Dominion is suing MyPillow Lindell

1. 67

   IslandBitesposted 4 years ago

   Dominion Voting Systems is suing MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell, a vocal supporter of former President Trump, in a $1.3 billion defamation suit.
   
   The Wall Street Journal reported that Lindell was named the defendant in a suit filed in Washington, D.C. federal court alleging that he harmed the company's brand by disparaging the integrity of its machines by pushing unproven claims that they were used to steal the November election from Trump.
   
   “He is well aware of the independent audits and paper ballot recounts conclusively disproving the Big Lie,” reads the lawsuit, according to the Journal. “But Lindell...sells the lie to this day because the lie sells pillows.”
   
   Ouch. First the crqzy lawyer, then Fox and Rudy. I remember someone here (forums) asking why not Lindell, as some kind of proof he was onto something. Well, there you have it.
   
   Again, who is next? Trump? Trump Jr?

   replyreport
   1. 92

      MizBejabbersposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Good, the man probably knows little or nothing about government or politics, just what sells pillows. He continued to perpetuate this lie even after it was rejected by the (how many) courts. I believe Dominion can prove that Lindell, as well as others, cast doubt on the integrity of their product and damaged their sales. Lindell certainly cast doubt on his own integrity as well.

      replyreport
      1. 74

         wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         How do we know it is a lie?  Because the manufacturer, making billions off it's product, says so?  Just wondering...
         
         I would also be interested in seeing the court records of those courts that have examined (via expert witnesses, of course) the machines.  However many there were, can you give a list of them?
         
         I've seen Lindell list of "problems" and put about as much faith in them as I do your claim it is all a lie.  None at all, but then that's what courts are for.  Perhaps we'll find out.

         replyreport
         1. 92

            MizBejabbersposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            "How do we know it was a lie?"
            
            So you don't believe the courts? If they saw validity in the many filed cases, they would have ruled on them. I guess we will find out.

            replyreport
            1. 74

               wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this

               I ask for the courts that have examined those machines and the software that runs them.  You didn't reply, presumably because no court has authorized or conducted such an examination.  That would agree with what I have read and heard.
               
               Given that I can only repeat: "how do we know it was a lie?".
               
               (It is truly amazing how many people think that because a suit was thrown out for being filed late, for lack of standing or some other legal technicality it is proof that the suit had no validity.)

               replyreport
               1. 92

                  MizBejabbersposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                  How do we know it wasn't a lie? That is a legitimate question, too. That's the problem with trying to discuss anything with Trump supporters. Their only defense is an offense. Do you know what a technicality is? Some were thrown out because they lacked merit.
                  https://www.factcheck.org/2020/11/the-f … hallenges/
                  
                  Some were "technicalities" because they were redundant. And do you know what lack of standing means? The Texas case was thrown out because Texas had no standing in the other four states. In other words, it was none of Texas business.
                  
                  I don't think a corporation like Dominion is apt to file a frivolous lawsuit. I'll bet they have some proof that it was a lie. When and if their suit goes to court, then you will know.

                  replyreport
                  1. 74

                     wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                     "How do we know it wasn't a lie? That is a legitimate question, too."
                     
                     Absolutely true.  But you didn't ask that question; your words were "He continued to perpetuate this lie even after it was rejected by the (how many) courts.", indicating it IS a lie.  And that the lie was rejected by the courts.
                     
                     I asked how you know it was a lie, and which courts have examined the machines and their software.  So far you have replied to neither, except to say that you don't think Dominion is apt to file a frivolous lawsuit.  True as far as it goes, but the onus is on Lindell to prove his statements true, not Dominion to prove them false, and that presents a whole different picture.
                     
                     It will be very interesting to see if Lindell can prove his assertions - assertions beyond that there was a possibility of fraud, that is.  I think it would be difficult to impossible to prove, beyond any doubt, that there was zero possibility of fraud.  If that could be done, Microsoft would not have bugs in Windows.
                     
                     It is possible, of course, that Dominion doesn't realize their machines are faulty or have "backdoors".  If THAT happens it will really be a can of worms!

                     replyreport
   2. 82

      Kathryn L Hillposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      I am afraid for Lindell's life.

      replyreport
2. 75

   Valeantposted 4 years ago

   This was inevitable.  Really surprised they haven't gone after Trump yet.

   replyreport
3. 75

   Valeantposted 4 years ago

   In making his claims, can you explain how Lindell examined the machines to prove they made errors?  This is the point of the suit, he is making claims without evidence which has done monetary damage to Dominion.
   
   And I continue to ask this question of Big Lie believers - how do you explain the paper ballot counts matching the machine tallies in every state that did them?

   replyreport
   1. 92

      MizBejabbersposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      I notice that the Trumpers have left your question alone but continue to pick apart my question and source that I quoted. They can't explain it.

      replyreport
      1. 74

         wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         From your source, purportedly showing that courts have examined the data from voting machines:
         
         Donald J. Trump for President, Inc., v. Bucks County Board of Elections; Nothing to do with voting machines.
         
         Donald J. Trump Campaign, Inc., v. Philadelphia County Board of Elections:  Nothing to do with voting machines.
         
         Donald J. Trump Campaign, Inc., v.  Kathy Boockvar, Secretary of the Commonwealth: Nothing to do with voting machines.
         
         Donald Trump for President, Inc. v. Philadelphia County Board of Elections:  Nothing to do with voting machines.
         
         Donald J. Trump For President Inc., v. Montgomery County Board of Elections:  Nothing to do with voting machines.
         
         Donald J. Trump for President, Inc., et al v. Kathy Boockvar et al:  Nothing to do with voting machines.
         
         In Re: The 2020 Election for President of the United States:  Nothing to do with voting machines.
         
         In re: enforcement of election laws and securing ballots cast or received after 7 p.m. on November 3, 2020:  Nothing to do with voting machines.
         
         Aguilera v. Fontes:  Nothing to do with Trump, or with Lindell.  Nor with the voting machines themselves - only with the markers used.  Thrown out after voting officials claim that there was no problem with them.  Never checked.
         
         Donald J. Trump for President Inc. v. Hobbs:  Nothing to do with voting machines.
         
         I could go on, but you get the idea.  The source you gave as proof that courts have examined the voting machines and software did nothing of the sort.  I did not see a single court case where those machines, or software, was examined by the court.
         
         So what's to explain?  Why you would give a source that gives not a single word supporting your claim?  That would have to come from you.

         replyreport
4. 67

   IslandBitesposted 4 years ago

   Dominion Voting Systems' CEO said the company would continue to take legal action against people who spread baseless claims that its voting machines were used to "steal" the 2020 US presidential election... And it's 'not ruling anyone out'

   replyreport