuliani, the lawyer for Donald J. Trump and former mayor of New York City who played a key role in the former president’s monthslong effort to subvert the 2020 election.

The 107-page lawsuit, filed in the Federal District Court in Washington, accuses Mr. Giuliani of carrying out “a viral disinformation campaign about Dominion” made up of “demonstrably false” allegations, in part to enrich himself through legal fees and his podcast.

The suit seeks damages of more than $1.3 billion and is based on more than 50 statements Mr. Giuliani made at legislative hearings, on Twitter, on his podcast and in the conservative news media, where he spun a fictitious narrative of a plot by one of the biggest voting machine manufacturers in the country to flip votes to President Biden.

=========
I think they have a very solid case. Giuliani made lots of claims, such the company was founded in Venezuela to fix elections for Hugo Chávez, and he can't backup those claims with evidence. Meanwhile, the public and customers lost confidence in Dominion hardware and software resulting in loss of good will and monetary damages.

Everyone Trump touches is ultimately hurt.
Excellent! This seems like a slam dunk mega win for Dominion. Those 50+ statements he made all over the place will hopefully cause Rudy to have to cough up all of his wealth. I wonder if he'll commit suicide? Trump nor anyone else can help him get out of this. It will be fun to watch Rudy being forced to admit in no uncertain terms that he was lying and that everything he said about Dominion was untrue. Time to disbar Rudy! This is a great lawsuit and we also know that Sidney Powell was also sued. Maybe they can become paralegals together?
 
Let's dissect what you wrote:
They can not sue for what he said a legislative hearings. Those are protected from libel/slander lawsuits. You can say just about anything about anyone and anything in formal government and court proceedings.
What Rudy said at legislative hearings was the least of his problems. He even admitted that the case didn't involve fraud, which is an admission that what he said outside, to the press, etc. was false. That proves that he knew what he was saying were lies.

However, for the rest they can sue because anyone can - but it is problematical for Dominion. The lawsuit gives Rudy access to every email, every memo, every communication of any kind, all computer software, all computers, all computer records, and all voting machines of Dominion. He also can get all their financial information of any kind in regards to their claimed lost income.
No, it doesn't. Discovery doesn't give the defendant unlimited access to the plaintiff's records. Discovery requires the parties to disclose their evidence to each other in advance of the trial, and that's all. Dominion's evidence will be Rudy's dozens of public statements defaming Dominion. Dominion will ask the defendant (Rudy) for evidence that his statements were true. The defendant doesn't have a right to now pour over Dominion's systems to after-the-fact prove his previous statements were true.

Dominion will have to prove that Rudy KNEW his statements were false, since he did not accuse them of any criminal activity. He does not have to prove his claims. All he has to show is that he believed what he said is true. Dominion will have to prove Rudy knew in fact what he was saying is false. That is not easy to do.
First, defamatory statement are statements that are purported to be fact, made to a third party. The standard of defamation is:
  • knew that the statement was false and defamatory, or
  • acted with reckless disregard of the truth or falsity of the statement in making the statement, or
  • acted negligently in failing to ascertain whether the statement was true or false before making it.
Second, it will be easy for Dominion to prove this based upon the statements Rudy made in court and the wild statements he made in public. There is no contest that the statements were false and with reckless disregard of the truth.

Because this involved politics as the law clearly favors free speech for anything about politics as a necessity of democracy, so it is a high mountain for Dominion to climb, while makes everything about their company subject to discovery.
Sorry, Dominion is not a public figure, subject to a higher standard of liable and slander. Moreover, it doesn't open up everything about the company to discovery. As I wrote previously, Rudy doesn't have a right to now pour over Dominion's systems to prove after-the-fact his previous statements were true. Dominion's case will primarily rest with this: Giuliani made false statements that he knew were false, as shown by the fact that he refused to made those same statements before a judge. If Rudy asks for the right to go through Dominion's records and systems, he's admitting that when he made those statements he didn't know that they were true.

Because of attorney-client privilege, there is little discovery they could do against Rudy in return.
Nonsense. What Rudy is being sued for is not what he spoke to his client about in private but what he said in public and on the news. That speech isn't protected by and privilege.

The burden of proof is on Dominion not only to prove what he said is false, but to prove he KNEW what he said is false.
Previously discussed above. It will be easy to prove that it was false and he knew it to be false when he said it.

