Oil Billionaire Sues to Stop Criticism

[Michael Hardner]

The WEF crew doesn't want to talk about this sort of overt corruption.

Texas oil man contributes $1M to governor and gets a money saving loophole as a present from said governor.

Now Kelcy Warren is suing Beto O'Rourke for talking about it.

 

https://www.levernews.com/the-lawsuit-that-could-freeze-speech-against-billionaires/

But the WEF talks about climate change so they're worse....

 

[Aristides]

Just the GOP looking out for the little guy again.

[Moonlight Graham]

5 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

The WEF crew doesn't want to talk about this sort of overt corruption.

Texas oil man contributes $1M to governor and gets a money saving loophole as a present from said governor.

Now Kelcy Warren is suing Beto O'Rourke for talking about it.

 

https://www.levernews.com/the-lawsuit-that-could-freeze-speech-against-billionaires/

But the WEF talks about climate change so they're worse....

 

Its not defamation if its true.  Beto will get off.

The biggest conspiracies are right in from of our eyes.  Follow the money.  This stuff happens regularly.

[Michael Hardner]

5 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Its not defamation if its true.  Beto will get off.

The biggest conspiracies are right in from of our eyes.  Follow the money.  This stuff happens regularly.

Beto still has to spend money to defend himself. What if he didn't have the money?

[Moonlight Graham]

10 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Beto still has to spend money to defend himself. What if he didn't have the money?

Yes I agree, this person suing is a huge jerk.  Unfortunately anyone can sue anyone.  And here it acts like a tactic that also will make other politicians more fearful of speaking out about similar corruptions.

It's pretty sad how corrupt our politics are.  It affects our health, environment, economy, housing markets,  foreign policy... everything we could imagine.  It's a meta issue.

[Aristides]

12 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Beto still has to spend money to defend himself. What if he didn't have the money?

Hopefully he will get costs if he wins.

[Aristides]

1 hour ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Yes I agree, this person suing is a huge jerk.  Unfortunately anyone can sue anyone.  And here it acts like a tactic that also will make other politicians more fearful of speaking out about similar corruptions.

It's pretty sad how corrupt our politics are.  It affects our health, environment, economy, housing markets,  foreign policy... everything we could imagine.  It's a meta issue.

It's Amurica, you can sue if your coffee is too hot.

[reason10]

On 1/20/2023 at 7:54 PM, Michael Hardner said:

The WEF crew doesn't want to talk about this sort of overt corruption.

Texas oil man contributes $1M to governor and gets a money saving loophole as a present from said governor.

Now Kelcy Warren is suing Beto O'Rourke for talking about it.

 

https://www.levernews.com/the-lawsuit-that-could-freeze-speech-against-billionaires/

But the WEF talks about climate change so they're worse....

 

If the person getting sued committed libel and slander, those are items that are fair game in ANY court in the land, billionaire or not.

“Beto O’Rourke told millions of his followers that [Warren] engaged in bribery, corruption, and extortion and that he profited from the death of his fellow Texans simply because Mr. Warren gave a perfectly legal campaign contribution to the candidate of his choosing, Gov. Abbott,”

If the bribery, corruption and extortion are FACTS, there's no lawsuit. Any first year attorney will tell you that TRUTH is a defense to slander and libel.

Here is the alleged "loophole" that your source accuses the Texas Legislature of giving to energy producers.

On June 8, 2021, Abbott signed into law a set of bills that would purportedly improve the state’s power grid and require winterization of energy infrastructure. However, a loophole in the bill was carved out for the state’s natural gas suppliers that allowed them to opt out of this requirement, despite gas companies being the “primary cause of the outages,” according to the Texas Tribune.

This is nothing more than OPINION. It may be correct or it may be false.

Whenever I discuss ANY state laws, I first get a link of the legislature of that particular state along with its statutes. Fox News is pretty helpful in naming the actual law and which house it originated from.

So where in the Texas Statutes is a provision allowing natural gas suppliers to opt out of the requirement for winterizing energy infrastructure? That part should be easy to track if it actually happened.

