submitted by KosherHiveKicker to whatever 11 hoursJun 17, 2025 13:30:46 ago (+45/-0) (joehoft.com)
https://joehoft.com/exclusive-mike-lindell-press-release-vindicated-in-landmark-defamation-trial/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=exclusive-mike-lindell-press-release-vindicated-in-landmark-defamation-trial
dassar 6 points 8 hours ago
He didn’t win. He was found to have defamed the guy and was ordered to pay about $2 million.
From the comments -
Mike was found to have NOT acted with malice and instead acted out of conviction.
This is what I don’t understand. If you actually believed what you asserted to be true, and no evidence shows that you did NOT believe it to be true, then that conviction of truth is as good as the truth concerning defamation and liable.
If you acted in 100% good faith with no intention to harm, then you have not committed any wrong doing.'
The jury apparently found that Mike acted from conviction and not malice which is the reason for only 5% recovery.
However, that very reason for 5% recovery is the exact reason why there should not be any recovery.
Glad he’s going to appeal this. I’m sure the other guy is as well.
EDIT: How hard is it for a shonk site to just post an actual ruling, so we can read it ourselves and not have to rely on 2nd hand opinion shaping.
It can only be defamation if the statements aren’t true in the first place and the person who claimed harm proves reputational or economic damage!! Malice pertains to libel, not slander or defamation. The judge violated Lindell’s constitutional rights by refusing to allow exculpatory evidence that would have shown Coomer/Dominion did exactly what was alleged and was not defamatory. Mike should win on appeal.