Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

brooklynite

(94,581 posts)
Wed Jan 22, 2020, 10:55 AM Jan 2020

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard sues Hillary Clinton for alleged 'Russian asset' smear

Source: CNBC

Democratic presidential candidate Rep. Tulsi Gabbard sued former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Wednesday for allegedly defaming her by suggesting the Hawaii congresswoman is a “Russian asset.”

“Clinton’s false assertions were made in a deliberate attempt to derail Tulsi’s campaign,” says the lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Manhattan.

The suit claims that Gabbard has suffered “actual damages” of ”$50 million — and counting” from Clinton’s comments.

Clinton, the 2016 Democratic presidential nominee, in October said in an interview that an unnamed Democratic presidential candidate was “the favorite of the Russians.”


Read more: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/22/tulsi-gabbard-sues-hillary-clinton-for-alleged-russian-smear.html
85 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Rep. Tulsi Gabbard sues Hillary Clinton for alleged 'Russian asset' smear (Original Post) brooklynite Jan 2020 OP
Secretary Clinton does not need $, but I would still donate to her legal fund, if she had one catrose Jan 2020 #1
me too!! samnsara Jan 2020 #4
here's a donation. limbaugh praised gabbard with a caller, a gabbard fan claiming to be a certainot Jan 2020 #47
I'm pretty sure, I saw where she meant the GOP was grooming her. dewsgirl Jan 2020 #2
oh boo hoo someones feefees got hurted.. samnsara Jan 2020 #3
So you're OK with slander if your idol does it? n/t Odoreida Jan 2020 #49
Tulsi is a public figure jberryhill Jan 2020 #52
Not a "public figure" in the context of libel/slander law, but a "public official". lastlib Jan 2020 #70
Hillary never mentioned Gabbard by name. And Gabbard is a public figure running for President. Squinch Jan 2020 #60
Sounds like Tulski is MontanaMama Jan 2020 #5
Seriously? This Again? Me. Jan 2020 #6
Wonder who is behind this. 50 Shades Of Blue Jan 2020 #7
I am wondering the same thing. hamsterjill Jan 2020 #15
the desperate flailings of someone flaming out. nt Javaman Jan 2020 #8
Vlad sues Hillary. sarcasmo Jan 2020 #9
Exactly seta1950 Jan 2020 #10
Woo! Talk about some major butthurt! 2naSalit Jan 2020 #11
Is it really defamation Dopers_Greed Jan 2020 #12
Also, truth is a valid defense in defamation cases lagomorph777 Jan 2020 #13
Especially when she said it was the REPUBLICANS who were grooming someone rsdsharp Jan 2020 #16
Public figure / political speech.... jberryhill Jan 2020 #54
Good luck with that, Tulsi... paleotn Jan 2020 #14
I agree Rebl2 Jan 2020 #23
+1 K&R onetexan Jan 2020 #71
50 million? That's some serious grifting. nt chowder66 Jan 2020 #17
I don't believe Hillary mentioned Tulsi by name ... aggiesal Jan 2020 #18
Even Tulsi knows the case is bullshit Blue_Tires Jan 2020 #26
Ding! Ding! Ding! Winnah!!! Raster Jan 2020 #34
Hillary used "her" to describe...which could mean at140 Jan 2020 #58
Oh, boy!! Can I help with the discovery request by the Clinton legal team? TygrBright Jan 2020 #19
Why on earth is she... Wuddles440 Jan 2020 #20
Maybe this is a "WWTD" kinda thang solara Jan 2020 #21
That makes sense. They are pretty much cut christx30 Jan 2020 #69
This message was self-deleted by its author BannonsLiver Jan 2020 #22
