Good arguments, lawyers for Sidney Powell. Except for the fact that one of the most basic principles in the interpretation of pleadings is that a plaintiff's allegations have to be taken as true at first instance, which is why defendants have to at least meet the claim with their own pleadings in defence.
So if she's saying now that her previous lawsuits were bullshit made-up fairyland Nazi stuff, then can't she be found in contempt for filing them in the first place? Or face legal consequences for signing her name to said bullshit made-up fairyland Nazi stuff?
So if "...reasonable people would not believe the statements as fact..." and "...she believed the allegations then and she believes them now..." then by the transitive property her own counsel is saying Powell is somehow mentally defective, or am I missing something?
This sentient scraping from a septic tank (and actually, yes, I think I believe that to be fact rather than political hyperbole) was not aiming her crazed claims at reasonable people she knew wouldn't believe her. She was aiming them at an audience of Trump-supporting, conspiracy-theory-believing fools and fanatics she knew WOULD believe her. And possibly commit violent acts because of that belief. She was well aware of it and did not care.
I think she's saying she's an unreasonable person.
They got a Trump-appointed judge who was ignorant of the law. Powell may not be so lucky.
Ok. That makes sense. Thanks,
yeah, buts that's never going to happen
Good arguments, lawyers for Sidney Powell. Except for the fact that one of the most basic principles in the interpretation of pleadings is that a plaintiff's allegations have to be taken as true at first instance, which is why defendants have to at least meet the claim with their own pleadings in defence.
yep
Oh, let's go with Tiajuana donkey show. I can envision Sidney in that without needing brain bleach.
So if she's saying now that her previous lawsuits were bullshit made-up fairyland Nazi stuff, then can't she be found in contempt for filing them in the first place? Or face legal consequences for signing her name to said bullshit made-up fairyland Nazi stuff?
To extrapolate a little, is she arguing that the people who stormed the capital were not "reasonable people?"
Can, and must.
Corporations aren't full people yet. As such, the "public figure" body of law should not apply.
So if "...reasonable people would not believe the statements as fact..." and "...she believed the allegations then and she believes them now..." then by the transitive property her own counsel is saying Powell is somehow mentally defective, or am I missing something?
I can't tell if she's asking to be disbarred or not. does the Kraken have its own state bar?
Oh, yeah, the judge is going to LOVE Powell's argument. She'd be better off claiming diminished mental capacity -- at least that would be true.
So when is Netflix going to drop the limited series based on the debacle that is Sidney Powell?
This sentient scraping from a septic tank (and actually, yes, I think I believe that to be fact rather than political hyperbole) was not aiming her crazed claims at reasonable people she knew wouldn't believe her. She was aiming them at an audience of Trump-supporting, conspiracy-theory-believing fools and fanatics she knew WOULD believe her. And possibly commit violent acts because of that belief. She was well aware of it and did not care.
This is a insanity plea, isnt it? Or am I reading something wrong?