I hope Rudy has the funds to completely open up Dominion's books, computers, software, emails, all communications, software, and investors. This could prove to be a terrible mistake by Dominion.
As previously stated. Discovery doesn't give Rudy a right to pour over Dominion's documents to after-the-fact prove what he said was true.

Rudy should file a counter lawsuit.
On what basis, they sued me so I'm suing them?

Dominion better be squeaky clean and have no secrets they don't want divulged - nor any of its investors - because Rudy will have discovery rights to everything they got.
As said several times, the suit doesn't give the defendant unlimited discovery.
 
For those who are interested in legal precedent, the following excerpts from Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. are relevant to the Dominion cases against Sidney Powell and Rudy Giuliani:

A publisher or broadcaster of defamatory falsehoods about an individual who is neither a public official nor a public figure may not claim the New York Times protection against liability for defamation on the ground that the defamatory statements concern an issue of public or general interest...

Because private individuals characteristically have less effective opportunities for rebuttal than do public officials and public figures, they are more vulnerable to injury from defamation. Because they have not voluntarily exposed themselves to increased risk of injury from defamatory falsehoods, they are also more deserving of recovery. The state interest in compensating injury to the reputation of private individuals is therefore greater than for public officials and public figures...

The States, however, may not permit recovery of presumed or punitive damages when liability is not based on knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth, and the private defamation plaintiff who establishes liability under a less demanding standard than the New York Times test may recover compensation only for actual injury.


First, Dominion is a corporation. It is not a public figure.

Second, the underlined language provides the threshold: "knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth." Dominion is in a good position to prevail, because Giuliani's claims were baseless (lack of sufficient and credible evidence), a reasonable person would not have reached such conclusions from the lack of evidence available (conspiracy theories don't count as admissible evidence), and, as a lawyer, he should have known the importance of due diligence before making his assertions.
 
Dominion can demonstrate that Giuliani knew his claims were false by demonstrating that he made them without sufficient and credible evidence to support them.
More importantly, the bogus claims he made he never made in court because he knew that he would almost automatically lose his license to practice law. The Dominion suit points this out. He lied to the public but wouldn't dare lie in court PROVING that he knew he was lying. He better open some bank accounts in Switzerland and the Cayman Islands or he'll end up in a studio apartment on Staten Island.
 
No, it's not that easy. Dominion has to prove they KNEW what they were saying was false, not just if it was.
The risk seems greater to Dominion. For example, it was claimed the voting machines could not access the Internet, yet many people say they could. If it turns out any Dominion voting machine could go online, who has the winning lawsuit as a counter lawsuit is Powell and Giuliani - as just one example. If any computer tested alters one vote, Powell and Guiliani win - and could win a counter lawsuit. They only have to show one flaw of any kind, while Dominion not only has to prove perfection, but also prove Powell and Guiliani were knowingly lying - rather than relying on false information they were told.
Dominion also has to prove that it was Powell and Guiliani only who harmed them, not the other 100,001 people including on TV, the Internet and radio attacking Dominion. In fact, both Powell and Guiliani could present news commentators attacking Dominion as to why they believed the accusations.
Nothing either one said at any governmental meeting can be sued over. Those are highly protected from litigation.
Everything you wrote is wrong, everything. He knew he was lying and it's easy to prove by the fact in his court filings he never mentioned Dominion because if he did he would be lying to the court and he would be disbarred and possibly tried for perjury.
 
I would think Biden and the Democratic Party would NOT want this lawsuit. It opens up Dominion to total discovery and investigation. They can't claim confidentiality about anything. Unless their machines and everything about the company is 100% perfect and squeaky clean, it will again raise the question of the integrity of the election.
This may be a very bad idea for Dominion. Anyone can sue anyone. Doesn't mean they win.
Yup, they're squeaky clean. Rudy is a dumbass lawyer. Dominion's lawyers know everything and btw, you don't. Your premise is bullshit. Why must you always take the side of GOP liars? Blind loyalty is a terrible character fault for anyone.
 
How ”disgraced” can he get after these?

