Ray Epps Sues Fox for Defamation

Lionfish said:
Yet you say she is credible. Ya, dummy the specifice ARE what matter. Park your arrogance.
Click to expand...

More idiocy from you. Go sit in the corner with the other guy.

The specifics 'that matter' are that 'Trump demanded to go to the Capital and became hostile to his SS' and that is not lost if she says 'he then got into his blue SUV limo' and it turns out it was a black SUV limo.

Trying to seize on the irrelevant 'specific's is just something people who have lost do when they have no other arguments.


If i am called to testify that an attack was an assault and not a mutual fight, and in my recollection i am clear it was an assault because i saw the one party trying to walk away and avoid it, it DOES not matter if i get a detail wrong, saying in my recollection he 'pushed and then punched her' and it turns out 'he punched and then pushed her'.

Derps scream, 'none of it matters as he got the 'details' wrong' but that is because they are derps. And stupid.
 
QP! said:
It does work in court as juries are not stupid like you.

People understand that in recalling things years later, small details can get lost while the big picture can still be clear.

Meaning i can recall correctly that the plane that crashed was on fire, but i might say it was the right engine and not the left.

Only an idiot (you) says, it was proven the left engine was on fire so your testimony the plane was no fire, is not accepted.

Her story has already been corroborated by various parties on the scene in the way that matters. Trump was angry, beligerant and threatening to his SS as he demanded to get taken to the Capital. That and not the specifics of what words he used and what specific angry gestures he made, is what matters to anyone not stupid (ie not you).
Click to expand...

That's funny since I've been on a couple of juries in my lifetime.
 
QP! said:
More idiocy from you. Go sit in the corner with the other guy.

The specifics 'that matter' are that 'Trump demanded to go to the Capital and became hostile to his SS' and that is not lost if she says 'he then got into his blue SUV limo' and it turns out it was a black SUV limo.

Trying to seize on the irrelevant 'specific's is just something people who have lost do when they have no other arguments.


If i am called to testify that an attack was an assault and not a mutual fight, and in my recollection i am clear it was an assault because i saw the one party trying to walk away and avoid it, it DOES not matter if i get a detail wrong, saying in my recollection he 'pushed and then punched her' and it turns out 'he punched and then pushed her'.

Derps scream, 'none of it matters as he got the 'details' wrong' but that is because they are derps. And stupid.
Click to expand...

Now you drag the Nazi's into the post. Arrogant pricks like you are a favorite.
 
martin said:
Epps offers the latest object lesson in "Never Go Out on a Limb for Donald Trump".

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/po...epps-files-defamation-suit-fox-news-rcna93939

Ray Epps, a Trump supporter who became the focus of right-wing conspiracy theories after he protested in Washington on Jan. 6, has filed a defamation lawsuit against Fox News and former host Tucker Carlson for claiming he was an undercover FBI agent who helped provoke the riot at the Capitol that day.

In his lawsuit, Epps accused Fox News of telling a “fantastical story” that he acted as a government-sponsored instigator of the violence that ensued as Congress sought to certify Joe Biden's electoral victory.

The lawsuit argues that Carlson launched a “years-long campaign” that spread falsehoods that “destroyed” the lives of Epps and his wife, who now reside in Utah but were living in Arizona at the time.

Epps is seeking punitive and compensatory damages to be determined at trial for “economic, emotional, reputational and other injuries."
Click to expand...

Epps isn't a supporter of Donald Trump.
 
QP! said:
She was not relaying what she said she witnessed.

She said she was relaying what she was told, as she recalled it.


If someone tells you they got in a fight, and they tell you they got tripped and hit their head, and you recall it as 'they were in a fight and got picked up and hit their head' that is NOT a lie.

In the retelling of Trump's conflict with his SS in his angry rant to go the Capital the vantage point from which he lunged at his SS in anger does not matter. It is the conflict that matters, and not the specifics.
Click to expand...

She made it up!
 
Tinkerpeach said:
You stated that juries are not stupid like me yet I've been on them.

So you are a liar.
Click to expand...

"juries" as in the entire 'jury' is not stupid like you. The fact that there are 12 people over rides the stupid of the individual.


that does not mean that individuals as stupid like you do not get on juries.

there is no lie there. You just validate how stupid you are.
 
QP! said:
Nope.

That is just you being stupid again.

If i tell you 6 months ago i was in a fight, and that is what you recall, and can testify to that, that is what matters.

If you get certain points wrong, such as 'was it a kick or punch that started it', everyone knows that happens. That does not then invalidate that you got the point that matters correct.

Anyone trying to say 'she said it was a punch when it was a kick' as a way to try to say it did not happen and was all a lie, is just stupid.
Click to expand...

Random phrases. No apparent coherency.
 
Tinkerpeach said:
That doesn't work in court.

If you aren't credible you are not a good witness.

She will have to say who told her this then that agent will be questioned for his statement.

If he cannot be validated then her whole testimony is irrelevant.

So an agent saying Trump grabbed the wheel and another agent by the throat to force them to drive to the capital is obviously lying so everything he said will be discounted by a jury.

Besides, she wasn't even a witness to it.

She never heard the words.

Why haven't they been in touch with someone who actually did here it?

Why are they relying on her and not the source?
Click to expand...

Because she's willing to blatantly make shit up and call it 'The Truth' for the Democrats.
 
QP! said:
It does work in court as juries are not stupid like you.

People understand that in recalling things years later, small details can get lost while the big picture can still be clear.

Meaning i can recall correctly that the plane that crashed was on fire, but i might say it was the right engine and not the left.

Only an idiot (you) says, it was proven the left engine was on fire so your testimony the plane was no fire, is not accepted.

Her story has already been corroborated by various parties on the scene in the way that matters. Trump was angry, beligerant and threatening to his SS as he demanded to get taken to the Capital. That and not the specifics of what words he used and what specific angry gestures he made, is what matters to anyone not stupid (ie not you).
Click to expand...

Perjury does not work in court, dumbass.
 
QP! said:
More idiocy from you. Go sit in the corner with the other guy.

The specifics 'that matter' are that 'Trump demanded to go to the Capital and became hostile to his SS' and that is not lost if she says 'he then got into his blue SUV limo' and it turns out it was a black SUV limo.

Trying to seize on the irrelevant 'specific's is just something people who have lost do when they have no other arguments.


If i am called to testify that an attack was an assault and not a mutual fight, and in my recollection i am clear it was an assault because i saw the one party trying to walk away and avoid it, it DOES not matter if i get a detail wrong, saying in my recollection he 'pushed and then punched her' and it turns out 'he punched and then pushed her'.

Derps scream, 'none of it matters as he got the 'details' wrong' but that is because they are derps. And stupid.
Click to expand...

Random phrases. No apparent coherency.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top