Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop
If you are working in the clerk's office at the federal district court, and a man walks in and says, I'd like to file a tort claim, and you say, this is the federal court, you need to go to the country court, you haven't orchestrated anything. When you say that Schiff orchestrated with the whistleblower, you are misstating what happened, and you are either doing it consciously, because you like Republican propaganda, or you are doing it unconsciously, because you are susceptible to Republican propaganda. If you brought a claim based on purported conspiracy between the whistleblower and Schiff and tried to make it past summary judgment on what we know, you would lose. You keep using the word "evidence" but there is no evidence of the facts that go to key distinction, whether Schiff knew that a whistleblower had some kind of complaint or whether he worked with the whistleblower to shape the substance and manner of the complaint. There is no evidence that anyone on the Intelligence Committee did anything more than say, go to your IG. And you acknowledge as much when you talk about giving Republican Senators a whiff of cover. When your argument is about whether or not there is a whiff of evidence of something, you should stop arguing, because it means there isn't any evidence, and you should ask yourself when you are so committed to arguing for things that aren't true.
|
Reread that paragraph from the PBS article.
That’s adequate evidence to create an issue of fact. That gets you past summary judgment in state and fed court.
I’m not parroting something that isn’t true. I’m saying I’ve got enough to create the issue of fact. And I do (you’ve even fallen into arguing contrary factual allegations, which is often how one loses his summary judgment argument).
You keep arguing that you have the true and actual facts and I do not. You miss the point. The point is, is there enough to assert there was coordination or orchestration. Yes, there is enough to do that. And that’s all the Rs need.
Sans Schiff, there’s probably not enough to credibly create that question of fact.
