Tulsi Gabbard sues Hillary Clinton for $50M, claims defamation over 'Russian asset' remark

[Jimmy Higgins]

Pretty sure Hillary could reduce Tulsi to tears and wetting her pants just by giving her a hard stare. Or challenging her to a duel by facts/information.

This cult of personality around Hillary is really baffling to me. So now she is not only "the most qualified candidate ever" when she wasn't even the most qualified candidate in her race, but she can reduce army officers who were deployed in Iraq to tears with a mere look. Quite a cult of personality. Stalin would be jealous.

Hahahahahahaha.


Hillary was never my first choice as candidate. She was my choice over Trump or anyone in the GOP field that election or any other candidate that year.

Yeah, one doesn't need to particularly think she is great to be able to appreciate her determination and how calculating she is and rather indestructible she can be. After all the GOP threw at her over 30 years, still won the popular vote for President, losing the EC by a handful of counties. She sat before a remarkably partisan and bitter Congressional Panel before the 2016 election, that wanted to destroy her... and she testified for over 8 hours and didn't bat an eyelid.

Sure. the woman has no principles, but I think she is probably more forthcoming than Gabbard... who appears to be less forthcoming than Bill Belichick.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

Pretty sure Hillary could reduce Tulsi to tears and wetting her pants just by giving her a hard stare. Or challenging her to a duel by facts/information.

This cult of personality around Hillary is really baffling to me.

Stop watching Fox news and unbaffle.

So now she is not only "the most qualified candidate ever" when she wasn't even the most qualified candidate in her race

She won by almost three million votes (ten million when you include express preference of voters who ended up not voting for non-partisan reasons) in the third largest raw vote tally in US history, beating every single white male to have previously run for and hold the office.

And she didn't need to cheat to get there.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

This is like saying that Kasparov's opponent won in chess because he had more pieces on the board. The game rules are to win by checkmate, not have more pieces on the board. You might have to sacrifice an important piece to win and if you put resources into winning it shouldn't count against you. While Trump is a terrible person he still played for checkmate, not the number of voters in the country.

 

[Elixir]

Imagine the two dueling. I think that TG would likely win: she's younger and she has done military service.

Hilary Clinton will probably survive Armageddon.

So, do you figure the human race will be re-seeded by Hillary and Willy Nelson, or Hillary and Keith Richards?

 

[Jarhyn]

Tulsi better go for a headshot if they do end up dueling with pistols... Anything that can live without a soul generally isn't going to go down so easily. Look at Cheney, motherfucker took a shotgun and kept ticking!

 

[ZiprHead]

It will be summarily dismissed. Not only did she not name Gabbard, the comment wasn't defamatory against her if she had. At best, it was defamatory against Russia--accusing them of having an agenda in our politics--which has already been proven true.

Not to mention it's very hard to sue celebrities. What was said has to be proven false and that there was malice as the reason for saying it.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Tulsi better go for a headshot if they do end up dueling with pistols... Anything that can live without a soul generally isn't going to go down so easily. Look at Cheney, motherfucker took a shotgun and kept ticking!

Cheney's the one who shot someone. But in your defense, he has no heart.

 

[ZiprHead]

Tulsi better go for a headshot if they do end up dueling with pistols... Anything that can live without a soul generally isn't going to go down so easily. Look at Cheney, motherfucker took a shotgun and kept ticking!

I think you've got that wrong. Cheney shot someone else in the face.

 

[Elixir]

Hillary could argue that being called a Russian tool is in fact a YUUUUGE benefit, citing the incredible terrific amazing success of Most Stable Genius Trump, and counter-sue because she never received any reciprocal benefit.

 

[Toni]

Tulsi better go for a headshot if they do end up dueling with pistols... Anything that can live without a soul generally isn't going to go down so easily. Look at Cheney, motherfucker took a shotgun and kept ticking!

I would wager that Hillary has a soul much less tarnished than Tulsi’s.

And I really appreciate the vitriole heaved at Hillary for being associated with bad men, including one I’ll wager most of you voted for and would do so again. But knowing Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein is enough to disqualify her in your opinion. I’d be shocked if Bernie didn’t have a relationship with Bill, Donald, and ole Jeff. And worse.

 

[J842P]

I’d be shocked if Bernie didn’t have a relationship with Bill, Donald, and ole Jeff. And worse.

Why? Why would Bernie have a relationship with either Donald Trump or Jeffery Epstein? Maybe Bill Clinton, but I don't think he even had much of that aside from being in the House during Bill Clinton's tenure.

