Could Trump impeachment help Mike’s libel fight against Rachel Riley?

The arguments are exactly the same.

After Donald Trump tweeted that his supporters should protest at the United States Capitol building to “stop the steal” of his presidency (he had been defeated in a perfectly legitimate election last November), a riot ensued in which five people died.

The US Parliament – Congress – is to consider whether to impeach Trump (remove him from office) on the grounds that his tweet was “incitement of insurrection”.

Isn’t that similar to what I said about Rachel Riley – that her tweets to a vulnerable teenager encouraged her followers to send abuse to that girl, harass her, and ultimately made her believe her life was in danger?

Both Riley and Trump have protested against this characterisation of them – Riley by accusing me of libel, Trump by opposing the impeachment.

Riley has tried to have my defence against her accusation struck out by claiming that she had not intended any harm to the girl and that she could not be said to have had any influence over her followers who read her tweets and behaved inappropriately.

Trump’s argument will be the same – he didn’t intend any harm to take place and he cannot be said to have influenced anybody.

The difference is that he is opposed by members of his nation’s Parliament – many of whom will have years of legal experience, whereas I’m an internet-based journalist with a crowdfunded legal team.

If he loses his case, it will have a knock-on effect upon mine. The judge in Riley’s strike-out application still hasn’t handed down her judgment and I wonder whether this is because she is aware of the transatlantic situation and knows that an appeal could be lodged in my case, depending on the result in Washington DC.

In the meantime, it is important to ensure that I can still pay to defend myself against Riley. So while we’re waiting, please:

Consider making a donation yourself, if you can afford it, via the CrowdJustice page.

Email your friends, asking them to pledge to the CrowdJustice site.

Post a link to Facebook, asking readers to pledge.

On Twitter, tweet in support, quoting the address of the appeal.

There is now an international aspect to the Riley case.

Depending on events in Washington DC this week, anything could happen here.

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

2 thoughts on “Could Trump impeachment help Mike’s libel fight against Rachel Riley?

  1. El Dee

    The factors used to prove such an argument would, therefore, be intent and how foreseeable the (alleged) consequences were. Did the speech intend to cause the outcome but also did the speech CAUSE the outcome?

    But with the Riley case the shoe is on the other foot. Essentially she has to DISprove your writings and disprove that they were written in good faith as opinion. A very high bar indeed. People might wonder why she would bring such an action unless there were some other motive involved too..

    Reply

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.