Hughes noises off
Rep. Greg Hughes, who walked away from the House Ethics Committee with only a lecture to try to be more gentlemanly, says he's going to sue that rat Rep. Phil Riesen for defaming his sterling character.Riesen not only signed an ethics complaint against Hughes, but let the public know about it. Very bad form at the Leg
e. Very good political strategy for Hughes' opponent Lisa Johnson.Says the august furniture salesman Riesen:
His threats to file a suit against me are just more attempts at bullying, but neither I nor anyone else ever defamed him.Hughes, of course, is spouting pre-election baloney. Anyone can sue for anything, and in this case court papers haven't even been filed.
The good old First Amendment would crunch any such lawsuit, and Hughes — win or lose — will drop the whole thing 30 seconds after the ballots are counted.
10 Comments:
The First Amendment does not protect all speech, such as slander, libel, and defamation.
Just because someone is an elected official, it doesn't mean that unfounded and unsubstantiated allegations of criminal actions can be thrown at them without legal consequences.
It's one thing to say "we need to stick to the rich and big business". That's protected speech (and also happens to be Lisa Johnson's platform). It's another thing to say "Hughes broke the law" and not be able to back it up.
I wonder who that last comment was from?
You're right Anon#1, there are limits to defamatory speech. However Hughes would be committing political suicide going through with a defamation lawsuit: When you accuse someone of slander or libel, your entire character is grounds for inquiry. Just ask Roger Clemens.
Unless of course you think Hughes' behavior is beyond reproach.
Poor Warchol. Doesn't understand the nature of Hughes claim.
Because this was a "fishing expedition" with no real corroborating witnesses, a civil judge likely would have granted a request from Hughes to have his attorney's fees covered. It happens.
From wikipedia: For example, in the State of Georgia, a trial court must award attorneys fees if a party has brought a claim "with respect to which there existed such a complete absence of any justiciable issue of law or fact that it could not be reasonably believed that a court would accept the asserted claim, defense, or other position." O.C.G.A. § 9-15-14(a)
Just a little more intellectual curiosity, untempered by your massive grudge against the legislature, would have helped you discover this, Glen.
People to Vote Out Because they Give the State a Black Eye List:
1. Mark Shurtleff
2. Chris Buttars
3. Greg Hughes
4. John Valentine
5. Curt "I'm the majority leader" Bramble
6. Carl Wimmer
Am I missing anyone?
You forgot David Litvack on your list.
-"Because this was a "fishing expedition" with no real corroborating witnesses, a civil judge likely would have granted a request from Hughes to have his attorney's fees covered. It happens. "-
A signed witness statement accusing a public official of bribery is a 'fishing expedition?'
You fail.
Lets not forget about Greg Curtis, he has a great resume running....
http://www.speakercurtis.com/
Well the vote on the bribery charge was 4-4, so I would hardly say Greg has been exonerated. He simply had his cronies back him up and we have a split decision...therefore no ruling. What we need is an independent commission to review ethics charges so we can take politics out of it. I find it ironic that now Greg Hughes is making spurious charges against his opponent. It's time for him to go.
Somehow Hughes and his defenders (both of them) seem to never mention that the accusation came from a friend and colleague of his, not from Riesen or Johnson or anyone else. And it was in writing and she is a Republican.
Post a Comment
<< Home