Comments by "L.W. Paradis" (@l.w.paradis2108) on "Kim Iversen: WHERE Is Epstein's Client List? Elon Musk Pushes DOJ To Make Names Public" video.

  1. This!
    27
  2.  @matthiatt6834  That's where the money is all right.
    14
  3. Except that's not what happened.
    7
  4.  @themanfromdystopia807  Did you ever read the article alleged to be defamatory? Just curious. Or did you come away thinking the case was about who abused more? Because that's not what a defamation case is about.
    4
  5.  @themanfromdystopia807  The jury came up with comparative blame for the abusive marriage. Do you think Depp, or anyone, should be liable in defamation for their lawyer's speech? (That was a howler.) Let's use our heads. Kim saw through this. She always does.
    4
  6.  @tracieday8661  If I were Ruler of the World, I'd give Depp $1, and make the lawyer whose speech was found to be defamatory (and pinned on Depp!) refund his entire legal fee to Depp. With interest. 😂 Actually, I don't believe any of this was defamation under the law, but if rough justice were my goal . . .
    2
  7. She's right, you were duped.
    2
  8. So did Depp. You still don't get it, huh?
    2
  9. How is it we still don't know who was on the list? We all know where Julian Assange is.
    2
  10. You're still acting like that wasn't a violation of First Amendment rights and a show trial/ giant distraction.
    1
  11.  @riselikethephoenix1  OH PLEASE. Dupery.
    1
  12.  @riselikethephoenix1  Try learning something, someday. Put down the screen. Visit a library.
    1
  13.  @riselikethephoenix1  I don't have the time. If you want to repeat insipid, inapplicable, or meaningless talking points, go for it. Your friends will 👍 you more, and that's what matters.
    1
  14.  @riselikethephoenix1  Here's the short version: if Heard believed what she was saying, the New York Times malice standard, which protects First Amendment rights, cannot be met. As for Depp, it wasn't even his speech, but his lawyer's. That should never be imputed to the client in a defamation case. Not ever. I bet you never even read the article. Nobody should be taken to court for that article, much less held liable for it.
    1
  15.  @themanfromdystopia807  Well, I know the law, so there's that. The jury didn't apply it.
    1
  16.  @martell203  I hope both verdicts will be thrown out. I have never, ever heard of such a law as was applied to Depp, and I have two licenses, one of which is California. Depp's liability for his lawyer's speech, without clear and convincing proof that they conspired or something on that order, is a travesty.
    1
  17.  @waynemangan9925 Like I said. That's not even true. You literally dismiss the corroboration. Depp said enough on the stand himself for a legitimate defamation case to be thrown out. You've never seen one before, I'm guessing? I bet you never read the allegedly defamatory article. I mean, people aren't readers any more. 😂
    1
  18.  @waynemangan9925  Kim saw through it.
    1
  19.  @dan10400  Whoever shorted in December made a mint.
    1