“Read the entire decision here. Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss are heroes for our democracy and didn’t deserve any of their treatment. This is great news. Take that, Rudy.”

Rudy Giuliani, who once served as Donald Trump’s attorney, has conceded he made defamatory statements about Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss—two Black Georgia election workers—in an attempt to settle their lawsuit against him and to satisfy a judge who thought about sanctioning him.

In the Tuesday night filing, Giuliani stated he does not contest Moss and Freeman’s claims that he made slanderous statements about them following the 2020 election. The pair counted ballots in Fulton County, Ga. However, in the filing, he also stated that the false claims about vote-rigging in the 2020 presidential election were constitutionally protected speech and did not damage Freeman and Moss.

In a defamation lawsuit that was filed in 2021, the women said that they became targets of ridiculous conspiracy theories pushed by Giuliani and employees of the right-wing news network One America News. While Giuliani refuted the claims, One America News settled with Freeman and Moss for an undisclosed amount in 2022. The federal judge, Beryl A. Howell of the DC District Court, is still reviewing Tuesday’s filings from Giuliani.

On Wednesday, Howell recognized Giuliani’s concessions in the lawsuit and ordered him to pay more of Moss and Freeman’s legal fees, after he was already ordered Giuliani to pay the pair $90,000. It’s also unknown how criminal prosecutors from the Justice Department’s special counsel’s office, who have questioned Giuliani, will react to his revelations in the lawsuit.

Attorneys for Moss and Freeman will respond next week in court to several of Giuliani’s latest statements. The duo’s lead attorney Michael J. Gottlieb, a partner at Willkie, Farr & Gallagher, stated on Wednesday that Giuliani’s concessions were a “major milestone” in the case.

“Giuliani’s stipulation concedes what we have always known to be true—Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss honorably performed their civic duties in the 2020 presidential election in full compliance with the law; and the allegations of election fraud he and former-President Trump made against them have been false since day one,” he explained.

Go after everyone that put your entire families life in danger. Thank you for your service and I hope no one has to endure what you guys had to ever again.

* * * * *

Meanwhile, Republicans grill FBI Director over conspiracy theories.

          While Biden was working to advance America’s interests at home and abroad, House Republicans were attacking Trump-appointed FBI Director Chris Wray about baseless conspiracy theories that the FBI understandably chose not to investigate. Wray fought back hard, saying, “The idea that I’m biased against conservatives seems somewhat insane to me, given my own personal background.” See The Hill, Wray takes aim at GOP claims of FBI politicization.

          Wray was forced to defend against GOP conspiracy theories that the FBI was a moving force behind the January 6th insurrection. Wray said,

This notion that somehow the violence at the Capitol on Jan. 6 was part of some operation orchestrated by FBI sources and agents is ludicrous and is a disservice to our brave, hardworking, dedicated men and women.

          Wray also commented on efforts by GOP Rep. Jim Jordan and others to “defund” the FBI. Wray noted that any such effort would make America less secure. Wray said:

It would hurt the American people, neighborhoods and communities all across this country, the people we’re protecting from cartels, violent criminals, gang members, predators, foreign and domestic terrorists, cyberattacks, I could go on and on. And the people that would help would be those same violent gangs and cartels, foreign terrorists, Chinese spies, hackers and so forth.

          When the Director of the FBI says that efforts by Republicans to attack the FBI are “insane,” “ludicrous,” and would “help violent gangs and foreign terrorists,” you know that the GOP is descending into madness.

Two defamation suits against GOP lies about January 6th and the 2020 election.

          In the aftermath of January 6th and Trump's loss in 2020, the GOP and Fox News began promoting lies about both events. Individuals who were targeted by the lies are fighting back through defamation suits—following the successful precedent of E. Jean Carroll (against Trump) and Dominion Voting Systems (against Fox).

        Fox News promoted the false story that Ray Epps—a two-time Trump voter—was a government undercover agent who encouraged insurrectionists to attack the Capitol to embarrass Trump. Epps is now suing Fox News. See NYTimes, Fox News Sued for Defamation by Man Linked to Conspiracy Theories. Epps demanded a retraction—a demand that Fox News has ignored. Fox News should expect to pay another substantial settlement for defaming Epps—who expects to be charged by the DOJ any day now for participating in the insurrection.

          Two Georgia election workers defamed by Rudy Giuliani--Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss—have asked a federal court to impose monetary sanctions against Rudy Giulian for failing to turn over electronic communications on his cell phone and computer. See Politico, Georgia election workers say Giuliani failed to turn over key evidence in defamation suit.

          Both developments are good news. Fox News and Republican operatives acted in wildly irresponsible ways following the 2020 election in the mistaken belief that they could defame innocent Americans with impunity. That belief has resulted in three-quarters of a billion-dollar payout by Fox and a two-billion claim still wending its way through the courts. Let’s hope that Ray Epps is indicted for his role in the insurrection and recovers millions from Fox for falsely claiming that Epps was working for the FBI.