Maybe she could get a few notes from Devin Nunez. BlueIdaho Jan 2020 #24
Wonder which right winger is financing this bullshit. While Clinton didn't expliciting mention still_one Jan 2020 #25
Fortunately, the good folks in Hawaii's 2nd CD. . . DinahMoeHum Jan 2020 #27
Tulsi Gabbard... MarianJack Jan 2020 #28
Maybe Gabbard needs to sue NBC which reported on Russia's interest in her delisen Jan 2020 #29
trying to stay relevant... stillcool Jan 2020 #30
Gabbard is a tool Rorey Jan 2020 #31
She's following the Devin Nunes playbook calguy Jan 2020 #32
from the Hoarse Whisperer Gothmog Jan 2020 #33
That's a good one! mr_lebowski Jan 2020 #36
So... her argument is tht Sec. Clinton prevented her from cashing in? Stryst Jan 2020 #35
Seems her lawyers have no idea what the term 'actual damages' actually means ... mr_lebowski Jan 2020 #37
How much is $50 M in rubles? underpants Jan 2020 #38
My guess is that some Conservative organization or person is backing this. Recall Paula Jones? Midnight Writer Jan 2020 #39
Maybe all the folks pushing the "Dems were unified until she raised her hand" BS Grokenstein Jan 2020 #40
I'm ok with Rep. Gabbard taking steps to defend herself and respond to defamation Devil Child Jan 2020 #41
Hillary didn't use her name. And Tulsi is a public figure -- the bar is set very high for pnwmom Jan 2020 #44
Bingo - been trying to explain that to people. . . ET Awful Jan 2020 #48
The "didn't use her name" part is not relevant jberryhill Jan 2020 #55
There is also the fact that newspaper issued a correction on the initial report. pnwmom Jan 2020 #59
The Complaint is a joke jberryhill Jan 2020 #61
Yeah, that complaint was just a big P.R. job. I wonder who's paying for it. nt pnwmom Jan 2020 #63
I know. It was weird enough when the hack Nunes hired did it onenote Jan 2020 #68
Her spokesperson said if the nesting doll fits JonLP24 Jan 2020 #83
Big deal. Tulsi Gabbard is a public figure and the bar is set very high. nt pnwmom Jan 2020 #84
I said so myself JonLP24 Jan 2020 #85
My quick research indicated that NY has a narrow and weak anti-SLAPP law. onenote Jan 2020 #76
The fact that she is a public figure is why she has a hard case JonLP24 Jan 2020 #82
Of course you are. Nice avatar you have there, too. Hekate Jan 2020 #45
Thanks!! Devil Child Jan 2020 #46
Forgot my sarcasm smiley Hekate Jan 2020 #56
It's all good, I forgive you! Devil Child Jan 2020 #64
How was she defamed? BuddhaGirl Jan 2020 #50
Seriously...don't think this will go anywhere. Tulsi need to grow the f up. nt iluvtennis Jan 2020 #42
Interesting. KnR Hekate Jan 2020 #43
There is/was a campaign? guillaumeb Jan 2020 #51
Apparently one member in this thread Wawannabe Jan 2020 #79
I saw that. guillaumeb Jan 2020 #81
That should be dismissed immediately treestar Jan 2020 #53
What lawyer would take this nonsense accusation? mahina Jan 2020 #57
One who has received an adequate retainer jberryhill Jan 2020 #62
And who sees a chance to get some publicity treestar Jan 2020 #65
Obvious desperation. Hillary didn't even say that. Eugene Jan 2020 #66
Please go away, Tulsi. orangecrush Jan 2020 #67
Seriously Tulsi just admit you're a republican mdbl Jan 2020 #72
representing enid602 Jan 2020 #73
Yawn. truthisfreedom Jan 2020 #74
This message was self-deleted by its author geralmar Jan 2020 #75
Neither of them will be president. Gore1FL Jan 2020 #77
Moo! Wawannabe Jan 2020 #78
Gabbard merely proves her incompetence and stupidity Yeehah Jan 2020 #80
 