View attachment 67315231
A guy who once had the spotlight and began to crave it again as he saw it all slipping away. The craving was so bad he was willing to do anything, and he did. Mix that with a pinch of mental illness, a 1/4 cup of anger over his irrelevance and a pound of advanced age related lack of self awareness and voila!
 
Not exactly. If Dominion demonstrates that the unsubstantiated claims were made with reckless disregard over their veracity, that would be sufficient. Dominion is not a public figure, so the bar is somewhat lower than if Dominion were a public figure.

Would a reasonable person have made the claims Giuliani did without sufficient and credible evidence? If the answer is “no,” then Dominion will succeed in asserting that Giuliani made his claims with reckless disregard as to whether they were true.

Dominion has a strong case. That’s why a number of media outlets chose to accept the terms available to them in order to avoid litigation.

The reasonable person just might wonder why Giuliani continues to make statements about Dominion during his multiple public interviews, yet failed to provide the same claims in any of the lawsuits he filed. Giuliani spread the falsehood that Dominion was owned by Venezuelan communists and corrupting the election for no reason other than to attack Trump.

Another question that Trumpies like Joko seem to be avoiding - Dominion balloting machines were used in many districts that Republicans won. Does anyone with a rational mind think the GOPers would want those districts' machines checked out or would it only be those districts that went for Sleepy Joe and other librul Dems?
 
Dominion can demonstrate that Giuliani knew his claims were false by demonstrating that he made them without sufficient and credible evidence to support them.

That's not enough. They have to prove he didn't believe what he was saying. I do not recall him accusing Dominion of any crime. Dominion will fall into the category of a public figure. So they have to prove he knew what he said was false - not just that he didn't know it was certainly true.

It is more a harassment/starve out lawsuit that could blow up on them, depending how hard Rudy fights back and can afford to do so.
 
Yup, they're squeaky clean. Rudy is a dumbass lawyer. Dominion's lawyers know everything and btw, you don't. Your premise is bullshit. Why must you always take the side of GOP liars? Blind loyalty is a terrible character fault for anyone.

How long have you worked for Dominion to know they are "squeaky clean?" The blind loyalty is yours.
 
and when Rudy retracts every word he said, nota Trumpist here will stop believing Dominion somehow "magically" switched votes.

Trumpism is vile.

Come 2022 virtually every Republican will be declaring:

-2020 was stolen
-Antifa attacked the Capitol.
 
How long have you worked for Dominion to know they are "squeaky clean?" The blind loyalty is yours.
How long have you worked for RudyG or S. Powell to know they have not made false statements regarding Dominion?:LOL:

Let's see how this plays out in the courts. If it gets that far.
 
That's not enough. They have to prove he didn't believe what he was saying. I do not recall him accusing Dominion of any crime. Dominion will fall into the category of a public figure. So they have to prove he knew what he said was false - not just that he didn't know it was certainly true.

It is more a harassment/starve out lawsuit that could blow up on them, depending how hard Rudy fights back and can afford to do so.

As with so much in our modern world - It depends - It depends in this case as to whether or not Dominion Voting Systems is now, or previously when the first accusations were laid, a 'public' or 'private' figure. The standards for charges of 'libel/slander' are very different for the two classes.

If the person defamed is seen as a public figure, the person making the defamatory statement can only be held liable for defamation if he/she knew that the statement was false or if he/she acted with reckless disregard as to the truth or falsity of the statement. In this case with Giuliani making public defamatory statements BUT not using the accusations, buttressed by testimony or physical evidence, in any of the lawsuits he filed - we must wonder. Is Giuliani gullible because he accepted 'information' from poor sources, or is he a liar?

The difference between defamation of a public figure versus defamation of a private person is that a private person who claims defamation only needs to prove that the defamer acted negligently, while a public figure who claims defamation has to prove that the defamer acted intentionally or recklessly. The question then to be answered: Where did the defamer obtain the information which caused them to speak out? Was the source a reliable/trustworthy place/person?
 
I would think Biden and the Democratic Party would NOT want this lawsuit. It opens up Dominion to total discovery and investigation. They can't claim confidentiality about anything. Unless their machines and everything about the company is 100% perfect and squeaky clean, it will again raise the question of the integrity of the election.
This may be a very bad idea for Dominion. Anyone can sue anyone. Doesn't mean they win.

you say this because you assume that Dominion has something to hide.
 
Back
Top Bottom