          The claims underlying the defamation suits are part of the bad-faith conspiracy theories that continue to circulate among right-wing politicians and commentators today. Indeed, FBI Director Chris Wray went out of his way to debunk the Ray Epps conspiracy theory in his remarks to the House Judiciary Committee. The cumulative effect of suits by Dominion, Smartmatic, E. Jean Carroll, Ruby Freeman, and Shaye Moss should go a long way to controlling the spread of disinformation by solvent defendants going into 2024.

[Robert B. Hubbell Newsletter]

In fact, Fox paid out $787,500,000.00 just so it wouldn’t have to reveal in open court how mendacious and duplicitous it is.

Though most Fox viewers probably wouldn’t really care anyway. It’s a lot easier to indoctrinate people than it is to deprogram them.

4 (Possible) Reasons Johnny Depp Lost His Defamation Lawsuit Against the Sun

As we've said before, in the U.S. the defamatory statement had to cause you some type of harm in order for you to seek justice, however, in the U.K. the requirements are even more basic.

The statement in question must identify or refer to the claimant, neither of which happened in #AmberHeard's original op-ed- and although the op-ed was written and published in the United States, the Sun reported on it.

Further more, the Sun reported on an op-ed that did not explicity state Johnny Depp's name- HOWEVER, the op-ed was (and still is) of major public interest of millions around the globe.

Not only was the Sun not privy to the knowledge of (potential) defamation prior to commenting on it (making them unaware and in the clear accoridng to Reg. 19 of the 2002 EC Directive in the UK), BUT they also are protected under the UK defense of #reynoldsprivilege.

Lastly, careful research and responible behavior is rather subjective to the eye of the beholder so the decision to dispense the jury in favor of a judge made that subjective decision the monumental deciding factor and decreased Johnny's odds in having someone see his side.

This situation is the perfect example of why hiring an experienced and knowledgable #defamationlawyer is key.

A RM Warner #defamationattorney will make sure to fight for your right to a fair trial, regardless of the state or country you reside in, and will come prepared with the knowledge of that territory's laws so you're protected no matter the region.

We help clients all over the globe so click the link in the bio to schedule a consultation today!

Sad to see that some of y'all "feminists" who claim gender equality includes protecting men who have been abused and encouraging them to be more open emotionally backing Amber Heard in this trial. Once again, y'all were just full of shit.

Watch "This One Thing Made Alex Jones Stop Lying | Robert Reich" on YouTube

$787.5 MILLION DOLLAR SETTLEMENT

Now I need every person/family that has been harmed/killed by “Alternative Facts” on that network to continue to file suit.  You didn’t want Dominion to air your business for the world to see FOX but you are still liable for your actions.  You caused deaths and harm to many.

Deciphering Defamation: A User's Guide to Navigating Online Reputation Risks | Suro Law Firm

In the digital age, where information flows freely, protecting your online reputation is paramount. Defamation, a pervasive threat, can tarnish one's character and credibility in an instant. As a user in today's online landscape, understanding defamation risks and preemptive measures is essential.

Understanding Defamation: A User's Perspective

Defamation, encompassing libel and slander, refers to false statements that harm a person's reputation. Online platforms amplify the reach and impact of defamatory content, posing significant risks to individuals and businesses alike.

Identifying Defamation: Red Flags to Watch For

False Statements: Beware of false information disseminated about you or your business, especially if it damages your reputation or credibility.

Online Reviews: While reviews provide valuable feedback, they can also be avenues for defamation. Monitor online reviews vigilantly, addressing any false or malicious claims promptly.

Social Media: Social media platforms facilitate rapid dissemination of information. Be vigilant of defamatory content shared on social networks and take immediate action to mitigate its impact.

Mitigating Defamation Risks: Proactive Strategies for Users

Monitor Your Online Presence: Regularly monitor online mentions and reviews using monitoring tools. Promptly address any defamatory content or misinformation to prevent escalation.

Educate Yourself: Familiarize yourself with defamation laws in your jurisdiction. Understanding your rights and legal recourse empowers you to respond effectively to defamatory attacks.

Seek Legal Counsel: In cases of severe defamation, consult with a defamation lawyer to explore legal options. A skilled attorney can provide guidance and representation to protect your reputation and pursue justice.

Defamation Lawyer Denver: Your Trusted Partner in Reputation Protection

Denver, home to reputable defamation lawyers, offers invaluable expertise in navigating defamation claims. A defamation lawyer in Denver can provide personalized guidance and representation tailored to your specific needs, ensuring your reputation remains intact.

Conclusion

As a user navigating the digital landscape, safeguarding your online reputation is non-negotiable. By understanding defamation risks, identifying red flags, and implementing proactive strategies, you can mitigate potential threats and protect your reputation effectively. Remember, in the realm of online communication, vigilance and proactive measures are key to preserving your credibility and integrity. Choose empowerment over vulnerability, and take charge of your online reputation today.