certainot

(9,090 posts)
47. here's a donation. limbaugh praised gabbard with a caller, a gabbard fan claiming to be a
Wed Jan 22, 2020, 05:32 PM
Jan 2020

liberal/progressive

the caller was very lucid and erudite (while bullshitting about gabbard with lmbaaugh agreeing) proving the caller had to be a troll, and probably not American!

just find out where the call came from! aaltho just getting lmbaugh's endorsement means she's a russian tool too.

 

jberryhill

(62,444 posts)
52. Tulsi is a public figure
Wed Jan 22, 2020, 06:27 PM
Jan 2020

Sorry, but in the context of a national political figure commenting about other national political figures, the courts are not going to weigh in heavily on the entire point of the First Amendment - i.e. the maximum possible protection of political speech - nor are the courts going to become arbiters of political disputes.

The case is a turkey.

lastlib

(23,238 posts)
70. Not a "public figure" in the context of libel/slander law, but a "public official".
Wed Jan 22, 2020, 08:20 PM
Jan 2020

Gabbard holds a public office. So the bar is higher than that for a "public figure" (e.g. an actor or other person generally known to the public). On that basis alone, Gabbard has virtually no case.

Plus, there is the truth defense, which makes Gabbard a loser. But discovery would be interesting!

Squinch

(50,950 posts)
60. Hillary never mentioned Gabbard by name. And Gabbard is a public figure running for President.
Wed Jan 22, 2020, 06:43 PM
Jan 2020

So how, exactly, is what Hillary said "slander?"

Or was that meant to be just a baseless dig at the other poster?

hamsterjill

(15,220 posts)
15. I am wondering the same thing.
Wed Jan 22, 2020, 11:43 AM
Jan 2020

Puttie sure hates Hillary, doesn't he?

Good grief. Ridiculous waste of everyone's time and being done only to get Gabbard some attention.

2naSalit

(86,636 posts)
11. Woo! Talk about some major butthurt!
Wed Jan 22, 2020, 11:21 AM
Jan 2020

Poor little wannabe princess. I hope she ends up with a defamation suit against her for all the truly nasty shit she's accused HRC of doing.

rsdsharp

(9,182 posts)
16. Especially when she said it was the REPUBLICANS who were grooming someone
Wed Jan 22, 2020, 11:59 AM
Jan 2020

currently in the Democratic primary race to be a third party candidate. She did say that person was a favorite of the Russians who would support her with bots, etc. if Jill Stein was willing to give up the position.

aggiesal

(8,915 posts)
18. I don't believe Hillary mentioned Tulsi by name ...
Wed Jan 22, 2020, 12:31 PM
Jan 2020

She implied, but of course Tulsi knew it was about herself.

Hillary's actual quote.

"I'm not making any predictions, but I think they've got their eye on somebody who is currently in the Democratic primary and are grooming her to be the third-party candidate," Clinton said, "She's the favorite of the Russians."

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/18/politics/hillary-clinton-tulsi-gabbard/index.html

Clinton never names Gabbard, but there are only five women running for President -- Gabbard, California Sen. Kamala Harris, Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar and author Marianne Williamson -- and none of the other woman have been accused of being boosted by Russia.

Gabbard is going to have a hard time claiming injury since her name was not actually mentioned.
The only public that really know are those of us that follow politics very closely.
The rest of the voting public only understand 3 word bumper stickers.

Blue_Tires

(55,445 posts)
26. Even Tulsi knows the case is bullshit
Wed Jan 22, 2020, 02:39 PM
Jan 2020

This is just a half-assed way for her to stay in the news cycle...

Raster

(20,998 posts)
34. Ding! Ding! Ding! Winnah!!!
Wed Jan 22, 2020, 02:56 PM
Jan 2020

And that is EXACTLY what Tulsi* wants... to stay in the news cycle and appear relevant.

at140

(6,110 posts)
58. Hillary used "her" to describe...which could mean
Wed Jan 22, 2020, 06:37 PM
Jan 2020

either Amy or Elizabeth or Tulsi or Kamala. So no specific name.

TygrBright

(20,760 posts)
19. Oh, boy!! Can I help with the discovery request by the Clinton legal team?
Wed Jan 22, 2020, 12:38 PM
Jan 2020

I have some ideas...

anticipatorially,
Bright

Wuddles440

(1,123 posts)
20. Why on earth is she...
Wed Jan 22, 2020, 12:54 PM
Jan 2020

upset about being called a "Russian asset"??!! Hell, it worked for the vermin currently infesting our White House! She should embrace it because the Republican (aka Trump) party just loves those who worship at the alter of Putin and authoritarians of his ilk. Plus her "courageous" votes on impeachment really establishes her street creed with the deplorables. Time for her to come clean and switch parties.

christx30

(6,241 posts)
69. That makes sense. They are pretty much cut
Wed Jan 22, 2020, 07:35 PM
Jan 2020

from the same cloth. If you can’t beat ’em, sue ’em.

