Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Sunday, February 19, 2017

Melania: Nice suit

There are a couple of competing theories about Melania Trump's lawsuit against the Daily Mail.

Theory 1. The suit is purely Melania's idea. She wants money of her own so she can live in luxury after divorcing the tangerine tyrant. Presumably, she signed a prenup which would leave her with very little if she divorced Trump right now.

Theory 2. The suit is Donald Trump's idea. It is the prelude to a larger scheme to cow the media by bringing lawsuit after lawsuit.

Rachel Maddow has hinted in a recent broadcast that she leans toward Theory 2 or some variant thereof. Although I strongly doubt Theory 1, it has gained a number of fans in recent days.

I'm glad that I didn't touch the rumor that Melania had worked as an escort. I had heard the story early on, and even made a few attempts to research the matter. (An "instant book" devoted to this theory showed up on Amazon Kindle. It turned out to be crap.)

Melania continues to seek redress from the Daily Mail. She seems to have settled her case against Webster Tarpley, a right-wing conspiracy blogger who -- I was surprised to learn -- lives here in Maryland.

Perhaps I should be grateful to the guy. When I learned that Tarpley liked the "Melania as escort" story, I immediately decided that it was crap.

I've always been chary of Tarpley because he had a fairly lengthy relationship with the LaRouchies, although I remain unclear as to the exact nature of his place in the organization. I'm also unsure as to whether the connection is ongoing. All I know is that he was hanging out at Casa LaRouche back in the 1980s, when they were up to some evil shit.

Tarpley's resume isn't all bad: He wrote a piece about the Aldo Moro case which I rather liked at the time, although I might have a different opinion if I saw it now. He also co-wrote a hostile bio of "Poppy" Bush which I considered over-the-top but useful. (The footnotes were copious and they usually went to decent sources.) In the early 1990s, that book received wide distribution in liberal-land for the simple reason that there was nothing else like it. I don't know why an actual liberal didn't write an anti-Bush book; such a volume would have sold fairly well.

But then Tarpley got involved with the 9/11 Twoofers, and you know what I think about those people. I also had a glance at his Obama books. Not my cup of tea party.

I don't think that Melania was an escort. Nevertheless, I doubt that she will prevail in her suit against the Daily Mail, because she is clearly a public figure, which places the bar for libel very high. Her claim to have suffered financial damage is not convincing.

That claim is predicated on plans to capitalize on her husband's office for financial gain -- a fashion line bearing the brand of the First Lady. Some would argue such a scheme constitutes a kind of whoring.

(Oh, go ahead and sue, Melania. I have nothing but a nice collection of oil paints and a diabetic rat terrier.)
Well, libel law in the UK is more stringent than in the USA, so she might have a chance if she sued in a UK court.
I know the LaRouch gang were a conspiracy of conspiracy theories, I once had one of the books they published, but I'm not sure what elese they got up to.

If she's suing the Mail, she should do it in Britain where the libel laws are much looser. Don't need to show intentional falsehood, or specific financial harm, they Mail will have to prove what they said was true rather than her proving it's untrue, and they have previously taken cases against all manner of foreign press where they have no reasonable jurisdiction, so the Mail certainly qualifies.
hm, yes, well, these speculations are just so much fantasy, are they not? so, why not?

as for melania, i simply cannot give the principles in this play to much credit beyond smacking down what they don't like, so hard to say who instigated all this. i have to say, prenup or no, she would never get much from the marmalade scarecrow because he in truth has so little; all leveraged debt will not even buy a cuppa.

as for said goldenrod's intentions to sue sue sue in order to shut down the press, that does not seem at all likely to me. IANAL, but i do know that (a) he has a tacky history of doing such things, to the likes of bill maher, (b) those vanity suits have not gone well for him, and (c) the down side for him would be the almost limitless discovery process. which it is hard to his attorneys doing anything other than avoiding like the plague.

