I'm being sued by Mike Postle, as are ESPN, Doug Polk, Joey Ingram, Bart Hanson, Phil Galfond, Matt Berkey, Daniel Negreanu, Jonathan Little, Veronica Brill, Haralabob, and Pokernews

[turdzilla]

Stupid question.

Since Brill is an atheist and nihilist how do you swear her in so she is subject to criminal prosecution if she does not tell the truth?

When did Brill say that she was a nihilist?

But to address the meat of your question...

Contrary to what religious conservatives claim, the United States of America is NOT a country based on a belief in God. Hence, the courts allows for those who don’t want to recognize “God” as the ultimate moral authority when being sworn in to give an “affirmation” that they won’t lie under oath.

Veronica Brill
23.1K Tweets
See new Tweets
Veronica Brill
@Angry_Polak
Born in Poland, love America, analytics, hypewoman, nugget host, RN, timetraveler, nihilist, Othello champ, pie chart pro IG: angry_polakv BLM

a person who believes that life is meaningless and rejects all religious and moral principles

A true nihilist would believe in nothing, have no loyalties, and no purpose other than, perhaps, an impulse to destroy.

Are theft, slander, and perjury moral principles?

[simpdog]

Guess UB/AP superusers should have sued too. Missed opportunity!

[MumblesBadly]

When did Brill say that she was a nihilist?

But to address the meat of your question...

Contrary to what religious conservatives claim, the United States of America is NOT a country based on a belief in God. Hence, the courts allows for those who don’t want to recognize “God” as the ultimate moral authority when being sworn in to give an “affirmation” that they won’t lie under oath.

Veronica Brill
23.1K Tweets
See new Tweets
Veronica Brill
@Angry_Polak
Born in Poland, love America, analytics, hypewoman, nugget host, RN, timetraveler, nihilist, Othello champ, pie chart pro IG: angry_polakv BLM

a person who believes that life is meaningless and rejects all religious and moral principles

A true nihilist would believe in nothing, have no loyalties, and no purpose other than, perhaps, an impulse to destroy.

Are theft, slander, and perjury moral principles?

Yeah. There’s no way she is an actual card-carrying nihilist. She probably included that in her Twitter bio for shock valie. Or she simply has no clue what it means. Druff should ask her about the next time she calls into the show. Because there is no way that a nihilist, who rejects all moral principles, would have given two fucks about someome cheating at poler game except for how it affected them, nor risk the backlash for trying to bring public light to a potential poker cheat.

[Belly Buster]

Stupid question.

Since Brill is an atheist and nihilist how do you swear her in so she is subject to criminal prosecution if she does not tell the truth?

When did Brill say that she was a nihilist?

But to address the meat of your question...

Contrary to what religious conservatives claim, the United States of America is NOT a country based on a belief in God. Hence, the courts allows for those who don’t want to recognize “God” as the ultimate moral authority when being sworn in to give an “affirmation” that they won’t lie under oath.

This does raise the question of ...

If Mike has to testify in court, and if he were subsequently found to have materially lied under oath, presumably he could then be prosecuted for perjury?

Not so much of a freeroll now, is it?

[Rick Sanchez]

a person who believes that life is meaningless and rejects all religious and moral principles

A true nihilist would believe in nothing, have no loyalties, and no purpose other than, perhaps, an impulse to destroy.

Are theft, slander, and perjury moral principles?

This is a shitty watered down interpretation of nihilism. Just because you don't believe that ethics are governed by some higher power or are baked into nature, doesn't mean you have no moral compass whatsoever. Nihilists are not a bunch of serial killers.

This is the same lazy argument about atheists having no reason not to rape women in the street. You don't need God to tell you not to do that. You can have your own reasons to be a decent person.

[sonatine]

a person who believes that life is meaningless and rejects all religious and moral principles

A true nihilist would believe in nothing, have no loyalties, and no purpose other than, perhaps, an impulse to destroy.

Are theft, slander, and perjury moral principles?

This is a shitty watered down interpretation of nihilism. Just because you don't believe that ethics are governed by some higher power or are baked into nature, doesn't mean you have no moral compass whatsoever. Nihilists are not a bunch of serial killers.

This is the same lazy argument about atheists having no reason not to rape women in the street. You don't need God to tell you not to do that. You can have your own reasons to be a decent person.

its so confusing, reading this in rick sanchez' voice.

[turdzilla]

I am sorry I just looked up the definition.

I haven't stopped laughing since Duff's attorney said he was going to drag this out until Duff ran out of money.

[Dan Druff]

I am sorry I just looked up the definition.

I haven't stopped laughing since Duff's attorney said he was going to drag this out until Duff ran out of money.

Huh? Who is "Duff"? Do you mean me?

If so, my attorney never said such a thing.

[Crowe Diddly]

 

View on scribd here: https://www.scribd.com/doc/479802844/  

[MumblesBadly]

a person who believes that life is meaningless and rejects all religious and moral principles

A true nihilist would believe in nothing, have no loyalties, and no purpose other than, perhaps, an impulse to destroy.

