Are We Sure About This?

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard comments on defamation lawsuit she filed against Hillary Clinton: “I will not stand quietly by as Hillary Clinton or anyone else tries to smear my character.” https://t.co/oHeO6D8pKa pic.twitter.com/2b008y04bp

— ABC News Politics (@ABCPolitics) January 23, 2020

I don't want to give Rep. Tulsi Gabbard's defamation suit against Hillary Clinton more space than it deserves (although I think I just have) but if what Clinton said against Gabbard was way out of bounds, then oh lordy, let me tell you about all the other politicians out there since....history? I'm just saying, it feels overwrought to be intended as a real legal case, and would have a really messed-up effect on political speech if it somehow was treated as one. Also--"damages estimated to exceed $50 million" seems hard to establish. It doesn't seem to reflect future fundraising based on prior campaign figures, does it? Does it reflect potential earnings in other endeavors outside of political office? (I don't know that having a beef with Hillary Clinton has necessarily lost anyone money. It would be as bassackwards as bankrupting a series of casinos. Indeed, many people seem to have profited from hating the Clintons.)

Now, I may be wrong about this, but I noticed grumblings on Twitter about who is even paying for such a lawsuit (after the fashion of: "Who is paying for Rep. Devin Nunes to sue an internet cow and others?"). I think FEC allows for legal costs to be paid for with campaign funds if they relate to the campaign itself so maybe she's going to fundraise on sticking it to the establishment via Hillary Clinton?

Do you support Tulsi Gabbard's decision to sue Hillary Clinton for defamation over her 'Russian asset' comments? Please retweet and share.

— StandwithTulsi (@StandwithTulsi) January 22, 2020

I guess we'll see if any fundraising emails mentioning the lawsuit are put out.

Anyhow, just as an aside--while I like tea just as much as the next person, Hillary Unbound, even if she is a private figure now, so to speak, is never going to be, strictly speaking, a private figure. I think she skirts the line on this one, because she's saying something I don't think other people didn't previously think or even say out loud. But there is still a timing issue here--we're in the middle of a serious election! And even if talking at liberty is her way of demonstrating she is 100% not running for office, nope, not even one little bit, the things she says have weight. Tons.

So, I guess what I'm saying is--are we sure about all this? Because we need a smart election, and I'm just seeing the stupid flying around. It is like a haboob. It gets everywhere.