re: Patel suing The Atlantic

quote:

---

so long as the person publishing it did not knowingly publish a false hoo

---

They raced to publish it citing only ANONYMOUS SOURCES before Patel could respond, even though he said he'd run down dates and locations to specifically address the piece for the Atlantic.

Now as I've said, if Kash has been publicly drunk, or reasonably suspect of other Atlantic charges, the Atlantic should be free and clear. IDK what the truth is here. But Reuters' response sent up the antennas, big time.

I did and you know that proving libel for a public official is next to impossible given that the last case in NYT v. Sullivan where the Times was found libel in an Alabama Court and the Alabama Supreme Court was overturned by SCOTUS in 1964. And that was the last time anything close to a libel case was found in favor of a plaintiff against a press outlet.

You should read up on what constitutes malice and publishing an knowingly publishing an outright falsehood. Really you should stick to tax law, your not very good at other law Counselor, Read Sullivan and get back to me.

Atlantic would be free and clear even if it were determined that Patel was in fact a teetotaler. He would have to prove that the author knew Patel was a teetotaler before the article was published. If the author found out a week later, Atlantic is in the clear.

However, in this case we have Patel chugging on a champagne bottle, so we know he is not, so that is a strike against his claim. Also their is rumor and talk in DC as reported in the press that Patel is alleged to be drunk on numerous occasions.

Patel probably should not fight this even if he wasn't drunk, because If he was day drunk even one time, he's a loser. If he was late to a meeting because he was hungover from the night before and the night before is corroborate, he's toast in a libel suit

shite he may not want to be known about his personal behavior.....certainly nothing pertaining to his position as FBI Director as it applies to cases and official actions. But in terms of procedural admin stuff, if he opens the door in a counter, then the Atlantic can attempt to make his life miserable through discovery and interrogatories.......lawyers love Interrogatories, they are a lot of fun.

When I was practicing I would routinely send out 100 interrogatory questions just to see the response of the other side. If someone bitched or was too vague in their answer It was party time. You could be sure that I would send out a lot more , just for fun and if you did not answer I would call, and if you still refused to cooperate, I might even try a meeting with the judge assigned.

Place your bets on the outcome.

I say Patel doesn’t want to hand over documentation during discovery.
Patel ultimately doesn’t get a penny from The Atlantic for this lawsuit.

quote:

---

I say Patel doesn’t want to hand over documentation during discovery.

---

Why? What documents do you think would be damaging to him? What is your basis for this belief?

quote:

---

When I was practicing I would routinely send out 100 interrogatory questions just to see the response of the other side.

---

If you actually practiced you would know these would be objected to.

quote:

---

I’ve heard that the article was sourced by something like two dozen people within the FBI.

---

Name a single one

quote:

---

I did and you know that proving libel for a public official is next to impossible given that the last case in NYT v. Sullivan where the Times was found libel in an Alabama Court and the Alabama Supreme Court was overturned by SCOTUS in 1964. And that was the last time anything close to a libel case was found in favor of a plaintiff against a press outlet.

---

You should read up on the cardi B case from 2022. You are completely wrong that there hasn’t been a libel case won since 1964. Why did you lie about that? Or are you just scared to admit your complete ignorance???