Tories can dish it, but can't take it

[afransen]

Tories fight back against Kinsella lawsuit
OTTAWA — The federal Conservatives are fighting back against a lawsuit by Liberal strategist Warren Kinsella.

In a statement of defence filed Monday, the Tories reject Kinsella's libel charge, arguing that "open discussion is the lifeblood of democracy."

Kinsella sued the party and Public Works Minister Christian Paradis over a February press release that described him as a "disgraced Chretien backroom organizer."

The Tory statement says the release was not motivated by "malice or bad faith or acting as part of a conspiracy to injure" the political provocateur.

It asks the Ontario Superior Court of Justice to dismiss the suit with all costs.

Kinsella, a stalwart supporter of former prime minister Jean Chretien, has more recently declared himself a volunteer strategist for Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff.

That prompted the Conservative news release, under the name of Paradis, which attempted to link Kinsella to the former sponsorship scandal.

The Tory statement of defence maintains that Kinsella is in fact "disgraced" among what it calls "right-thinking members of the Canadian public and within the Liberal party itself."

The Conservatives sued the Liberals last year to silence allegations relating to an alleged $1-million life insurance offer for the vote of Independent MP Chuck Cadman.

But the party now says the cut and thrust of political discourse shouldn't be silenced by lawsuits.

"Democracy depends upon the free and open debate of public policy issues and the freedom to criticize those who exercise power and authority in our society," says the statement.

Copyright © 2009 The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

The hypocrisy is really rather astounding, especially considering that Kinsella has a more legitimate case of libel, whereas the CPC suit was just a tactic to prevent the LPC from discussing the issue in public.

 

[Prometheus The Supremo]

they can always use this defense:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNeuW-VS0Dw

 

[Whoaccio]

Part of libel involves spreading an allegation you know to be less than factually accurate with the intent of damaging reputations. In the Cadman case the CPC could argue that, by accusing them of corruption and bribery, the Liberal party was knowingly attempting to defame them. With respect to Kinsella though, who is to say he isn't "disgraced"? It is such a vague term that it is impossible for it not to be true in one sense or another, he surely is disgraced among some Canadians.

 

[afransen]

Turned out that the basis for the CPC's case re: the tapes was a disaster. The CPC's own witness suggested that the tape had likely not been tampered with.

"It is such a vague term that it is impossible for it not to be true in one sense or another, he surely is disgraced among some Canadians."

Does that mean I can call Harper a scumbag?

 

[kEiThZ]

Does that mean I can call Harper a scumbag?

Of course you can. And you won't get sued for it. There's a difference between personal opinion and libel.

 

[Whoaccio]

Does that mean I can call Harper a scumbag?

Wouldn't be the first...

 

[GenerationW]

And as usual, only the liars......I mean the lawyers will come out ahead.

 

[Brandon716]

LOL the Cons are always humorous.