I see Mary Lou is joining the compo culture brigade with a defamation lawsuit against RTE.
Everybody knows what you will think, but you will continue to refuse to say it.
But you are using this thread as a spoiler on the subject of MLMD and the abuse she directed towards Mairia Cahill both publicly and on record and in private as reported by Mairia Cahill, you have given your opinion on Leo on the public evidence, yet refuse for MLMD for the public evidence, that is the definition of a hypocrite. If people refuse to give their opinions, there is nothing to discuss with them (hence you repeating "it's defamation" like a parrot and refusing to engage on the subject in any way).
And Brucie stuck in repeat mode on the right to take a case arguing with their own shadow.
I've listened to the clip. Den, den, den!!
If its the reason, for what it's worth, I think RTE are fucked. It was either a hatchet job or sloppy journalism.
They claim MLMD supports not believing abuse/rape claims and supports the IRA interviewing victims of abuse.
I'll be darned if I know how they'll prove that.
However, hopefully it puts an end to Varadkar/Martin style inferred unsubstantiated cheap shots instead of answering questions. I can see now why all the government party boys are so obsessed.
Cut the cod.
He mentioned MB and he raised how they were similar. Just cut the bull. If you didn't want to engage, don't.
You are trying very hard to make this about people.
Varadkars hand was forced by public opinion, the insurance rates and her local branch. Brave my hole. Also getting gee eyed and falling off a swing then having the brass neck to try sue is not comparable.
What abuse Astro?
You have supplied comments which are repudiation of claims made, perfectly justified.
What abuse did she direct at MC.
If this is the kind of insinuation and guilt by allegation that MLMD wants to put a stop to, then I have not a qualm in the world in supporting her.
So you believe she defamed Mairia Cahill then? We can get into what is and isn't abuse when your own opinion based on the publicly available evidence has been declared.
If this was easily proven by MLMD, she would have gone other routes and had a decision soon, got her fine and had the clip taken down and an apology. She could even have gone the lawsuit route after if she wasn't happy with the outcome.
She chose not to go that route and instead go for one which takes a long time, costs a lot more money but crucially curtails the media from discussing it due to the ongoing case. It's also a route that means that many more people will listen to the clip and make decisions based upon it (as you have now done), which is usually the opposite that a claimant wants (well, unless they are after money). It will be interesting to see if RTE give Mairia her day in court over the case and if #IBelieveHer will be trending at the time.
This is a bit of revisionism (unsurprisingly), the party didn't know of the suit till later on (apart from Madigan) and it only came to light after MB became a TD. She lost party support pretty much immediately and then lost her place on the ticket as part of the official process by deselection (as well as putting in a procedure that candidates have to declare all pending legal actions before selection). MLMD is using a procedure her party wants to outlaw, yet the cult of personality that exists in SF will mean no one challenges her on it even though it's damaging to SF.
Unlike you, I can't claim to know how she thinks. I think RTE are fucked on this.
Point out the revisionist part? I said public opinion and the local branch, with public feeling on insurance rates caused Varadkar to elbow MB out. Tell me which part is revisionism?
How did she defame her?
Look you have been caught with no back up, might be better just to admit it. Rejecting allegations is not defamation, if that is what MC is going to use for a defence, well, as I said, she is on a shaky wicket.
At least one good shinner thinks it's defamation, will the others follow suit.
The revisionism is the timeline, MB lost party support surprisingly quick and was made an outcast soon after as the details came to light. We're usually slow in Ireland on these things (the Brits used to head chop much faster) but I was pleasantly surprised to see it dealt with in the way it was and even follow through properly on deselection which gave MB no cause to take a case about it (speaking as a centrist floating voter).
She lost party support pretty much immediately
Oh yeah?
Eh, yea?
even as a motion of no-confidence was tabled in her constituency
I'm not a big fan of Coveney, but in this case the party moved fairly quickly:
When the scandal first broke about the claim Ms Bailey made after she fell off a swing while holding drinks in both hands, the Tanaiste urged the Taoiseach not to withdraw the party whip from the TD.
And Coveney is of course entitled to his opinion, which he aired, unlike some who like to hide it lest they be exposed.
