Eric Coomer is suing Mike Lindell for defamation; he is not suing for slander.
The difference? Slander requires that the statements be false, while defamation does not require any falsity. As such, the truth is not a defense in a defamation case, while it would be in a slander case.
One of the tests for defamation will be: did Lindell know his statements were true, and how did he determine that, AND did he act with malice. This is why even a true statement can cause defamation.
I'm not sure Mike's going to prevail here: his lawyer needs to produce that "Antifa conference call" and show how it came to be or....
...not sure.
Worse, Nina Wang was nominated by the Autopen Regime so it's a forgone conclusion she follows a Marxist outlook. Coomer and Antifa might be a badge of honor.
NO MORE VOTING MACHINES! Mike Lindell is a good and truthful man!
I may be wrong, but I think I'm right about this.
Eric Coomer is suing Mike Lindell for defamation; he is not suing for slander.
The difference? Slander requires that the statements be false, while defamation does not require any falsity. As such, the truth is not a defense in a defamation case, while it would be in a slander case.
Not a lawyer...
I believe you are correct - as far as it goes.
One of the tests for defamation will be: did Lindell know his statements were true, and how did he determine that, AND did he act with malice. This is why even a true statement can cause defamation.
I'm not sure Mike's going to prevail here: his lawyer needs to produce that "Antifa conference call" and show how it came to be or....
...not sure.
Worse, Nina Wang was nominated by the Autopen Regime so it's a forgone conclusion she follows a Marxist outlook. Coomer and Antifa might be a badge of honor.
Pillow man update