Davin News Server

On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 08:12:35 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
<noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

>On 12/25/2024 7:09 AM, NoBody wrote:
>> On Tue, 24 Dec 2024 07:20:34 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 12/24/2024 4:08 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 08:18:12 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 12/23/2024 5:59 AM, Siri Cruise wrote:
>>>>>> NoBody wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sun, 22 Dec 2024 07:27:59 -0800, Siri Cruise
>>>>>>> <chine.bleu@www.yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> NoBody wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Once again, if she knowingly published a poll with a known bad
>>>>>>>>> methodology (as you had noted, she had the same issue in the past)
>>>>>>>>> it's fraud.  That's what discovery is for.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So what if it is a fraud? First amendment, sunshine.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> First Amendment doesn't cover fraud with malicious intent, dimbulb.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Who did she take money from?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Civil Code 3294. (3) “Fraud” means an intentional misrepresentation,
>>>>>> deceit, or concealment of a material fact known to the defendant with
>>>>>> the intention on the part of the defendant of thereby depriving a person
>>>>>> of property or legal rights or otherwise causing injury.
>>>>>
>>>>> Excellent point! Even if Selzer acted fraudulently, Trump has to show
>>>>> the poll caused him to lose money even though he didn't pay for the poll.
>>>>
>>>> "the intention on the part of the defendant of thereby depriving a
>>>> person of property or legal rights or otherwise causing injury."
>>>>
>>>> That is not limited to money.
>>>> What is the matter with you two?
>>>
>>> Siri quoted California law. Trump's lawsuit is in Iowa where the law states:
>>>
>>> "A consumer who suffers an ascertainable loss of money or property as
>>> the result of a prohibited practice or act in violation of this chapter
>>> may bring an action at law to recover actual damages."
>>>
>>> https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/code/714H.pdf
>> 
>> This should be an interesting case.  Also in this law contains the
>> following:
>> 
>> "
>> 2009 Acts, ch 167, §2, 9
>> 714H.3 Prohibited practices and acts.
>> 1. A person shall not engage in a practice or act the person knows or
>> reasonably
>> should know is an unfair practice, deception, fraud, false pretense,
>> or false promise, or
>> the misrepresentation, concealment, suppression, or omission of a
>> material fact, with the
>> intent that others rely upon the unfair practice, deception, fraud,
>> false pretense, false
>> promise, misrepresentation, concealment, suppression, or omission in
>> connection with the
>> advertisement, sale, or lease of consumer merchandise, or the
>> solicitation of contributions for
>> charitable purposes. For the purposes of this chapter, a claimant
>> alleging an unfair practice,
>> deception, fraud, false pretense, false promise, or misrepresentation
>> must prove that the
>> prohibited practice related to a material fact or facts.
>> “Solicitations of contributions for
>> charitable purposes” does not include solicitations made on behalf of
>> a political organization
>> as defined in section 13C.1, solicitations made on behalf of a
>> religious organization as
>> defined in section 13C.1, solicitations made on behalf of a state,
>> regionally, or nationally
>> accredited college or university, or solicitations made on behalf of a
>> nonprofit foundation
>> benefiting a state, regionally, or nationally accredited college or
>> university subject to section
>> 509(a)(1) or 509(a)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986."
>> 
>> While he may not be able to recover money, the law doesn't appear to
>> stop him from suing under the law.
>
>No. Again:
>

I quote from the exact law to which you refer and you say 'no".

Laughter.