If they did, a template for their case

[bruce MN]

No reason they can’t. Did anybody here say they couldn’t or shouldn’t? 

I suppose if a suit was to run parallel to an investigation into treason or a simple impeachment they might want to hold off until all of that were over.  I don’t believe there is a Statute of Limitations on libel. And some  protection that has been inserted into the Constitution sorta keeps testimony from one proceeding from being presented as summary evidence in another.

But nothing beats keeping the pot stirring does it.  Hadn’t heard a good Benghazi or Birther quip surface lately, until Rudi brought up Seth Rich this AM.

But when it’s what you’ve got. 

[sdholloway56]

To sue for libel would be the very WWTD (what would Trump do) whereby, even though he did it (one of the voluminous list of very wrong things he's done before and since his election) he'd deny it, threaten to sue, maybe sue and then either drop it later after tying it up or quietly settle, with a gag agreement.

This is actually about Treason, a capital crime, as Bill Weld says.

But I doubt that Treason will be among the articles of impeachment. 

The one conclusion to take away from recent events like the Zimmerman trial is that it is a mistake to overcharge- a jury probably would have gone for manslaughter but balked at giving him 20 to life. Likewise, the jury (the public, really) probably can't deal with the prospect of hauling one of their favorite WWE and Reality TV stars off to death row. He has such nice children.

[r3020]

Is Joe Biden ashamed of Hunter?

[Samthehumble]

---

@sdholloway56 wrote:

The fascination sometimes borders on horror.

Can't figure out why people would embrace a vast world of false narratives just to protect their own fragile sense of identity.

The horror is that enough of such people can and will result in some really, really bad stuff.

---

said the truther.

[Samthehumble]

---

@bruce MN wrote:

No reason they can’t. Did anybody here say they couldn’t or shouldn’t? 

I suppose if a suit was to run parallel to an investigation into treason or a simple impeachment they might want to hold off until all of that were over.  I don’t believe there is a Statute of Limitations on libel. And some  protection that has been inserted into the Constitution sorta keeps testimony from one proceeding from being presented as summary evidence in another.

But nothing beats keeping the pot stirring does it.  Hadn’t heard a good Benghazi or Birther quip surface lately, until Rudi brought up Seth Rich this AM.

But when it’s what you’ve got. 

---

No of course not Bruce, can't expect them to have a legal team put together in a few days.   Just laying down a marker, I'll give them 6 months.   No suit by them, they know its true.

[rsbs]

Nutz, did you go on facebook after Trump won  and post that anyone that voted for him was dead to you?