How stupid is Maxine Waters? To many that is a rhetorical question, to the court overseeing a defamation case against her, stupidity is no excuse for her failing to respond to the complaint.
Because of the damages issue and possible punitive damages, her financial dealings should be fair game, is my guess. Bonus.
Quote:
We've heard a lot of overheated rhetoric from Mad Maxine Waters over the years. She calls people racist without any evidence. She was one of the loudest voices encouraging public confrontations with Republicans.
She got used to getting away with that crap without any serious consequences, even when she's gotten caught with her hands in the cookie jar. For example, in 2010, Waters was accused of helping an unsound bank (OneUnited) receive government aid to help her husband, who was an officer and stock-owner of the bank. She avoided any problems by throwing her grandson and chief of staff under the bus.
Maybe that's why she thought nothing of slandering the Republican she was running against last November.
Quote:
But this will come back and bite her. The man she slandered is no ordinary Republican. This guy is a veteran. He is black. And he was honorably discharged in connection with his disability.
Quote:
When Joe Collins(R) brought legal action against her, she ignored it as some sort of a campaign stunt, letting it go unanswered.Quote:
"And she ignored it. And she went into default. And, you know, after the default was entered, then she started trying to put in paperwork, when she saw that I wasn't playing games. And, here we are now, Maxine's trying to get documents filed to the court the last minute even though she's already defaulted. And it's been a complete mess. We won in court yesterday
"So she filed an anti-SLAPP motion a free speech motion to say that what she said was part of her free speech rights, which is ridiculous. This is America, you can say what you want to, but you got to pay if you lie, you know, and that's where she's at.
But the judge denied (her motion). The continuation she wanted to file, a judge denied that as well. And the motion to set aside the default, the judge denied that as well, because she was already in default and trying to file all this other paperwork. And even the motion to get a trial, the judge denied that as well. And so now we have another court date and on this court date, I get to ask her whatever I want to." JustTheNews
LINKQuote:
What does he want to ask her? Questions about her OWN sordid history of corruption, which she will answer under oath. Which he will use in the rematch against her next time around.
In John Solomon's podcast interview with Collins, he covers a lot of interesting ground, not the least of which is his plan to fight her by her own rules.
If her side is using ballot harvesting and is legal there, why should he put himself at a disadvantage by not pressing that same advantage?
Kicking her ass in court for slander? That will go a LONG way to getting the name recognition it will take to defeat someone who has been in office since, what, the Hoover Administration or something?
That's the benefit it will give to him. But for the wider debate?
What happens to the Democrat 'political misinformation' narrative if a slander case proves that the only way one of their own biggest names could only beat a Republican was by publishing baseless lies about a man who served honorably. (And since Democrats also love to play the intersectionality cards, did we mention he was a disabled Black Navy veteran?)
Because of the damages issue and possible punitive damages, her financial dealings should be fair game, is my guess. Bonus.
