nortex97 said:

---

I imagine his real goal is discovery of any payments to her.

Democrats waged lawfare against him for going on 8 years now but especially the past 4 and now have to brace for impact. He's not running again and doesn't really care if he loses these, imho, he wants people to see the vengeance tour and hopefully it intimidates future Garland regime types of folks.

---

Exactly what this is. He just wants to see if the Dems paid her (which they more than likely did).

aggiehawg said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Ya, it ended without discovery

---

The ABC news case ended because of impending discovery.

---

Right. Which if this one is headed that direction it will end the same way. With a settlement prior to discovery.

dmart90 said:

---

Yeah. This is stupid. Move on, Trump.

---

Libs said the same thing about the ABC lawsuit. We see how that turned out.

Teslag said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Ya, it ended without discovery

---

The ABC news case ended because of impending discovery.

---

Right. Which if this one is headed that direction it will end the same way. With a settlement prior to discovery.

---

Assuming it gets past a motion to dismiss, then yes, it will likely settle.

HTownAg98 said:

---

Teslag said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Ya, it ended without discovery

---

The ABC news case ended because of impending discovery.

---

Right. Which if this one is headed that direction it will end the same way. With a settlement prior to discovery.

---

Assuming it gets past a motion to dismiss, then yes, it will likely settle.

---

Why? Does Trump need the money? Why even push this if truth isn't the main objective?

Teslag said:

---

Ya, it ended without discovery

---

I think we know why.

aggiehawg said:

---

Trump will have no shortage of expert pollsters to use as witnesses but there is the question of damages, as previously pointed out and I'm not sure a declaratory judgment really accomplishes anything. Her career is finished.

The Des Moines Register as the publisher does raise an interesting question however. Will have to read the complaint for the legal angle there.

---

Since newspapers and media outlets are free to endorse whatever candidate they choose, I don't see where he's got any angle against the paper.

There's literally hundreds of polls out there, and if your newspaper decides a particular one is credible and reliable, there's nothing to prevent them from printing it and running with it, regardless of what it says. You're risking journalistic integrity, it would seem, if you go with a lesser known poll, but that's the free market for you.

This seems frivolous on Trump's part at best.
Is this what it's gonna be like this time around? "That media outlet said bad things about me, so I'm going to sue!"

Did the Des Moines Register knew her poll was pure BS but published it anyway? How many copies and clicks did they get by running it?

aggiehawg said:

---

Did the Des Moines Register knew her poll was pure BS but published it anyway? How many copies and clicks did they get by running it?

---

And why did she call the Kamala campaign ahead of the release, as reported?

To those above noting the ABC settlement before discovery, fyi that was because Trump accepted it for timely headlines this month. And Disney-ABC happens to have much deeper pockets than A Seltzer/Iowa podunk paper etc. Often, the value of continuing to trial vs. settlement can't be reached/determined until some/all discovery is complete.

aggiehawg said:

---

Did the Des Moines Register knew her poll was pure BS but published it anyway? How many copies and clicks did they get by running it?

---

I knew it was bull**** the second I saw it. Certainly they did as well.

Not a lawyer but could it be that the goal is to expose a deeper corruption between the DNC, the Kamala campaign, and the media (specifically the Des Moines Register)?

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Did the Des Moines Register knew her poll was pure BS but published it anyway? How many copies and clicks did they get by running it?

---

I knew it was bull**** the second I saw it. Certainly they did as well.

---

I would expect that paper in that small of a state would have a better feel for the state's citizens. Iowa had passed a new abortion law that had gone into effect mid-summer. If that was the watershed level event that Selzer was saying it was, their reporting would have reflected that, no?

aggiehawg said:

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Did the Des Moines Register knew her poll was pure BS but published it anyway? How many copies and clicks did they get by running it?

---

I knew it was bull**** the second I saw it. Certainly they did as well.

