Video & Multimedia
Related: About this forumOil Tycoon Sues Beto O'Rourke For Criticizing His Political Donations - Ring of Fire
An oil tycoon in Texas is suing Democratic gubernatorial candidate Beto O'Rourke for saying that his political donation to Republicans in Texas "looked like a bribe." The tycoon, former Energy Transfer CEO Kelcy Warren, is now suing O'Rourke for defamation, but the specific line that sparked the lawsuit will likely result in the case immediately being laughed out of court. Beto has been careless with his words in the past, but this time he's untouchable, as Ring of Fire's Farron Cousins explains.
TexasTowelie
(112,167 posts)is that it isn't defamation, libel, or slander when the allegations are true. I don't believe that the shareholders at Energy Transfer are going to look kindly upon Kelcy Warren if a bunch of investigators come into the company examining financial reports and emails, plus having the company officers deposed. That will send the stock price for a decline.
SheltieLover
(57,073 posts)Rhiannon12866
(205,320 posts)And, like TFG, there's a good chance it will backfire on him...
SheltieLover
(57,073 posts)Midnight Writer
(21,753 posts)LetMyPeopleVote
(145,195 posts)LetMyPeopleVote
(145,195 posts)This lawsuit is really sad. The lawyer who filed this lawsuit is the Kasowitz firm that is not known for First Amendment issues but is known for representing TFG and Russian Oligarch. The Houston office of this firm is mainly employment litigators
To win this lawsuit, Kelcy needs to prove that Beto made a statement of fact that Beto knew was false. The complained statements are statement of opinions, and you can sue for this
Link to tweet
The man bringing the lawsuit against ORourke is Kelcy Warren, the co-founder and current Chairman of the Board of Directors at Energy Transfer Partners, one of the largest oil and gas companies in the world. His lawsuit is seeking damages against ORourke for defamation, slander, and libel.....
There have to be very clear misstatements of fact, if there are merely opinions, generally speaking, they are not going to be actionable as defamation, said Shavin. The standard of the law applies even further to a public official, according to Shavin. Its not enough just to prove its false or defamatory, its got to be proven that it was made with actual malice.....
Shavin pointed to a Texas case to describe the very high bar for meeting defamation: Carr v. Brasher. In that case, the Texas Supreme Court denied rehearing a case from Lynn Brasher, the former mayor of South Houston, against his election opponent (and new mayor) Al Thiel and Walter Carr, a campaign aide who authored campaign brochures. Brasher alleged that Carr committed libel for some of those campaign brochures for an election in 1985. Some of the allegations raised in those brochures included payoffs Brasher made to bookkeepers. The defense for Thiel and Carr rested on the absence of malice in the accusation.
This lawsuit will be fun to watch