Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

The Republican Election Challenges

v991icq8p5761.png
 

The Washington Post has identified a secret witness in filings protesting the presidential election —who was presented by pro-Trump attorney Sidney Powell as a former intelligence contractor — as a pro-Trump podcaster.

The Post identified the witness as pro-Trump podcaster Terpsichore Maras-Lindeman.

In the affidavit, the witness identifies herself as a former “private contractor with experience gathering and analyzing foreign intelligence.” She claimed that from 1999 to 2014 she delegated tasks to contractors in the U.S. and in foreign countries.


The Post said it identified the witness as Maras-Lindeman by matching parts of her affidavit with a 2019 blog post.

Powell in legal filings had claimed that the witness’s identity had to be kept secret to protect her “reputation, professional career and personal safety.”

Maras-Lindeman confirmed to the outlet that she authored the affidavit, telling the Post that “this is everybody’s duty” and that the results of the election are “just not fair.”

Federal judges have rejected the complaints that Powell has filed in Wisconsin and Arizona targeting the election results that include Maras-Lindeman’s affidavit.
 
I wonder if they know any good lawyers.
Trump can tell ceaseless outrageous lies and apparently face no consequences over doing so but it's his superpower everyone else has to pay the piper sooner or later. It continues to amaze me how many people are prepared to ruin their careers and even their own lives in service to a petty demagogue who wouldn't do the same and will abandon them without a thought.
 


The QAnon-peddling attorney took things to a whole new level on Wednesday night, however, when he decided to take to Twitter and toss out a series of dangerously unhinged accusations





After painting Roberts as a murderous pedophile, the far-right attorney went further down the QAnon rabbit hole by bringing up deceased sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, suggesting the chief justice was mixed up in trafficking children and apparently hinting that he may have had Epstein killed.


 












Whichever classes Roberts may have skipped, I'm pretty sure he's going to know quite a few competent lawyers who are very nicely skilled up on defamation, and probably also the use of insanity defences to try and avoid the consequences...
 
Although defamation is very difficult to prove in the US, different from the UK where the defendant has to prove the statement's true, and here that the judge has suffered harm from it.

The liability to prove the statement made is defamatory and untrue lies upon the plaintiff. The plaintiff has to prove that the statement was made and that the statement shall be published, or heard by a person other than the person being defamed. The statement made should be false and untrue and must cause injury to the person being defamed


I'm not sure how you'd actually prove you didn't kill Epstein, and the rest.
 
Although defamation is very difficult to prove in the US, different from the UK where the defendant has to prove the statement's true, and here that the judge has suffered harm from it.




I'm not sure how you'd actually prove you didn't kill Epstein, and the rest.
Well, linking him with the folk devil of "paedophilia" pretty much maximises the potential harm. OTOH, Lin Woods' complete and total lack of credibility suggests that few are likely to take his claims seriously...though it is more likely to be the idiots who think kidnapping governors who are going to believe it.

I think the likeliest outcome will be Woods' progressive disbarment from every court in the US.
 
Well, linking him with the folk devil of "paedophilia" pretty much maximises the potential harm. OTOH, Lin Woods' complete and total lack of credibility suggests that few are likely to take his claims seriously...though it is more likely to be the idiots who think kidnapping governors who are going to believe it.

I think the likeliest outcome will be Woods' progressive disbarment from every court in the US.

I did also see that if someone goes round making preposterous accusations then courts don't look favourably on it along the lines of Crying Wolf.
 
Lin Woods' complete and total lack of credibility suggests that few are likely to take his claims seriously

Lin Woods does have some brief claims to fame - he represented Richard Jewell in his civil suits over allegations of his guilt, and represented the Ramseys in asserting...err..their innocence. You are correct, though, that his current behaviour is completely and totally lacking in credibility

I think the likeliest outcome will be Woods' progressive disbarment from every court in the US.
US Bar associations are generally reluctant to disbar members. For example, despite a 25 year career of filing not merely frivolous, but ridiculous suits, and even having been found to have inappropriately touched his kids, Larry Klayman still hasn't been disbarred, although he's currently serving a suspension.

It'd be unusual for a Supreme Court judge to sue for defamation, but Woods appears to be daring Justice Roberts to sue him over his pedophilia claims. If Roberts does, he appears to have a high likelihood of success, unless Woods can evidence his outlandish claims, for example, producing a non-dead Jeffrey Epstein to back him up.

Even if neither of the above prove to be the end of his career, he's at the point where only people who share his distorted world view will hire him. It's a small market, with a lot of grifters. His day is over.
 
'coming soon, on netflx - the sequel to reality romantic horror blockbuster mel & dons money hit it off, stay tuned for the final season:

ep1: mel hits the bottle
ep2: mel hits the pipe
ep3: mel hits the spike
ep4: mel hits the bong
ep5: mel hits rock bottom
ep6: mel hits the road
ep7: mel hits don with divorce lawsuit
ep8: mel hits pay dirt
 
I get the feeling that post-White House, she'll hit the road at the first opportunity.

I've listened to the "secret recordings" an ex-friend made of their conversations. What I've heard suggests that she and Trump are pretty similar people. They're both very transactional in their personal relationships, and she doesn't seem to have much feeling for anyone other than herself and her son. Besides, why ditch the big payoff when she's so close to a payday? He's elderly and eats crap. He's not going to last forever.
 
I've listened to the "secret recordings" an ex-friend made of their conversations. What I've heard suggests that she and Trump are pretty similar people. They're both very transactional in their personal relationships, and she doesn't seem to have much feeling for anyone other than herself and her son. Besides, why ditch the big payoff when she's so close to a payday? He's elderly and eats crap. He's not going to last forever.
Very true, but he clearly has lasted a lot longer than she expected him to. Perhaps she's taking every chance to raise his blood pressure by endlessly dropping the election into the conversation.
 
The lawyer on that call with Trump has been made to quit:


Cleta Mitchell, the prominent Republican attorney who has been advising Donald Trump in his efforts to overturn the US presidential election, has resigned from her law firm, the Washington Post reports.

Mitchell’s role in the president’s attempts to subvert democracy was revealed on Sunday, when the Washington Post published a recording of an hour-long call during which Trump, aided by Mitchell, attempted to pressure the Georgia Secretary of State to change the outcome of that state’s vote.

Mitchell’s law firm, Foley & Lardner, issued a statement Monday expressing concern about Mitchell’s participation in the phone call, noting that the firm had “made a policy decision not to take on any representation of any party in connection with matters related to the presidential election results” in November.
 
Whichever classes Roberts may have skipped, I'm pretty sure he's going to know quite a few competent lawyers who are very nicely skilled up on defamation, and probably also the use of insanity defences to try and avoid the consequences...
I really can't understand why Roberts hasn't already gone DefConOne with lawsuits. I would, were I he.
 
Back
Top Bottom