Response to brooklynite (Original post)

still_one

(92,204 posts)
25. Wonder which right winger is financing this bullshit. While Clinton didn't expliciting mention
Wed Jan 22, 2020, 02:35 PM
Jan 2020

Gabbard by name, Gabbard appears to be outing herself

I wonder which campaigns will come out supporting this bullshit




delisen

(6,044 posts)
29. Maybe Gabbard needs to sue NBC which reported on Russia's interest in her
Wed Jan 22, 2020, 02:42 PM
Jan 2020
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/russia-s-propaganda-machine-discovers-2020-democratic-candidate-tulsi-gabbard-n964261


The Russian propaganda machine that tried to influence the 2016 U.S. election is now promoting the presidential aspirations of a controversial Hawaii Democrat who earlier this month declared her intention to run for president in 2020.

An NBC News analysis of the main English-language news sites employed by Russia in its 2016 election meddling shows Rep. Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii, who is set to make her formal announcement Saturday, has become a favorite of the sites Moscow used when it interfered in 2016.
 

mr_lebowski

(33,643 posts)
36. That's a good one!
Wed Jan 22, 2020, 03:01 PM
Jan 2020

What a freaking joke Tulski is (great nickname, whoever came up with that one).

Stryst

(714 posts)
35. So... her argument is tht Sec. Clinton prevented her from cashing in?
Wed Jan 22, 2020, 03:00 PM
Jan 2020

A) How exactly was she going to make $50M that Sec. Clinton prevented her from making?

B) Is she actually insane enough to sue over money that, at best, would be suspect? Call the cops and tell them someone stole your drugs and see how that goes.

C) Does she understand that she basically has NO public credit left, and that this might be putting the last nail in the coffin of her political career?

 

mr_lebowski

(33,643 posts)
37. Seems her lawyers have no idea what the term 'actual damages' actually means ...
Wed Jan 22, 2020, 03:07 PM
Jan 2020

That means, like, you crashed into my car worth $50K on the open market, it was paid for already, therefore I suffered $50K in 'actual damages'.

I believe there are other slightly more tenuous examples that can be called 'actual' like if you were hurt in the accident and lost money cause you couldn't work.

I doubt Tulski can show 'actual damages' to the tune of even $500 due to what Clinton said, let alone $50M.

Grokenstein

(5,723 posts)
40. Maybe all the folks pushing the "Dems were unified until she raised her hand" BS
Wed Jan 22, 2020, 03:31 PM
Jan 2020

could join the suit? /snark

pnwmom

(108,978 posts)
44. Hillary didn't use her name. And Tulsi is a public figure -- the bar is set very high for
Wed Jan 22, 2020, 04:05 PM
Jan 2020

public figures.

Tulsi's just looking for some free publicity.

ET Awful

(24,753 posts)
48. Bingo - been trying to explain that to people. . .
Wed Jan 22, 2020, 05:48 PM
Jan 2020

Public figures have a much different standard than your average person when it comes to libel, slander, or defamation because "They also are considered to have significant ability to defend themselves regarding such public scrutiny and therefore cannot claim defamation unless the statement is not only proven to be false, but the defamer is proven to have shown reckless disregard for that falsity."


"If a public official or public figure believes that he or she has been defamed, he or she must prove with convincing evidence that the statement is false. The public official also must prove that the defamer showed reckless disregard for that falsity, either because the defamer knew the statement was false or should have known. "

So, unlike other areas of law, the onus is on the Plaintiff must prove that the statement was false, not on the defendant to prove that it was true.

See: https://www.minclaw.com/legal-resource-center/what-is-defamation/defamation-public-official-vs-private-person/?fbclid=IwAR0w3gh0Cw3vzse7A0-YYIF8Kg6_gUsX3AYOE5kUsLeUAyVcdL1XoPbd87o

So unlike many areas of law, there would need to be proof that the statement was false, but that there was a reckless disregard for the fact that it was false. Since nothing in the statement identified Gabbard by name, it was not made as a statement of fact, but rather as an opinion (thus the "I think" portion of the statement), there is little to support a claim for defamation or slander. This will likely be thrown out on a Motion for Summary Judgment.

 

jberryhill

(62,444 posts)
55. The "didn't use her name" part is not relevant
Wed Jan 22, 2020, 06:33 PM
Jan 2020

Aside from the public figure and political speech issues, it is clearly a statement of opinion, and not an assertion of fact in the first place.

