Mary Lou MacDonald suing RTE

Are you saying that party leaders have no redress blanch, because it sounds like you are.

Or are you trying to use this latest round of pedantry to pretend that no other politician has sued for defamation?

Scrutinise away, but you are seeing things that aren't there to see.

That'd be why you are supposing stuff.

Now now now Brucie. As I said, none of the gaslighting. I thought the victim was the one bringing the defamation case? No? Like Mr Savile threatened, or attempted, to do.

Those meanie journalists trying to say naughty things about him and talking about alleged "victims" when it is clear that the bringer of the defamation case was the real victim.

Ya know, the way RTE discussed so-called victims on the still up radio interview? The one that we are told that a certain politicial person took exception to. Obviously, in their crooked reporting, they never mentioned that the real victim was the politician.

Any chance of consistency from ya?.....not holding me breath.

Most don't believe MLMD is a victim here at all, because if that was the issue, she wouldn't have gone the route of using a SLAPPS following the lead of other members of SF.

I don't think we get to play the victim card by launching frivolous lawsuits all over the place, DOB wasn't a victim when he did the same (especially when the evidence for MLMD's case is all in the public domain and has been referenced as directly by the media as they can to avoid another SLAPPS on themselves).

But the hypocrisy here after catching up on the Leo thread is crazy, I firmly believe that a few posters don't care about their track record anymore with the amount of denying of their previous (easily referenced) opinions. Reminds me of Stath the estate agent (I think what Leo did was illegal just in case people think I'd pick "sides" like some sort of baby person).

Yep, see the word alleged, you even use it yourself. Had MLMD gone through the normal channels, more may have believed it.

You also support Dennis O'Brien as an alleged victim as well though.

For a person who denies all reality on their previous opinions and snakes to whatever the pro SF position needs to be for a particular thread on a particular day, calling others up on "made-up stuff" is pretty inflammatory.

All the media believe it's a SLAPPS, there is very little disagreement here other than the 3 amigos. Short of a survey (likely being run by the media...) I'm going to stick with "most".

This is an interesting new tactic, amazing as it may be, but not everyone's credibility is in the toilet like yourself.

I'm sticking by "most", I will revise my opinion if the media is allowed run a survey to that effect (of course you can run one on boards, but that would entail having to engage with the evidence available, i.e. the Morning Ireland Mairia Cahill interview where she called out about sharing a stage with MLMD due to the vitriol directed at her by MLMD).

Are you still sticking to the line that you haven't listened to the evidence? Seems a lot of time to spend on something and not discussing but limit yourself to listening to the content available. Every major press organisation printed the story, every one of them notes the pattern of lawsuits coming from SF, a lot of them went further and called it out directly as trying to silence the media and every other news organisation also printed a reference to it in the media that went further, it has clearly got the backs up of the free press that they would link directly and reference other news organisations who are taking more of a direct stand.

Can you itemise the vitriol directed at Mairia Cahill by MLMD?

That would be interesting to see.

Writing a post every few hours really isn't 'a lot of my time' Astro. And you said 'most don't believe' you didn't specify the 'free' press. So if you can't back that up I'll take it you made it up. No biggie, you aren't the first poster on here who thinks they speak for the majority.

But SF deny a 'cover-up' that is an unproven allegation.

And you still haven't shown any 'vitriol' (contesting the facts is NOT vitriol) directed at MC by MLMD.

This is going into a court, which will deal with facts, not hearsay and allegation Astro.

As the alleged victim, surely you're throwing your support behind Mairia, to be consistent of course?

I also gave evidence of direct slurs against Mairia that were later apologised for (and luckily that's still in the public domain), which I would take as accepting there was vitriol directed against her.

But look, I've answered all the questions.

How about giving an opinion on whether the public domain evidence in question (Morning Ireland show) is defamation against MLMD? It could of course be something else, but let's eliminate that one, if we're discussing in good faith of course (and not just trolling a thread to shut down discussion).

I have absolutely no problem in saying that Saville had a right to redress if he felt he was defamed. Everybody has rights or nobody has, you cannot be selective.

What do you not get about that 'right' Donald and why are you trying to taunt people. Respecting everybody's rights is not the same as supporting them personally.