Bear in mind, left wing hacks like CNN, MSNBC, THE VIEW, accused Florida of passing a DON'T SAY GAY law, which was a LIE. I had an open mind and looked up the bill. The word GAY did not appear at all. The name of the bill Governor DeSAntis signed was the Parental Rights In Education Law.

https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1557

I'm not saying your source is telling the truth or not. The only way to affirm that truth is to look up the legislation. Did Texas pass a loophole for natural gas companies or not? If it did, the law is in the statutes and can be easily accessed. (Internet legal research has come a LONG way from the very expensive Westlaw days)

By the way, Libel And Slander lawsuits happen every day. This forum isn't the only place unfriendly to free speech. The requirement in any libel or slander suit is to show actual damages, monetary damages especially. That's where a case comes from. And truth is the only defense against such a lawsuit. If what the respondent said was factual, then damages or not there is no case.

(In criminal cases, it's Plaintiff versus Defendant. In Civil cases its Petitioner versus Respondent.)

 

 

[reason10]

14 hours ago, Aristides said:

It's Amurica, you can sue if your coffee is too hot.

Actually, you sue if you're stupid enough to put a styrofoam container of hot coffee between your bare legs while leaving a McDonalds parking lot.

[reason10]

On 1/20/2023 at 8:08 PM, Aristides said:

Just the GOP looking out for the little guy again.

Doesn't look like any little guys were involved in this at all. Beatoff O'Rourke does not qualify as a little guy.

[reason10]

On 1/21/2023 at 1:03 AM, Moonlight Graham said:

Its not defamation if its true.  Beto will get off.

The biggest conspiracies are right in from of our eyes.  Follow the money.  This stuff happens regularly.

Actually, you should follow the legislation. Find the bill passed by the Texas Legislature and signed by the governor that offers a loophole (in this case, allowing natural gas companies to be exempt from the winterization requirement.)

If such a loophole exists, then Beatoff is correct and truth is a defense to any defamation/slander suit. If the loophole DOESN'T exist, he has a problem, especially if his big mouth caused monetary damages for the entity he allegedly defamed. That's how juries normally come up with monetary awards in such lawsuits.

[reason10]

On 1/21/2023 at 6:11 AM, Michael Hardner said:

Beto still has to spend money to defend himself. What if he didn't have the money?

If he didn't have the money, then the attorneys for the Petitioner would probably refuse to take the case, since they normally go after a deep pocket. Then again, the billionaire Petitioner would likely have paid them a handsome retainer, which would cover their billable hours and filing costs. (And those filing costs are not cheap.)

[Aristides]

15 hours ago, reason10 said:

Doesn't look like any little guys were involved in this at all. Beatoff O'Rourke does not qualify as a little guy.

The little guys are the public who get screwed when billionaires get to opt out of legislation which would prevent the kind of power outages that killed 250 people in Texas.

Edited January 23, 2023 by Aristides

[Nationalist]

Question: What sort of warped logic allows you to think oil and gas are responsible for power outages in Texas? If I remember correctly, it was those stupid fcking windmills that froze and stopped working.

That's reliable green energy for ya.

[reason10]

9 hours ago, Aristides said:

The little guys are the public who get screwed when billionaires get to opt out of legislation which would prevent the kind of power outages that killed 250 people in Texas.

Well, all you have to do is your homework. Show us that legislation that allegedly did all that damage. Give us a link to the exact law that was signed by Governor Abbot.

[Aristides]

1 hour ago, reason10 said:

Well, all you have to do is your homework. Show us that legislation that allegedly did all that damage. Give us a link to the exact law that was signed by Governor Abbot.

Yes, allegedly, that is what the suit will be about. I'm not taking sides here, just clarifying who the little guy is. I think people should be accountable for what they say, the Trump Cult and those who stick up for people like Santos don't. 

[reason10]

On 1/23/2023 at 11:02 AM, Aristides said:

Yes, allegedly, that is what the suit will be about. I'm not taking sides here, just clarifying who the little guy is. I think people should be accountable for what they say, the Trump Cult and those who stick up for people like Santos don't. 

You took a side with the goose steppers when you said "Trump Cult." There is no such thing, YOU FCKING TROLL.

And I STILL haven't seen any documentation as to the legislation that hurt some snowflake's feelings.

Do your homework or admit you don't know what you're talking about.

[Deluge]

On 1/20/2023 at 5:54 PM, Michael Hardner said:

The WEF crew doesn't want to talk about this sort of overt corruption.

Texas oil man contributes $1M to governor and gets a money saving loophole as a present from said governor.

Now Kelcy Warren is suing Beto O'Rourke for talking about it.