that is one area of relief i feel in all this bluster about the press. and, lest we forget, his widely broadcast default intention had he lost in november was to start up a new network.

bannon knows precisely how to manipulate the masses. hard to imagine melania's suits have not been part of that scheme.
Since the election I suffered from a lot of physical and emotional ailments. I cry frequently. Can I bring a suit against someone for that, successfully. IMOI it's murder and someone has to pay for it.
Or can all people who voted for Hillary sue (on behalf of America) trump's voters. Class action thing. I am sure a nifty lawyer can find away.
Melania is not a very sympathetic character. Women don't like her much. She was treated as a Jackie imitator in the inauguration coverage. Having her recite the Lord's Prayer is a transparent effort to increase her likeability but she sounds like an immigrant whenever she opens her mouth and people are wondering why she gets to live in privilege while Trump is deporting other less good-looking people who are not sexual trophies. This suit isn't going to help make people like her more. She needs to find and do some good works for that, something to indicates self-sacrifice, beyond the bargain she made to live on Trump's money.
What the msm wants is to take 'potshots' at politicians with no repercussions.

There is no law that says the 'politician' can't fire back. Trump fires back hard.

The 'namby-pamby' msm can't get used to that. They overreact and say Trump wants to 'stifle' them.

What he wants is to take his own'potshots' back.
Nevertheless, I doubt that she will prevail in her suit against the Daily Mail, because she is clearly a public figure, which places the bar for libel very high

That's not true under UK law (as Philip notes above), which is why I'm surprised she filed the suit in New York rather than, say, London. It would be, as they say, a slam dunk in a British court.

Under US law, she'd have to show that there was actual malice - unless she has some evidence of that it's hard to see how she could win. Then again, winning might not be the point.
There's no backsies in politics.
What Trump wants is to have everyone including the media to agree with him at all times, turn a blind eye to all his lies and exaggerations and allow him to do as he wishes with no checks and balances.
Your attempt at normalizing the behavior of this con man is pathetic.
Reciting the "lord's" fucking prayer = likability? BARF.

And LaRouche? DEADLY cult that targets damaged college kids.

M, you are a bit strong, but this piece is triggering as hell.
Webster Tarpley was effectively ejected from the Truth Movement in 2007 after an incident that became known as the "Kennebunkport Warning". About that time a certain faction of irresponsible 9/11 researchers fell under the influence of a retired Army intel guy, Captain Eric May, who claimed he could predict when the next 9/11 was going to happen based on some kind of numerological analysis. They predicted a number of terrorist attacks, none of which ever happened.

Tarpley issued what he called the "Kennebunkport Warning" about an imminent false-flag terrorist attack. He had a number of Peace Movement figures at some kind of conference in Kennebunkport, and he claimed that he got four of them, including Ciny Sheehan, to sign on to his prognosticative statement. The peaceniks immediately claimed that he had misrepresented the document they were signing, and Tarpley called Ms. Sheehan "a wretched creature".

Tarpley was overwhelmingly dissed by the truth movement after that, and his colleagues Dr. James Fetzer and Dr. Kevin Barrett were largely dissed by responsible truthers as well. None of Captain May's predictions ever came to pass.
Anon, I'm very grateful to you for this inside account of Tarpley's interactions with the Twoofers -- and thank you for "keeping it neutral" regarding what I presume to be your own feelings on that matter.

Tarpley is pals with Fetzer? Yeesh. I should have known.

I wish I could devote a post to the information you've given me here, but...jeez. So much is happening right now! I just spent more than an hour writing what I consider an important piece on a pedophile ring allegedly run by a Trump associate. I'd love to keep that piece at the top of my blog for the next few days. But I may have to top it with another post tomorrow morning, because that's how fast events are unfolding these days.

It's maddening! Even *I* don't want to spend THIS much time reading the news...let alone writing about it...
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is 

powered by Blogger. 

Isn't yours?

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Image and video hosting by TinyPic