• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Bachmann could face lawsuit for ‘propagating complete and utter lies’

T

TheDemSocialist

Gradualist
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
34,951
Reaction score
16,311
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Socialist
A religious freedom advocate told U.S. News he is considering suing Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-MN) over allegedly slanderous comments she made in a fundraising pitch.
“We are caucusing with our legal counsel to consider the most expeditious course of action we can take in a federal court to stop these bald-faced lies,” Mikey Weinstein of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF) said. “About 96 percent of our members [at MRFF] are Protestant or Roman Catholic… of our unpaid volunteers, at least well over 80 percent are Christian… I say [to Bachmann]: Tell it to the judge.”
Earlier this month conservative bloggers falsely claimed that Weinstein was behind a plan to court-martial Christians in the military who shared their faith. The conspiracy was quickly debunked by the Pentagon itself, which noted that proselytizing — a form of religious harassment — has long been prohibited, but service members are free to evangelize and speak about their faith.

But as of Wednesday Bachmann’s website still stated that Weinstein’s conspiracy with the Pentagon could “prevent our military from practicing their own faith.” She described Weinstein as a “left-wing, anti-Christian activists” and a “radical.” She also claimed that Weinstein had compared “sharing the gospel to ‘spiritual rape’ and ‘treason,’” when he actually described misogyny, Islamophobia and anti-Semitism as “spiritual rape” and “treason.”
Weinstein accused Bachmann of “propagating complete and utter lies.”
Click to expand...


Read more @: Bachmann could face lawsuit for ‘propagating complete and utter lies’ | The Raw Story

Please god sue this nutbag. Probably wont go far, but the more attention to this crazy nut bag the better. Pretty scary she is on the House Intelligence Committee.
 
Good. He has my full support.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Read more @: Bachmann could face lawsuit for ‘propagating complete and utter lies’ | The Raw Story

Please god sue this nutbag. Probably wont go far, but the more attention to this crazy nut bag the better. Pretty scary she is on the House Intelligence Committee.
[/FONT][/COLOR]
Click to expand...
----------------
I dunno......she seems to thrive on attention...negative or positive.
I thought her near-death re-election in 2012 might calm her down.
Apparently, I was wrong.
 
Bachmann is totally reckless and constantly make defamatory statements. Like all tea baggers, she has no sense of decency or truth. I think a big fat lawsuit thrown her way would be a perfect ending to her freakazoid career.
 
I agree. if you are ever going to reign in the absurd lies that people like bachman make over and over again there needs to be consequences for their actions when they knowingly misrepresent the truth to confuse the issue. I have little faith it will go anywhere and will probably end up getting squashed by the courts sending a message to bachman and the radical right that they can just make up whatever outlandish lie they want to and no one will hold them accountable for knowingly deceiving the people who trust them, but maybe i am wrong. It is worth a try, and if it works I say hammer the hell out of all of them when they make their wild and false accusations.
 
How many of you really want a president set so that when a politician spouts out a half baked statement against an organization they then are sued for libel? Given that Democrats Pols do so also?
 
She just doesn't come across as very smart to me.
 
Shadow Serious said:
How many of you really want a president set so that when a politician spouts out a half baked statement against an organization they then are sued for libel? Given that Democrats Pols do so also?
Click to expand...
------------------------
I do.
Maybe such a precedent will encourage pols on both sides to temper their--often idiotic, unsupported, inflammatory --remarks.
Repub or Dem----let the chips fall as they may.
 
azgreg said:
She just doesn't come across as very smart to me.
Click to expand...
------------------
And yet, she serves on the House INTELLIGENCE Committee.
 
azgreg said:
Mind boggling isn't it?
Click to expand...

Supposedly convinced there was evidence of radical Islamic infiltration of the US government at the highest levels, she chose to make sure the appropriate authorities were informed.

Morning talk shows. I mean, I would have brought such evidence to, like, the FBI or something, but that's just me.

Other GOP favorites:
Climate and environmental committee member who thinks global warming can't possibly be an issue because the world will end when God wants it to end, not before. Great. Screw the environment, God will fix it!
Science, space, and technology committee member, a doctor and father of two, who thinks evolution, embryology, and the big bang theory are "lies from the pit of hell." Say, doctor, when you looked at ultrasounds for your two children, what the flying **** did you think you were looking at?

I wonder how many other committee members they have whose sole purpose seems to be defying the entire purpose of that committee.
 
Bachmann may be a miserable excuse for a human being, but the standards for Libel are very high in the United States. One is required to prove the the statement is not true, the offender was aware it wasn't true and damage arose from the publishing of the lie. It is quite tough to demonstrably prove that in a court of law.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom