Sarah Palin is giving the country a reminder of why exactly did the Americans vote for President Donald Trump.
The historic wins the Republicans had on Election Day were a sign that America was ready to push back.
We are sick of being told that we are racist, stupid and gun nutty, while we try to protect the country from threats at home and abroad.
Palin has been defamed two months ago by New York Times after she was blamed for the shooting of Gabby Giffords. But, she hit back. And we also thought that her lawsuit against the New York Times would be thrown out of court. It was quite the opposite instead. The editorial’s author is now being called in to testify.
According to our source, My Right American, this is a huge win for Palin because most folks at this stage in this sort of lawsuit usually don’t get testimony. This could provide a wealth of information for her legal team that will help her case.
Here’s the full order:
“Pending before the Court is the motion of defendant The New York Times Company (the “Times”) to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b) (6), Fed. R. Civ. P., the claim of plaintiff Sarah Palin that she was defamed by a Times editorial that appeared on or about June 14, 2017. One close question presented by that motion is whether the Complaint contains sufficient allegations of actual malice, an essential element of the claim. To a large extent, determination of that issue may turn on what inferences favorable to the plaintiff are reasonable given the circumstances alleged in the Complaint.
— ╰☆☆ BUD ☆☆╮🐾🐾 (@bud_cann) August 12, 2017
For example, the Complaint alleges that the allegedly false statements of fact that are the subject of the Complaint were contradicted by information already set forth in prior news stories published by the Times. However, these prior stories arguably would only evidence actual malice if the person(s) who wrote the editorial were aware of them. This is information peculiarly within the knowledge of defendant; but on it arguably depends the reasonableness vel non of inferring actual malice.
Accordingly, to help inform the Court of what inferences are reasonable or unreasonable in this context, the Court, pursuant to Rule 43(c), will convene an evidentiary hearing on Wednesday, August 16 at 2:00 PM EST.
At the hearing, defense counsel must produce the author(s) of the editorial, who (or each of whom, if there is more than one author) will be examined under oath by defense counsel for no more than thirty (30) minutes, to be followed by cross-examination of plaintiff’s counsel of no more than forty-five (45) minutes, to be followed by no more than fifteen (15) minutes of redirect by defense counsel. The Court also may question each such witness.”
Scroll down to the comments and tell us what you think.