Look no further than the Suro Law Firm if you're in need of a Defamation Attorney in Denver. With their renowned expertise and unwavering dedication, they cater to clients not just in Denver but across Colorado. With a solid reputation for excellence, the Suro Law Firm is your reliable partner in navigating challenging defamation cases.

UPDATE FROM JURY: Jury asked if the verdict form was referring to #AmberHeard's entire OpEd or just the headline. Amber Heard previously spoke on this, stating, “I spoke up against s3xu@l violence -- and faced our culture's wrath. That has to change."

During the #JohnnyDeppVsAmberHeardTrial, the jury did hear Amber say that she experienced SA by #JohnnyDepp using a bottle...so there's that. 

However, the #johnnydepptrial jury is likely considering whether there's any evidence (and EVIDENCE is the key word we, and the jury, are looking at here) that Amber was SA by #Depp, which the jury will invariably answer in the NEGATIVE.

Follow along for more #amberheardjohnnydepp updates on this #defamationtrial!

My Legal Battle with my Family and their Co-horts / Co-conspirators (168):

Attached to this post are four (4) images. The purpose of this post is to show how my family (these images - accurate, true and correct evidence evidencing my sister, Shalene Sumter Ryall) pretends to the world how they care about and love me but in reality this is just a front as to me, they berate me and call me names and wish me harm. And how they are nothing but fake users.

The top left image is of a text exhange I had with my nephew, Alex Ryall, on 11-6-20. He had asked me questions to which I responded the truth and then my sister, Shalene Ryall, grabbed the phone from him and began to berate me calling me a "fucking twat."

The top right image is of an email my sister, Shalene Sumter (Ryall), sent me on 6-9-21 beginning with the line "Happy Pride." She concluded her email with "Love, Moose."

The bottom right image is of a comment my sister, Shalene Sumter (Ryall) posted to my Instagram Account on 10-23-21 (after I had blocked her account and she made up another account under the name "Shalene Sumter" to stalk me). Here, to my 25,000 plus followers at the the time, calls me a liar by stating "None of this is true., We all love you very, very much and wish you would reach out. We miss you."

The bottom right image is of a comment my sister, Shalene Sumter (Ryall), posted to my Facebook account under a fake account she also created there using the name "Amy Waltman." Here she defends my mother and father, Gloria Sumter and Leonard Sumter Jr., for sexually molesting me when I was nine (9) years old and inadvertantly admits how my parents falsely accused another, completely innocent, man named Terry Breland of actually being the one that sexually molested me. This "Amy Waltman", who is actually my sister, then accuses me of having "psychotic episodes" and berates me. My sister using the fake account "Amy Waltman" posted this to my Facebook page not long before I had the seizure during which I broke my jaw.

I need to also state that both of the fake accounts my sister created (IG-"Shalene Sumter"; FB-"Amy Waltman") were in response of me posting how "I was having to take my family to court" and how that "stressed me out and caused me to have seizures" (Instagram on 10-23-21) and how I "filed a lawsuit against my family" (Facebook on September of 2022).

Also, between my sister creating a second Instagram account so she could continue to stalk me despite being blocked and made nasty slanderous /libelous comments on my post by calling me a liar to my 25,000 plus followers and her creating a second fake Facebook account "Amy Waltman", I took my sister to court for making up the first fake account under her nee, "Shalene Sumter", to stalk and harass me. The judge in that proceeding told my sister to stop creating fake accounts and to stop posting to my social media accounts. To evade taking responsibliity for her actions (obviously not a social media afficionado, my sister purported to the judge that she only changed her Instagram account name from "Shalene Ryall" to "Shalene Sumter" due to her impending divorce. Anyone remotely familiar with social media privacy preferences, understands that by changing the name on an account has no affect as to whether you are blocked. It's the ACCOUNT which is blocked, not the name of the account.

This evidences for what reason my sister subsequently created the "Amy Waltman" Facebook account - she believed she would she be safe from legal recourse for her stalking.

I have, on many occasions, plead with my family to please cease all stalking and harassment as its stress causes me seizures. Why are they so insistent to deny me access to the courts / judicial system? , According to Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Georgia Law) this is explicitly indicia of their guilty. Yet, after nine (9) years of harassment, threats and retaliation they still refuse to relent, instead doubling their efforts. This is evidence of their overt actons to cause my seizures. It also is inculpatory of attempting to murder me as it would be

FYI, you can click on any of the images attached to this, or any post, to see the full text / content of the image.

Oh, one more very important point to show. The top right image which is of the email my sister sent me on 6-9-21 asking questions because she had audio, video and photographic evidence of her then husband, John Ryall, being abusive to my nephews and how she was taking him to court. But shown in the top left image, which is of a text message my sister sent me on 11-6-20 calling me a twat then stating "at least [I] quit calling CPS on her family." That is because after witnessing the abuse of my nephews by both my sister, Shalene Sumter, and my brother-in-law, John Ryall, I had called DCS (Department of Child Services) in August 2014, but not since. But she admits via email in June 2021 that this abuse was occuring.

#57: Murder Mayhem

Only murders in the building? So just a lot of crows?