A few days ago I put up a post on the Dominion Voting Systems v. Powell defamation case. In the action, commenced a week ago today, Dominion claims Powell, with malice, damaged the business and its reputation through wild accusations of misconduct in the 2020 U.S. Presidential election. I believe they have a strong case.
I have been unable to find a public response or even determine if she has hired a lawyer. The Washington Post has reported that neither Powell nor Rudy Guiliani have appeared on a Fox news program in a month which is fairly close to when Dominion sent a letter to Fox News about its coverage.
I believe the Dominion case, if it reaches trial, has the chance to be the definitive statement on what happened in the election. I expect Dominion can prove there was no fraud by its machines.
In my last post (a link is below) I put up a letter I wrote 18 years ago to the author, D.D. Guttenplan, on his book, The Holocaust on Trial. It was a libel action by the English author, claiming American author, Deborah Lipstadt, and Penguin books had defamed him concerning the Holocaust. As part of their defence Lipstadt and Penguin put forth evidence proving the Holocaust occurred. I anticipate that, in the future, the evidence used in this case and its acceptance by an English court will be used to challenge Holocaust deniers.
The letter also provided examples of libel cases in Canada, Germany and Israel where the facts of history were determined in court.
My overall conclusion was that the “establishment” view of history won the challenges of historical determination and interpretation. The establishment position may have been right or it may have been wrong but it would win.
I no longer accept my conclusion that the "establishment" will prevail. In the past 25 years I have had the opportunity to participate in two Canadian Government Commissions of Inquiry that reached conclusions on major historical issues contrary to the “establishment” position.
The operator of the blood system, the Canadian Red Cross, asserted it had acted promptly and properly in dealing with these infectious diseases. After reviewing thousands of documents and hearing dozens of witnesses who faced cross-examination and receiving submissions from numerous lawyers the Commissioner, Justice Krever, issued a report that was devastating to the Red Cross. After the Inquiry the Red Cross was removed as the operator of the system.
My good friend, Doug Elliott, was the leader of a team that represented the Canadian Aids Society at the Commission.
In addition, we represented our clients in the judicial review process in which the Red Cross and governments and governmental agencies and doctors unsuccessfully sought to limit the Commissioner from assigning responsibility for the public health disaster.
It was a powerful experience advocating on behalf of victims.
I appreciated getting to know and learn from Doug as we sought to help the Commissioner determine what happened and why it happened.
At the time of the release of the report in 1997 I was glad to see a successful challenge to the “establishment” but thought the success was an aberration.
As an example, before I became involved, my clients had retained an ex-RCMP document examiner who proved by typewriter analysis and hand writing analysis 100 years later that tender bids purportedly from Iowa had been typed up in the Indian Affairs headquarters in Ottawa and signed in Toronto.
The combined effects of participating in the search for the truth at those Inquires has led me to believe in Canada the “establishment” is no longer bound to win in the writing of history.
I do not believe the full facts and reasons for the tainted blood scandal, a huge public health disaster, would have ever been determined without the Inquiry Into the Blood System.
As we endure the pandemic of Covid 19 I am anticipating there will be another great Commission of Inquiry to delve into why the pandemic happened and how governments dealt with the pandemic.
It will take the victims and their families to press for such an Inquiry. Governments will seek to minimize investigations of the pandemic and avoid a national Inquiry.
If the victims of the pandemic, as did the victims of the Blood Commission of Inquiry and more recently in Nova Scotia concerning the mass killing this spring by Gabriel Wortman, demand an Inquiry public pressure will force an Inquiry.
I also expect Governments will be compelled by the public to set broad parameters to a new Inquiry.
If sufficient public funds are provided for lawyers to represent the victims I believe the facts of and reasons for the Covid 19 pandemic will be determined.
A Covid 19 Inquiry will be fascinating.