Comments by "J Nagarya" (@jnagarya519) on "BREAKING: Rudy Giuliani LOSES major court case" video.

This is a civil case.
8
@JustChuck1982 SEPARATE case DIFFERENT court.
2
@mariastevens6406 I have an education in law. I don't post law-illiterate generalizations. I'm not MAGA -- and not the opposite of MAGA who does exactly the same thing as MAGA: name-calling in place of THINKING.
2
@rickallen1908 It isn't needed in the criminal case where he is charged not for his SPEECH but for his ACTIONS.
2
@rickallen1908 He is trying to block it so he doesn't have to pay up. Period. Full stop. End of story. The CIVIL DEFAMATION suit is about SPEECH; the CRIMINAL case is about ACTIONS.
2
@muuuuuud Defamation is a CIVIL suit. Yes -- Giuliani is CRIMINALLY charged in OTHER court cases.
1
@B_Bodziak JESUS Christ -- get some basic education in distinguishing between civil and criminal. In THIS case Giuliani is being sued for DEFAMATION, which is a CIVIL action -- a tort; personal injury -- for DAMAGES.
1
@rickallen1908 How can his admission, in a CIVIL action, to having DEFAMED two private individuals, be relevant in a CRIMINAL RICO case?
1
@spikefivefivefive January 6th was INSURRECTION. Stop the dishonest effort to change the subject.
1
@shleyLX "a civil case that will be used in the criminal case." And exactly how is that to be done? DEFAMATION is a CIVIL action for PERSONAL INJURY. CRIMINAL actions are prosecuted by the GOV'T. We can't have the gov't prosecuting private citizens for SPEECH, which is the essence of DEFAMATION.
1
@B_Bodziak Any criminal charges are SEPARATE case DIFFERENT court. Those who harassed and threatened Ms. Freeman and her daughter engaged in CRIMINAL actions as part of the conspiracy, and where Giuliani committed CRIMNAL actions in that aspect of the conspiracy those are charged in the RICO case. DEFAMATION is PERSONAL INJURY, TORT, a CIVIL action. That aspect is a SEPARATE action. The CRIMINAL deals with ACTIONS; the CIVIL deals with SPEECH.
1
@JustChuck1982 No -- it means that the civil and criminal trials are SEPARATE, and different in nature: DEFAMATION is a CIVIL TORT, CRIMES are prosecuted by the GOV'T.
1
@kewakl8891 The CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY ALREAADY comprehends the CRIMES Giuliani committed; more so, the crimes committed by Harrison Floyd, and Kanye's person, and the white Lutheran minister, who directly threatened Ms. Freeman and her daughter. Guiliani is being tried in the DEFAMATION case for his SPEECH. The SEPARATE CRIMINAL trial is prosecuting his ACTIONS.
1
@JustChuck1982 The presumption of innocence does not negate probable cause, or trial on charges before one is convicted/found guilty. In short, your point is pointless. DEFAMATION is a PRIVATE right of action -- a tort; personal injury. It is about S-P-E-E-C-H, and DAMAGES. If the defendant is found "guilty," there is no penalty beyond payment of money damages. A CRIMINAL prosecution is about A-C-T-I-O-N-S and the penalty typically includes at very least the possibility of incarceration.
1
@biot2156 It depends on whether it's relevant, regardless whether it appears to be the "same activity". There is always opposing counsel challenging the admission of evidence y the other side.
1
No, they are not heroes; they are victims of the most vile of all the villainy engaged in by the Trump criminal enterprise. They are Christian ladies who give to their community, and who know Georgia's history of racism and lynching so wouldn't even consider committing a crime.
1
People who do their jobs are not heroes. They are simply people who are doing their jobs. If everyone who does their job is a hero, then the word "hero" has no meaning.
1
@lifeisgood1310 Being "proud" of someone else's efforts is effort to steal credit.
1
@ApinofArc The DEFINITION of hero is "above and beyond" the norm. Doing one's job does not make one a hero; it is going beyond it, and typically includes endangering one's life. If you had as much experience with the medical profession as I have, you'd recognize the difference between those few who practice medicine -- they are not heroes; that is what their job is to be -- and the majority that do "finance". The US health care system is based on the monetization of ILLNESS -- "healthiness" has no currency. If you ain't sick, no money is made by those with skin in the game -- the medical and insurance industries. The sicker you are, the greater the profit for OTHERS than YOU.
1
@ApinofArc "Above and beyond" is WITNESSED by others -- that is not "subjective". And I'm sick of the avoidance of fact by dodging into "subjectivism". There is nothing heroic in doing one's job as trained to do it. And you obviously don't know anything about the medical industry based upon experience. But sure -- try to tell us how the US medical industry, which is based upon the monetization of illness -- exploitation of illness for PROFIT -- is heroic. There are those who can PAY for the best medical treatment; and then there's the rest of us. There is nothing "heroic" in any of it.
1
@ApinofArc There is nothing heroic in getting an education in order to have a particular skill. Why not claim the legal profession is "heroic" -- when only those who can pay cash money can get legal representation.
1
@ApinofArc Doing one's job as required is not heroic. It is only by going above and beyond, at risk of one's own safety and life, that makes one a potential hero. I refer you to a DICTIONARY on the point.
1
@ApinofArc I'm literate; I don't make up "new" definitions of words to simply suit my irrationalities. If everyone is a hero for doing their job, then the word 'hero" is meaningless.
1
@ApinofArc I adhere to facts. It is a fact that a person simply doing their job is not a hero -- else everyone would be a "hero" and the word would be meaningless.
1
@ApinofArc It isn't logically incorrect: a hero is a special category. But if everyone is a hero, then no one is a hero.
1