• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

USA news & politics

That is what it's famous for but to be fair it's got a side to the island that is great for kids too. Ibiza old town and the castle is nice for the adults and a little walk around for a day as well.
And... how's it in reality with the part it's famous for?😈 Will be waiting for your opinion after visiting "the place Freddie Mercury had his 41st birthday" tonight 😄
 
And... how's it in reality with the part it's famous for?😈 Will be waiting for your opinion after visiting "the place Freddie Mercury had his 41st birthday" tonight 😄
I’m here with the fam so haven’t been to one club. It’s easily avoided if you want. But to be fair, we have laid out a huge amount of money on this that gives you that bit of exclusivity and privacy (nice big villa on the west side of the island away from the riff raff)
 
Caught on tape being horribly racist
Constantly talking **** about other wrestlers off stage
Cheating on his wife
Threatening to body slam Kamala Harris
Being a MAGA turbocunt

Among others
Snitching to Vince McMahon about Jesse Ventura trying to start a union to provide health care and a pension for wrestlers in the WWF.
 
Macron and Brigette just lost the defematiin suit against the originators of the rumour didnt they?
Weird that they would then have a crack at an American
As far as I can see the ones already cleared in France are because the court ruled that they made a mistake in good faith. Bit bullshit really and more likely meaning they couldn't prove malice. The same cannot be said of Candice Owens.
 
As far as I can see the ones already cleared in France are because the court ruled that they made a mistake in good faith. Bit bullshit really and more likely meaning they couldn't prove malice. The same cannot be said of Candice Owens.

I mean one could argue she derived her information from the originators of the rumour. TBH I havnt seen what Owens has said, but assuming its along the lines of Brigette having a winky, and the complexities of the US system, I can't imagine this is anything other than an attempt to intimidate.

Maybe partly promoted by the Obamas?
 
Oh **** off already you nasty twat.

Owens was given several opportunities to retract her statements but chose to double down on them and issue further attacks via her podcast. I hope she's sued into the ground.
 
I mean one could argue she derived her information from the originators of the rumour. TBH I havnt seen what Owens has said, but assuming its along the lines of Brigette having a winky, and the complexities of the US system, I can't imagine this is anything other than an attempt to intimidate.

Maybe partly promoted by the Obamas?
Originally yes, however she didn't say it just once, she has said it multiple times and continued to do so, despite repeated warnings not to. Intentionally repeating false statements about someone in the full knowledge they are false and can be damaging is definitely within the realm of what can get you done for defamation. The difficult part will likely not be proving she knew it was false and would be damaging, but of how much damage it actually did.

Why would the Obamas be involved in a right wing conspiracy...?
 
Originally yes, however she didn't say it just once, she has said it multiple times and continued to do so, despite repeated warnings not to. Intentionally repeating false statements about someone in the full knowledge they are false and can be damaging is definitely within the realm of what can get you done for defamation. The difficult part will likely not be proving she knew it was false and would be damaging, but of how much damage it actually did.

Why would the Obamas be involved in a right wing conspiracy...?

This argument lends itself to the originators of the rumour though no?

How do you prove malice, when Owens hasn't made the rumour up, and can obviously link to others evidence of it being true, others who have essentially been cleared of malice.

Interestingly, Owens has apparently claimed the Macrons are blood related.

Apparently Brigette has sued a number of others, namely 4 Parisian men who likened her to a peadophile, and another who repeated the idea she was born a man.

Seems like a trend.
 
You really are a grade A prick


 
Last edited:
So, after making claims that Obama should be tried for treason, Trumps administration is now saying they are going to investigate Clinton's emails again. This is beyond a joke now, they are a broken record.
Obama can't be tried for treason.

Remember, trump had the supreme court declare presidential immunity for any crimes during their administration.

Applies to Biden as well.

 
This argument lends itself to the originators of the rumour though no?

How do you prove malice, when Owens hasn't made the rumour up, and can obviously link to others evidence of it being true, others who have essentially been cleared of malice.

Interestingly, Owens has apparently claimed the Macrons are blood related.

Apparently Brigette has sued a number of others, namely 4 Parisian men who likened her to a peadophile, and another who repeated the idea she was born a man.

Seems like a trend.
my understand would be

make claim...get told the claim is not true and to stop because it is defamitory....repeat the claim

Its the point where she repeat it after being told to stop where she is in trouble, repeating somethign after you have been informed it is causing damage shows malice

i also understand the defence would be for it to be a genuinally held belief....but if youve been told it is untrue you would need to prove why you still believe it
 
This argument lends itself to the originators of the rumour though no?

How do you prove malice, when Owens hasn't made the rumour up, and can obviously link to others evidence of it being true, others who have essentially been cleared of malice.

Interestingly, Owens has apparently claimed the Macrons are blood related.

Apparently Brigette has sued a number of others, namely 4 Parisian men who likened her to a peadophile, and another who repeated the idea she was born a man.

Seems like a trend.
No, because the court still ruled that they were wrong.

You prove malice by showing it's likely beyond reasonable doubt the person knew what they were saying was false and would be harmful but did it anyway. Owens doesn't have to make the rumour up, she just has to spread it. The fact others have been cleared of malice is not the same as saying there was any credibility. The dismissal included a ruling that the originators of the claim were wrong, Owens cannot point to that as evidence there is truth in the claim. If she makes any attempt to point to that court case, it means she knows what the legal position was (that the claims are not true) but kept repeating them. Ironically her pointing to that case would prove her own malice, she could not claim ignorance of the fact a court had ruled the claims were false.

Owens has made many claims about the Macrons.

The trend is people making up bullshit and now being sued for it.
 
Obama can't be tried for treason.

Remember, trump had the supreme court declare presidential immunity for any crimes during their administration.

Applies to Biden as well.

I'm well aware of that, the Trump administration however cannot keep track of their own bullshit.
 
And... how's it in reality with the part it's famous for?😈 Will be waiting for your opinion after visiting "the place Freddie Mercury had his 41st birthday" tonight 😄
Can’t post the pic but there was a sign at the entrance that said:

No filming
No sportswear
No Glitter
No flip flops
No under 27s
No *****
 

Latest posts

Sponsored
UnlistMe
Back
Top