And what is it that you don't like about Tulsi?

 

[laughing dog]

I think she was probably talking about Gabbard and that Gabbard did somewhat suffer as a result of the remark...barring some discovery info where my conclusions may differ later.

...and the lawsuit is frivolous.

This is politics. Grow a thicker skin. If there is some fair amount, maybe $500K, $50K, or $5K or something. $50M is orders of magnitude too large.

I read allegations of Gabbard being a Russian asset long before Hillary's comments. I'd guess that Hillary did as well. In any case, Gabbard wasn't mentioned nor was she alluded to in terms that left no guess as to who the asset was supposed to be---unless she's actually a Russian asset.

I think people can make inferences without explicit mentions.

If my understanding is correct, people's inferences are not the responsibility of the speaker of the comment.

 

[lpetrich]

Imagine the two dueling. I think that TG would likely win: she's younger and she has done military service.

(snipped for brevity)

But I think you are right. Hillary would get massacred. Tulsi vs. AOC would be a fairer fight. Military training vs. Bronx upbringing.

I imagine TG challenging AOC to a duel by saying "Are you saying that I was shirking my job when I voted 'present' on impeaching Trump?"

AOC might respond "Yes. You yourself said that you consider Trump guilty of wrongdoing. What does a partisan split on this issue have to do with that?"

As to who is more physically fit, TG has released pictures and video of herself doing workouts, and AOC will find it hard to compete with that. However, she lugged big buckets filled with ice in her bartender years, and she once stepped onto a table to deliver a speech.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

I think people can make inferences without explicit mentions.

If my understanding is correct, people's inferences are not the responsibility of the speaker of the comment.

The inference appears to be correct. The campaign manager in response to whether it was Gabbard responded, "if the nesting doll fits." It seems like a reasonable inference that it affirms Gabbard is the one in question.

He then seemed to clarify why it was correct. However, after the Democratic Party went after Clinton for this divisiveness he backed away from the comment.

At least according to CNN which seems to try to hype up feuds between Democrats for ratings. They, then, cause division in the Party themselves.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/18/politics/hillary-clinton-tulsi-gabbard/index.html

 

[laughing dog]

I think people can make inferences without explicit mentions.

If my understanding is correct, people's inferences are not the responsibility of the speaker of the comment.

The inference appears to be correct. The campaign manager in response to whether it was Gabbard responded, "if the nesting doll fits." It seems like a reasonable inference that it affirms Gabbard is the one in question.

Someone else cannot confirm the implicit meaning. Moreover, Gabbard is a public figure and she most also prove malice on the part of the speaker.

HRC could have meant any of the candidates - she did not mention Gabbard. Gabbard is hurting herself with this pointless lawsuit. Most people had forgotten about Gabbard, and now she is saying that people were inferring she was a Russian asset. Now, why would anyone make that inference and why would Gabbard want to remind people of that?

 

[hurtinbuckaroo]

Imagine the two dueling. I think that TG would likely win: she's younger and she has done military service.

Hilary Clinton will probably survive Armageddon.

So, do you figure the human race will be re-seeded by Hillary and Willy Nelson, or Hillary and Keith Richards?

Based on what I saw last night, I’m going to say John Wick.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Truth is a defense in any defamation suit, and the definition of "Russian Asset" is "someone with an ideology different from Hillary's ideology".

 

[ZiprHead]

Truth is a defense in any defamation suit, and the definition of "Russian Asset" is "someone with an ideology different from Hillary's ideology".

TULSI GABBARD IS BEING USED BY THE RUSSIANS, AND TO A FORMER US DOUBLE AGENT, THE EVIDENCE IS CLEAR

Russian web trolls boo Biden, often boost Gabbard, report finds

Here’s Exactly How Much Russian Media Loves Tulsi Gabbard — and Hates Biden

There's your truth.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

Truth is a defense in any defamation suit, and the definition of "Russian Asset" is "someone with an ideology different from Hillary's ideology".

No, the definition of "Russian Asset" is anything the Russians can use or consider to be an asset.

Does no one on the right know what the word "asset" means?

Oh, Wolverines. Where are you when we actually need you?

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Truth is a defense in any defamation suit, and the definition of "Russian Asset" is "someone with an ideology different from Hillary's ideology".

No, the definition of "Russian Asset" is anything the Russians can use or consider to be an asset.

And according to Hillary, anyone or anything that opposes Hillary benefits the Russians.