This.
This is shortly in Brad’s procedural and generally Flynn cheerleading effort covering the court case that he and Susan Portnoy are part of, seeing as he is not attending and was chatting up Flynn’s brother spouting off legal advice.
Jim’s attorney’s will get fees at least from this.
Here again are the statements Jim has made that Flynn failed to prove weren’t true after Jim backed them up, mostly with Flynn saying/doing those very things.
Recall that Flynn relied on Mike Rothschild’s defamatory work shielding the convicted felon and foreign agent, along with Susan Portnoy and Pedo-Bear-Robin’s post on Urban Dictionary. Those sort of things established the lawsuit’s intent as being not at all serious, especially considering the lack of specific harm and alleged damages in that first filing.
While I am sure Mike added stuff to make the lawfare less obvious, judges don’t like having their courtrooms turned into a mockery.
Let’s review those parts that Brad Shuttleworth ‘thinks’ his boy Mike is fine on.
Did Flynn help plan and execute January 6th? Hell yes. He did treason openly, riled up the insurrection as a speaker in an attempt to overthrow the US government via terrorism, doing so as a Russian asset, literal traitor, running QAnon for Putin. That one event Flynn was front and center on covers most of the adjudicated statements. It’s also factual to say Flynn uses ISIS techniques given his book teaching others how to get people to kill others on your behalf.
All of those points are factually true, including Flynn’s illegal psychological efforts made to change 2016’s election outcome.
Here’s how Flynn’s defender puts it.
Jim’s statements made were factually true, non-defamatory, protected first amendment speech, backed up by what Mike Flynn did do and did say, mostly on film. Same with the four yet to be adjudicated truths. Mike’s lawyer who himself is under Federal investigation over subverting the 2022 election, didn’t bother to plead damages, just defamed Jim repeatedly using Rothschild’s lies. That’s why Jim could prevail on sanctions, something Brad admits next.
Then we still have a likely soon ruling on the remaining statements Jim made that were not struck with Stewartson having the right to prove. I have to laugh at how Brad goes off here again saying that his boy prevailed.
The court should strike all four remaining statements given the evidence presented with Jim prevailing prior to the countersuit.
Yes, we will get to a countersuit eventually.