(and you realise, in this MLMD case, you're the Coveney right? Or has that sunk in yet?)
You tried to bluff again Astro. You said ' MB lost party support surprisingly quick' but she didn't. She had Simon Coveney supporting her and advocating for her FFS. :)
You really need to review what you type. She had support in FG.
Stop being so childish. I'm not a shinner and I'm not too arsed about the case. I was drawn in by the outrageous claims by people like yourself, blueshirts.
He said that, on this occasion, Fine Gael members in Dún Laoghaire asked the party to review the ticket.
so I i wasn't being revisionist and Varadkar's hand was forced.
I've just skipped a few pages. Have we got any info yet? Or are we still guessing and presenting opinions as fact!
One side have given no opinion at all as they maintain its all a big secret
The other side have given an opinion based understandably on what rte have reported as understood to be the interview with the alleged defamation
Noone can find anything that could be defamation in it
Maybe there's some secret code in there hidden to boards users but visible to everyone else ,I dunno
In summary this thread is pretty much the same as all SF threads
An absence of movement
So no evidence then, only opinion, like I thought. I'll return in a few days
You've accepted she'll win and you're attacking the reasons why without knowing any of the details of the case. Thus you know she's been well advised and RTE will settle. Good work on her part wouldn't you say, a savvy decision to proceed and the decisiveness we require from our future Taoiseach?
Correct
But I don't think even if you leave it a few weeks, you're going to see this evidence of defamation
The non pro Sinn Féin side of the thread have been looking exhaustively
Whereas the Pro Sinn Féin side have been
Not sure what they have been, tbh
It's a wonder why we bother with courts at all when we have the learned crew here.
Looking exhaustively. And yet gleaned nothing. Such fine legal minds must surely be in some sort of demand.
Correct,they've gleaned nothing to suggest defamation so are saying it's a slapps action
Thats my view also,but I'm leaning towards beyond caring
The NUJ on the other hand
They're not happy with Mary Lou
They don't like Slapps as it affects their work
Or because they can be held responsible if they get their work wrong.
OK, so all of SF have called out MLMD except 1 because she's carrying out an action that they are also campaigning against? What is the bluff? SF don't take action when their members act in corrupt ways (you can bring that to the SF thread if you wish), other parties have similar examples but do take action.
Have you had time to form an opinion on whether it was defamation yet or waiting for some sort of council to decide for you?
When SF stick by their guns and deselect MLMD due to pursuing a SLAPP, we'll allow the other good members of SF to commiserate with her, that OK Brucie? Accountability is not part of their vocabulary as shown, yet again.
They're held responsible always, a SLAPP silences them, which is not a good thing in a healthy democracy.
I'm certainly not waiting for you guys to offer a verdict, yee reached it on day one.
And more flapping in the wind trying to ignore everything to hold the line for Mary.
I do find it interesting that you don't want to say that defamation occurred because then it opens up the can of worms of MLMD's awful treatment of a sex abuse victim at the hands of one of their members, one that she's already had to publicly apologise unreservedly to Mairia Cahill for.
I do understand why she would use a SLAPP in this case.
As I asked you the other day, why do you keep suggesting people are supporting MLMD's claim when you know that's not true?
I would say, IMO, RTE are screwed. Whatever about your SLAPPs talk, the piece, if its the piece, states MLMD doesn't believe abuse victims and supports the IRA interviewing them. Thats more like something you'd read on this thread than you'd expect from RTE.
.........or they don't enjoy being held accountable?
Kind of hard to argue with someone blinded by hate. Don't let reason get in the way of a good rant it seems.
All hail the new speedy justice system.
She apologised because like many organisations, SF didnt have the correct procedures in place.
There is no ‘vitriol’ Astro, you havent been able to produce a word of it from McDonald.
You bluffed but when asked to back up you flapped in the wind yourself.
If you're a shinner. Other cases seem to drag on and on or very expensive tribunals allowed gather dust.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w0.vanillicon.com/v2/06cc0fe609177756245ce5c91011153d.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wc.vanillicon.com/v2/c50f1c871638bccbbf9aa952593dd0cd.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wf.vanillicon.com/v2/fd886e8068d0cf75a5ff800614b8489e.svg)
