Valfusk under USA-valet 2020? Rapporterade incidenter.

Analyzed under these factors, and even assuming, arguendo, that each of the statements alleged in the Complaint could be proved true or false, no reasonable person would conclude that the statements were truly statements of fact.

[...]

The highly charged and political nature of the statements likewise underscores their political and hence partisan nature. Powell alleged that “Democrats were trying to ‘steal the vote’
from Trump and that ‘they ha[d] developed a computer system to alter votes electronically.” She and others appeared at a rally called “Stop the Steal,” which the Complaint identifies as a “Georgia political rally.” She claimed that she had evidence that the election result was the “greatest crime of the century if not the life of the world.” Reasonable people understand that the “language of the political arena, like the language used in labor disputes … is often vituperative, abusive and inexact.” It is likewise a “well recognized principle that political statements are inherently prone to exaggeration and hyperbole.”

Given the highly charged and political context of the statements, it is clear that Powell was describing the facts on which she based the lawsuits she filed in support of President Trump. Indeed, Plaintiffs themselves characterize the statements at issue as “wild accusations” and “outlandish claims.” They are repeatedly labelled “inherently improbable” and even “impossible.” Such characterizations of the allegedly defamatory statements further support Defendants’ position that reasonable people would not accept such statements as fact but view them only as claims that await testing by the courts through the adversary process