---

I would expect that paper in that small of a state would have a better feel for the state's citizens. Iowa had passed a new abortion law that had gone into effect mid-summer. If that was the watershed level event that Selzer was saying it was, their reporting would have reflected that, no?

---

Well, liberals DO love confirmation bias. Still, there was undoubtedly at least one adult at the paper who knew this was faked.

I haven't read the pleadings but election interference via "fake news" isn't, in and of itself, a tort, and a consumer fraud claims sounds like a class action claim that should be asserted by the newspaper's customers against it, rather than a claim that belongs to Trump.

I don't think this one has a very long shelf life.

twk said:

---

I haven't read the pleadings but election interference via "fake news" isn't, in and of itself, a tort, and a consumer fraud claims sounds like a class action claim that should be asserted by the newspaper's customers against it, rather than a claim that belongs to Trump.

I don't think this one has a very long shelf life.

---

When I first heard about this case, that was my initial reaction, "Um yeah, that's not gonna fly long."

OTOH, Selzer has been preemptively defending herself. (Always a bad move, keep your mouth shut.) Her defense has raised some eyebrows by saying she has had plenty of opportunities as a pollster to commit election interference in that past but didn't. Admission it is possible and that she knows what it looks like.

So I'll wait and see what develops. Still a slim chance but a chance nonetheless.

aggiehawg said:

---

twk said:

---

I haven't read the pleadings but election interference via "fake news" isn't, in and of itself, a tort, and a consumer fraud claims sounds like a class action claim that should be asserted by the newspaper's customers against it, rather than a claim that belongs to Trump.

I don't think this one has a very long shelf life.

---

When I first heard about this case, that was my initial reaction, "Um yeah, that's not gonna fly long."

OTOH, Selzer has been preemptively defending herself. (Always a bad move, keep your mouth shut.) Her defense has raised some eyebrows by saying she has had plenty of opportunities as a pollster to commit election interference in that past but didn't. Admission it is possible and that she knows what it looks like.

So I'll wait and see what develops. Still a slim chance but a chance nonetheless.

---

If the Harris campaign was paying her to generate this garbage, that might be an election code violation if it wasn't reported, but I don't think Trump would have a private cause of action.

Maybe something will come of this beyond the initial headline, but I can't see what it would be right now.

Poll came the weekend before election day. The MSM ran with the narrative that a tidal wave of support was coming for Kamala. The sole intent was to dampen republican turnout at the polls on Tuesday. Failed miserably. Let's see if the 'pollster' got paid for the results?

Quote:

---

Maybe something will come of this beyond the initial headline, but I can't see what it would be right now.

---

Neither can I but I don't know what Trump's lawyers know. And how far they stretch those facts.

Have you watched any of her interviews?

Selzer interviews? Not recently, but I've got other sources for comedy.

She loves getting skirts fluffed but is not very smart or at least doesn't come across that she is.

When you have time. On the Sunday before the election.

So Paxton needs to go Full-Alvin Bragg and charge her with criminal fraud, right?

…grand jury in Burnett Cty. I'm sure they'd be as sympathetic as an NYC jury in a Trump trial.

dmart90 said:

---

Yeah. This is stupid. Move on, Trump.

---

No it's not. He very well may not win this, but the message is clear. Be careful what you say because we won't ignore it anymore.

Gaeilge said:

---

Problem will be showing damages considering Trump won Iowa by 13pts. Would he have won it by 14 or 15pts w/o the poll? Who knows. But he won the state, so not sure this will go anywhere.

---

How much more money did the Trump campaign have to spend, to counteract the fake polling? Especially with the context of the Harris campaign acting on advanced knowledge?

Shouldnt be too hard to show damages.

They won by 13pts, so it's going to be hard to demonstrate that spending was necessary if they were so confident on their own internal polling

Copy of lawsuit here:

Trump lawsuit against Des Moines Register for flawed poll relies on invective - and a consumer protection statute.

