Discussion: Trump: Calling Sexual Assault Accusers Liars Is 'Hyperbole' Protected By First Amendment
âThe Statementsâall of which were advanced during a heated political campaign to convince the public to vote for Mr. Trump, and many of which were published via Twitterâconstitute non-actionable rhetoric and hyperbole that is protected by the First Amendment,â the filing reads.
So, basically admitting Trump lied and slandered these women while excusing it by saying it was political rhetoric.
Trumpâs reign has been hyperbolic and should be dismissed.
Non-lawyer speculation here. Are Trumpâs lawyers planning to argue that state criminal or civil charges cannot be brought against a sitting President?
Right now Trump has no cover if and when Scheiderman lowers the boom on Trump.
Whether such a move could have any justification isnât my question, but simply whether this could be a future move.
published via Twitterâconstitute non-actionable rhetoric and hyperbole
Interesting take on TwitterâŚ
Iâd like another example of campaign hyperbole from a presidential candidate or any candidate directed at an individual person unconnected to politics or any political issue.
Theyâre not preparing to. They explicitly made that argument in another section of this brief. Theyâre bending dicta in Clinton v. Jones past the breaking point to make that argument supplemented by several paragraphs of harrumphing and âbecause reasons.â
And yes, you have probably identified the more strategically significant part, because the part highlighted in this article, about the First Amendment, is just this side of sanctionably ridiculous.
In the case of the âComey tapes,â the White House responded to Congressional investigators by putting one of Trumpâs tweets on WH letterhead: http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/23/politics/white-house-comey-tapes-trump-tweet/index.html
So, which is it - are Trumpâs tweets ânon-actionable and hyperbole,â or are they official communications from the President?
Then the blogger being sued by Malaria for calling her a whore should be protected as well.
In other words, he was delivering fake news as a candidate and now as President.
This is actually one of his major problems as President. No one takes him seriously or ever feels comfortable with any of his statements because the ground is always shifting. Judges, his own staff, other leaders⌠Itâs like trying to read tea leaves when a bag was used
Didnât Paula Jones claim that Bill Clinton had a bent dicta?
"constitute non-actionable rhetoric and hyperbole that is protected by the First Amendment,â
So Trump is hiding behind the First Amendment to smear an accuserâŚwhile simultaneously suggesting that the same First Amendment be modified or abrogated to prevent people from criticizing him:
KARL: I want to ask you about two things the President has said on related issues. First of all, there was what he said about opening up the libel laws. Tweeting âthe failing New York Times has disgraced the media world. Gotten me wrong for two solid years. Change the libel laws?â That would require, as I understand it, a constitutional amendment. Is he really going to pursue that? Is that something he wants to pursue?
PRIEBUS: I think itâs something that weâve looked at. How that gets executed or whether that goes anywhere is a different story. But when you have articles out there that have no basis or fact and weâre sitting here on 24/7 cable companies writing stories about constant contacts with Russia and all these other mattersâ
KARL: So you think the President should be able to sue the New York Times for stories he doesnât like?
PRIEBUS: Hereâs what I think. I think that newspapers and news agencies need to be more responsible with how they report the news. I am so tired.
KARL: I donât think anybody would disagree with that. Itâs about whether or not the President should have a right to sue them.
PRIEBUS: And I already answered the question. I said this is something that is being looked at. But itâs something that as far as how it gets executed, where we go with it, thatâs another issue.
Calling Trump, a public figure of ill repute, an evil fat pig without any decency or morality, despite the fact that it is not hyperbole or rhetoric,would be protected speech under the First Amendment. Calling someone , who accused this evil fat pig of sexual assault, " a liar", and then explaining it was hyperbole and/or rhetoric, leads me to believe that Trump is acknowledging the truthfulness of the charges made by Zervos.
Trump claims his lies are just âhyperboleâ.
Good one.
Well, âwhoreâ was kind of harsh.
Given that itâs Melanoma, it should be âFirst Lady of the Nightâ. Or âPennsylvania Avenue Walkerâ, Or âDigger of GoldââŚ
Well, given how tight Trump is, I can tell you she was a âcheap dateâ
What.a loser argument. Sad.
Just another way Europe is far more advanced than the US.
They usually bounce their leaders when they get caught in a sex scandal. No groping around for themâŚ
Or they send their dignitaries to the US when they get the urge to beat up prostitutes.
Absolutely
That gang of accusers is also calling the Grabber in Chief a liar and that is the essence of a court battle.
Because they (the Trumpers) are trying to work the refs ahead of the trial proves that they fear the facts and are already working to undermine the foundation of the case.
His Presidency has been so bad that it has actually overshadowed the fact that the POTUS is a sexual deviant and predator.
The ladies havenât forgotten and the case is moving forward.
As Dipshit Donaldâs lawyers argue for his rights, they also argue for the rights of his victims. Thatâs known as, smooth lawyering!
Guy that threatens to sue everyone that criticizes or makes fun of him hides behind the First Amendment. Got it.