Tulsi Gabbard drops defamation lawsuit against Hillary Clinton
Source: CNN
Washington (CNN)Rep. Tulsi Gabbard dropped the defamation lawsuit she filed against Hillary Clinton on Wednesday, ending a short-lived legal battle where the congresswoman contended the former secretary of state and Democratic presidential nominee "lied about her ties to Russia" during a 2019 interview.
The lawsuit stemmed from Clinton saying that Gabbard, then a 2020 presidential candidate, was being groomed to run as a third-party candidate and was a favorite of the Russians. Clinton, in the same interview, suggested that the person she was talking about was a "Russian asset," while not naming the Hawaii Democrat.
"Plaintiffs Tulsi Gabbard and Tulsi Now, Inc. dismiss this action," Gabbard's lawyers, Dan Terzian and Janice Roven, wrote in a court filing on Wednesday. "While they remain certain of the action's legal merit, they are just as certain that this new COVID and post-COVID world require them to focus their time and attention on other priorities, including defeating Donald Trump in 2020, rather than righting the wrongs here."
Terzian and Roven did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the voluntary dismissal. A spokesperson for Gabbard also did not respond to a request for comment.
Read more: https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/05/27/politics/tulsi-gabbard-clinton-lawsuit/index.html
Raster
(20,998 posts)...long past time.
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)PJMcK
(22,031 posts)Ya didn't have much of a case, huh?
Pro tip #1: If you want to advance in the Democratic Party, it's a poor strategy to sue their last presidential candidate. You don't look like a team player, you know?
Pro tip #2: By calling attention to what you claim Sec. Clinton said, you amplify it. Is that really a smart move?
Sorry if your feelings were hurt. Politics is a full-contact sport, don't-cha know?
StevieM
(10,500 posts)She didn't even refer to Tulsi Gabbard by name.
PJMcK
(22,031 posts)Sec. Clintons reference was subtle and unnamed. Still, her reference was clear.
In any event, this is irrelevant.
JonLP24
(29,322 posts)In response to a question asking if she was referring to Gabbard. Her lawyers can easily get around that "defense". The real issue is Tulsi Gabbard is a public figure and Clinton's defense could be that she was giving her opinion.
The standards for defamation is very high which is why the case was dropped and why you don't see politicians file defamation suits unless it is Devin Nunez trying to stifle free speech.
StevieM
(10,500 posts)where she called HRC the queen of corruption, is hardly the same thing as if Clinton herself had actually mentioned Gabbard by name.
JonLP24
(29,322 posts)Tulsi Gabbard's Tweet About Anti-Hinduism In The West Is Stoking Anti-Muslim Sentiment In India
Gabbard quote-tweeted a US-based psychiatrist from Kashmir, who shared a screenshot of an anonymous Facebook post with the comment: Blatantly biased news & anti-Hindu propaganda has real-world consequences for innocent people.
The anonymous Facebook post described an alleged encounter between two women and their Uber driver, who blamed Indian Hindus for killing Muslims in New Delhi, when he learned the women were Hindu. The driver then allegedly asked the women to get out of his car. BuzzFeed News has reached out to Gabbard and the woman she retweeted to find out more about the Facebook post, which could not be independently verified or located online.
Gabbards tweet has since been shared on right-wing news websites in India and discussed on news channels.
(Snip)
Link to tweet
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.buzzfeednews.com/amphtml/nishitajha/tulsi-gabbard-hinduphobia-tweet-delhi-violence-modi
She has oddball positions & it is mostly libertarians that support her. I don't think she was a friend to anyone this primary.
StevieM
(10,500 posts)DesertRat
(27,995 posts)JonLP24
(29,322 posts)Tulsi Gabbard is a public figure and a Clinton defense could be she was giving her opinion.
On this issue I tend to agree with Ambassador McFaul
I also reached out to Michael McFaul, who was Obamas ambassador to Russia from 2012 to 2014 and is also despised by Putin, so much so that during the infamous Helsinki summit last year, Putin tried to persuade Trump to hand both Browder and McFaul over to him on charges that could generously be called dubious.
Like the seasoned diplomat he is, McFaul was far more cautious in the language he used about Gabbard. I do not believe generally that somebody should be suspected of being an agent for a foreign country because of a foreign policy position that they have taken, he said, adding he had not closely followed Gabbards positions and associations. I think one needs to be very careful about insinuations of working for a foreign government. One should have some firm documentation before saying such matters.
https://www.salon.com/2019/11/16/so-is-tulsi-gabbard-really-a-russian-asset-how-would-we-know-for-sure/
If she is a Russian asset the FBI could always indict her.
Raster
(20,998 posts)msongs
(67,395 posts)BigmanPigman
(51,584 posts)spot on Fux News....a permanant host?
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin
(107,922 posts)Wonder what kind of lame ass conspiracy theory will come out of right wing world as a result?
mitch96
(13,892 posts)SergeStorms
(19,193 posts)never hearing the words 'Tulsi' and 'Gabbard' again in my entire life. I guess I have to start over now, but that's alright.
lastlib
(23,214 posts)not_the_one
(2,227 posts)This teat has been maximally milked.