Are theft, slander, and perjury moral principles?

This is a shitty watered down interpretation of nihilism. Just because you don't believe that ethics are governed by some higher power or are baked into nature, doesn't mean you have no moral compass whatsoever. Nihilists are not a bunch of serial killers.

This is the same lazy argument about atheists having no reason not to rape women in the street. You don't need God to tell you not to do that. You can have your own reasons to be a decent person.

To be fair, it is most likely the most common interpretation of nihilism, being a shorthand for existential nihilism, which is what most people think of when someone mentions nihilism, hence the definition for it that popped up for turdzilla to reference. So unless Brill meant some other type of nihilism, she was being careless in using the generic term to identify herself with given the current common usage.

[turdzilla]

a person who believes that life is meaningless and rejects all religious and moral principles

A true nihilist would believe in nothing, have no loyalties, and no purpose other than, perhaps, an impulse to destroy.

Are theft, slander, and perjury moral principles?

This is a shitty watered down interpretation of nihilism. Just because you don't believe that ethics are governed by some higher power or are baked into nature, doesn't mean you have no moral compass whatsoever. Nihilists are not a bunch of serial killers.

This is the same lazy argument about atheists having no reason not to rape women in the street. You don't need God to tell you not to do that. You can have your own reasons to be a decent person.

Interesting, I am guessing that many don't break the law since they would be jailed by the believers not because of superior beliefs.

[turdzilla]

I am sorry I just looked up the definition.

I haven't stopped laughing since Duff's attorney said he was going to drag this out until Duff ran out of money.

Huh? Who is "Duff"? Do you mean me?

If so, my attorney never said such a thing.

Is there a transcript available? I will interpret his comments for you.

I thought I read there are 400+ hours of video to review. Let alone all the social media comments. The cost of collecting, reviewing, indexing, Bates stamping, sharing, retaining experts, and rebutting is big $. I have worked on cases with 1,000,000+ documents. They get out of control about 15 minutes into the process.

I don't work for free when I bury the opposing party in motions and discovery. I assume that he doesn't either.

[Cerveza Fria]

After a cursory review of the complaint, it does seem flawed in several spots.

1). I don’t think Plaintiff adequately states how the court has Jurisdiction over Druff. It states he is a resident of Nevada, runs the site from Nevada, and fails to state any action done by Druff was in the State of California. If fails to adequately allege California State Courts having jurisdiction over Druff. Is this curable, sure with an amended Complaint. Then Druff could contest jurisdiction without getting into the merits. Also, was the Service of process defective?

Plaintiff ultimately might have to refile in Nevada or elsewhere against Druff and some of the other defendants.


2). As for the causes of action, any competent attorney would have a field day with them. Proving malice is an element of one of the counts and isn’t so easy to do. There are several Affirmative defenses to these claims that are available. But, first they have to get around the jurisdictional issues.

As I said in an earlier post, I think the reason he went after Druff and others is to “shake the tree” to see what falls out and to scare everyone into silence.


At this point he should keep quiet and follow advice of counsel.

[turdzilla]

I am sorry I just looked up the definition.

I haven't stopped laughing since Duff's attorney said he was going to drag this out until Duff ran out of money.

Huh? Who is "Duff"? Do you mean me?

If so, my attorney never said such a thing.

I hope you can comment on the first question I would ask the defendants:

"If you were 100% certain you were being cheated, why did you continue to play in the game?"

[Dan Druff]

I can't comment on any questions. Not at this time.

However, tonight on radio, Eric Bensamochan will appear and will make a statement on my behalf.

[Crowe Diddly]

I hope you can comment on the first question I would ask the defendants:

"If you were 100% certain you were being cheated, why did you continue to play in the game?"

which of the defendants would this question apply to? I only quickly looked, but the vast majority of the defendants were never in those games, nor did they claim to be.

[Sidewinder]

I can't comment on any questions. Not at this time.

However, tonight on radio, Eric Bensamochan will appear and will make a statement on my behalf.

Defending a lawsuit is expensive.

In my case, it was done in federal court and we got jurisdiction moved to the state I lived in and the plaintiff never bothered to hire someone in my state to pursue the lawsuit.

I think if one peppers their accusations with "in my opinion", "in my judgment' it can go a lot better.

Also in federal law, there is a "public figure" standard which makes it almost impossible to slander someone in the public eye, on TV, etc.. I dk if this applies at the state level but anyone putting themselves on camera on purpose pretty much becomes a public figure and impossible to slander.

[The Shrink]

Interesting thread:

Embedded Tweet

https://twitter.com/rachelees69/status/1316219707058388993

Specifically this tweet:

Embedded Tweet

https://twitter.com/rachelees69/status/1316219731318206464

So RachelLees69 is saying the lawsuit was filed against these particular people (including Druff) so they wouldn't be able to participate in the documentary because they have to stay quiet during litigation. Interesting take.

[sonatine]

thats absolutely incredible.

[Tellafriend]

Lawyers, lol