At a minimum this suit will be tossed on preliminary motions.

What I would want to research is whether Gabbard's status as an applicant for the ballot makes her a suitable party for NY's Anti-SLAPP law.

pnwmom

(108,978 posts)
59. There is also the fact that newspaper issued a correction on the initial report.
Wed Jan 22, 2020, 06:38 PM
Jan 2020

Hillary didn't say this unnamed person was being groomed by the Russians; she said the candidate was being groomed by the REPUBLICANS. And there's no question of what she said, because the reporter had the tape.

 

jberryhill

(62,444 posts)
61. The Complaint is a joke
Wed Jan 22, 2020, 06:44 PM
Jan 2020
https://d3ba7j4nna908t.cloudfront.net/attachments/Tulsi-HRC_2020-01-22_Complaint_filed.pdf

14.Motivated by the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, Tulsi made the decision to dedicate her life to protect the safety, security, and freedom of the American people. She enlisted in the Hawaii Army National Guard.In 2004, as Tulsi was campaigning for reelection to the State House, the Hawaii National Guard’s 29th Brigade Combat Teamwas called up to deploy to Iraq. Tulsi’sname was not on the mandatory deployment roster, but she knew there was no way she could stay behind as her brothers and sisters-in-arms were sent off to war, possibly to never return.So Tulsi left an easy reelection campaign and volunteered to deploy—the first of two deployments to the Middle East as a soldier.

----------------

I know that there is a contingent on DU that doesn't seem to believe me on stuff like this, but that's not the kind of bullshit nonsense one puts in a civil complaint if one is doing it for purposes other than using the filing itself as a grandstanding opportunity.

Civil complaints are simply a short and plain statement of facts which, if true, entitle the plaintiff to relief. They are not works of literature. Narrative complaints with lots of adjectives and adverbs are simply silly and childish.

When it reads like a cheap novel or a PR blurb, I usually quit reading them, since complaints in this style are nearly always bullshit in the first place.

onenote

(42,704 posts)
68. I know. It was weird enough when the hack Nunes hired did it
Wed Jan 22, 2020, 07:33 PM
Jan 2020

Even weirder that this multi-city firm that actually has some real clients (even if they also happen to have some serious issues being raised about their practices) would do that.

I've been practicing for more than 40 years and I cannot imagine filing a complaint with a federal court that contained such crap.

onenote

(42,704 posts)
76. My quick research indicated that NY has a narrow and weak anti-SLAPP law.
Thu Jan 23, 2020, 12:25 AM
Jan 2020

Someone might know more, but it didn't look like it would be very helpful.

JonLP24

(29,322 posts)
82. The fact that she is a public figure is why she has a hard case
Sat Jan 25, 2020, 07:40 AM
Jan 2020

The didn't mention her by name is a weak copout because anyone with a half a brain including her lawyers can tie the statement to her because her spokesperson said if the nesting doll fits.

I don't care who wins or loses the lawsuit as I can't stand either of them but Tulsi Gabbard also isn't President so therefore she can be indicted if she was really a Russian asset.

I wish people would STFU and let law enforcement do its job. Clinton should have gone to the FBI if she was serious.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
51. There is/was a campaign?
Wed Jan 22, 2020, 06:26 PM
Jan 2020

Where is it? Who supports it?

Asking for millions of voters all across the country.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
81. I saw that.
Thu Jan 23, 2020, 01:40 PM
Jan 2020

But there is a difference between someone declaring a candidacy, and significant numbers of people supporting that candidacy.

Eugene

(61,899 posts)
66. Obvious desperation. Hillary didn't even say that.
Wed Jan 22, 2020, 07:14 PM
Jan 2020

Of course, Republicans vs Russians is increasingly becoming a distinction without difference.

mdbl

(4,973 posts)
72. Seriously Tulsi just admit you're a republican
Wed Jan 22, 2020, 09:56 PM
Jan 2020

and shut up and march in lock step with them with no guilt, just like they do.

Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Gore1FL

(21,132 posts)
77. Neither of them will be president.
Thu Jan 23, 2020, 12:41 AM
Jan 2020

News about them detracts from the presidential contest and the impeachment. We have enough side shows.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Rep. Tulsi Gabbard sues H...