Read here: Trump v. Selzer - Complaint (Dec. 16, 2024) | DocumentCloud https://t.co/OcqIy8xMgO

— David Folkenflik (@davidfolkenflik) December 17, 2024

Gaeilge said:

---

They won by 13pts, so it's going to be hard to demonstrate that spending was necessary if they were so confident on their own internal polling

---

That only bolsters their case.

If you're up by 13 points, you aren't going to spend as much. You can reallocate the funds, because you dont need to spend them there.

But if the polling is showing it's close, you're going to waste the funds in an area you dont need to. Hence the suit, and the damages.

Sid Farkas said:

---

So Paxton needs to go Full-Alvin Bragg and charge her with criminal fraud, right?

…grand jury in Burnett Cty. I'm sure they'd be as sympathetic as an NYC jury in a Trump trial.

---

Burnet

Go to 36 minute mark wherein Baris talks about knowing about the Selzer poll on Friday before its Saturday release and old the folks at Real Clear Politics about Ann calling the Harris campaign with glee that she Ann, was about to drop a bomb on Trump.

BMX Bandit said:

---

Copy of lawsuit here:

Trump lawsuit against Des Moines Register for flawed poll relies on invective - and a consumer protection statute.

Read here: Trump v. Selzer - Complaint (Dec. 16, 2024) | DocumentCloud https://t.co/OcqIy8xMgO

— David Folkenflik (@davidfolkenflik) December 17, 2024

---

Quote:

---

55. Iowa Code 714H.3(1) provides:

A person shall not engage in a practice or act the person knows or reasonably should
know is an unfair practice, deception, fraud, false pretense, or false promise, or the
misrepresentation, concealment, suppression, or omission of a material fact, with
intent that others rely upon the unfair practice, deception, fraud, false pretense, false
promise, misrepresentation, concealment, suppression, or omission in connection
with the advertisement, sale, or lease of consumer merchandise . . . .

56. Iowa Code 714H.2(3) defines a consumer as "a natural person or the person's
legal representative."

57. Iowa Code 714H.2(5) defines "deception" as "an act or practice that is likely to
mislead a substantial number of consumers as to a material fact or facts."

58. Iowa Code 714H.2(6) defines "merchandise" the same as the definition contained
in Iowa Code 714.16, under which the term includes "any objects, wares, goods, commodities, intangibles, securities, bonds, debentures, stocks, real estate or services." (Emphasis added).

59. Iowa Code 714H.2(9) defines "unfair practice" the same as the definition
contained in Iowa Code 714.16, under which the term "means an act or practice which causes substantial, unavoidable injury to consumers that is not outweighed by any consumer or competitive benefits which the practice produces."

---

Where is Leticia James and Alvin Bragg when you need them!!

nortex97 said:

---

I imagine his real goal is discovery of any payments to her.

---

Not saying he'll pull it off, but if so, I'd love to see him find a money trail to a number of other "independent" media members

Quote:

---

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP demands judgment against
Defendants J. ANN SELZER, SELZER & COMPANY, DES MOINES REGISTER AND
TRIBUNE COMPANY, and GANNETT CO., INC. as follows:
(a) On Count One, actual damages to be determined upon trial of this action;
(b) On Count One, statutory damages three times the actual damages suffered;
(c) On Count One, an order enjoining Defendants' ongoing deceptive and misleading acts
and practices relating to the Harris Poll and compelling Defendants to disclose all
information upon which they relied to engage in the deceptive and misleading acts
relating to the Harris Poll;
(d) The attorneys' fees and costs associated with this action; and
(e) Such other relief as the Court deems just and proper.
Date: December 16, 2024 Respectfully submitted,
/s/Edward Andrew Paltzi

---

Logos Stick said:

---

dmart90 said:

---

Yeah. This is stupid. Move on, Trump.

---

Libs said the same thing about the ABC lawsuit. We see how that turned out.

---

That had merit. This doesn't. So she refused to change her polling methodology. Just means she, and the paper she worked for, lose credibility.

There are lots of polls that are inaccurate.