 

https://www.levernews.com/the-lawsuit-that-could-freeze-speech-against-billionaires/

But the WEF talks about climate change so they're worse....

 

Oil tycoons need all the help they can get. They've got a diapered sociopath in the WH who wants to bury the entire industry, for God's sake. 

Legislating policy based on climate change is what should be banned. 

[reason10]

On 2/1/2023 at 3:13 PM, Deluge said:

Oil tycoons need all the help they can get. They've got a diapered sociopath in the WH who wants to bury the entire industry, for God's sake. 

Legislating policy based on climate change is what should be banned. 

 

Well, you're right on all counts. Only way to ban legislation based on the climate change lie is to vote all DemoNazis OUT OF OFFICE.

[Nationalist]

OK... @Deluge and @reason10

Gents...I usually agree with both of you. But the fact is...our climate is changing. Is man contributing to this event? Probably. Is it worth the extreme measures these Tweekies are imposing? Certainly not.

With all the money we've blown on this folly, we could have implemented cheap nat gas and coal generators in 3rd world countries, providing stable power and an avenue for improving the extreme poverty of these nations.

Instead...they grant China and India a pass on their crusade. 2 nations that are certainly not in the same position as a place like most African nations.

But no. These sick-os decide to stomp on the western nations and destroy their economies.

Its all asinine as hell.

[Deluge]

Oh, I can buy that the climate is changing. What I don't buy is the left's bullshit scare tactics. You don't see legitimate scientists running around screaming nonsensical bullshit about the world ending.  

Even BBC, which is not conservative, is reporting that the science community isn't taking the "human extinction" piece seriously. 

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-62378157

The Left has been spewing nonsense and they know it; otherwise, the coastal lefties would have already packed their bags and moved inland. 

 

Edited February 6, 2023 by Deluge

[reason10]

2 hours ago, Deluge said:

Oh, I can buy that the climate is changing. What I don't buy is the left's bullshit scare tactics. You don't see legitimate scientists running around screaming nonsensical bullshit about the world ending.  

Even BBC, which is not conservative, is reporting that the science community isn't taking the "human extinction" piece seriously. 

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-62378157

The Left has been spewing nonsense and they know it; otherwise, the coastal lefties would have already packed their bags and moved inland. 

 

A couple of facts:

1. The climate of the EARTH has changed many times in the past. In fact the reason we are not sharing the land with a bunch of DINOSAURS is because the climate of the Earth became a deep freeze, rendering those monsters extinct. The climate has changed MANY times, long before Texans started buying SUVS.

2. Only 29 percent of the Earth's surface is actual land mass. The rest is WATER. On the purest scientific terms, it is possible that the condition of the WATER (which humans have ZERO to say about) will affect the next climate change. Certainly the greenhouse gasses, (which the ALGORE nuts claim is warming the earth) consist 97 percent of WATER VAPOR. Suggesting human activity can somehow change GLOBAL climates when humans barely make up 10 percent of JUST THE SURFACE OF THE EARTH is imbecilic. It has been proven FALSE anyway, by reliable scientists (read those who AREN'T on the payroll of George Soros.)

[Guest]

4 hours ago, Deluge said:

Oh, I can buy that the climate is changing. What I don't buy is the left's bullshit scare tactics. You don't see legitimate scientists running around screaming nonsensical bullshit about the world ending.  

Even BBC, which is not conservative, is reporting that the science community isn't taking the "human extinction" piece seriously. 

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-62378157

The Left has been spewing nonsense and they know it; otherwise, the coastal lefties would have already packed their bags and moved inland. 

 

Nobody seriously believes the human race is going extinct due to climate change, just as nobody seriously believes the garbage reason10 posted in the post above this one.

People who argue against the fact that climate change is real and human caused use the extinction argument as a crutch.

Edited February 6, 2023 by bcsapper

[Deluge]

4 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Nobody seriously believes the human race is going extinct due to climate change, just as nobody seriously believes the garbage reason10 posted in the post above this one.

People who argue against the fact that climate change is real and human caused use the extinction argument as a crutch.

If that's the case, then why is Biden trying to turn the oil industry upside down? 

[Guest]

Just now, Deluge said:

If that's the case, then why is Biden trying to turn the oil industry upside down? 

Why would you ask such a stupid question?  Do you know what extinction means?