Trial of the Century

Night-Court-WATN---Harry-Anderson-then-jpgDiosdado Cabello vs. The Wall Street Journal. 

Remember: under U.S. libel law, Diosdado will have to prove the WSJ made a statement of fact that was both untrue and injurious to reputation.

Both those things, mind you.

I. canNOT. Wait for this.

I mean, the guy’s committed to his cause, right? Surely he’ll want to show up in person in U.S. District Court to present his case, right? Right?

56 thoughts on “Trial of the Century

  1. it sounds like fun, but I cannot imagine it going anywhere. Cabello would have to make himself available to the U.S. Courts for all purposes, both criminal and civil. Unless he is physically present in the U.S., the civil court could not punish him for perjury, for example.

    So, he’d have to physically come to the U.S. to give viva vice evidence, open his worldwide financial activities, bank accounts, etc to court scrutiny, and so on.

    What’s the chance he’ll do that?

    Liked by 2 people

    • “What’s the chance he’ll do that?”

      About as much chance as the bus driver ever producing that “scientific evidence” that Obama sent assassins to Venezuela (and they gave Chavez cancer). Both leader’s claims are strictly agitprop for domestic consumption. What’s a shame is the Obama administration will probably not release any of the juicy dirt we all want to hear, either. It will all be kept hushed up, like the recent trial of that Guatemalan drug queen. It’s a real shame that Boomerang Chavez is not available in translation. The U.S. public and the world are missing many of the juicy details of all the shenanigans going on in Caracas. Pity.


      • So when someone testifies: “I saw him sell drugs”, he isn’t going to take the witness stand and deny it? What will the jury say when that is pointed out to them?


        • I thought the Night Court image with this post made it clear, but maybe it bears clarifying still further: this story is a complete dadaist farce. Diosdado will never ever show up in U.S. district court to substantiate charges against the Wall friggin’ Street friggin’ Journal. The idea is insane, as is the idea that this suit could intimidate anyone in the U.S. into softening his line.

          The thought is funny, though, in a Night Court kind of goofy satire way.


  2. Most important, WHO WILL PAY FOR CAPODADO’S LAWYERS? Oh, yeah, he’ll pay with dollars from PUBLIC FUNDS, because keeping a stupid show is more important than importing medicines and food (Or supplies to produce them).

    Will the MUD with their eternal “let’s convince the repentant chavistas” method link two brain cells to tell those same “arrepentidos” which are the priorities of their gods in this time?


  3. Not just untrue, but also published with “actual malice.” Actual malice means that the reporter either knew it was false, or would have known had s/he engaged in basic journalistic practices. As long as real sources said what WSJ said they said, and as long as they called Minci for comment, they are covered.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Just “Godgiven Hair” showing off his usual bravado. None of this will ever happen. He will never step foot in the US again.


    • I agree. It’s the usual hot air to inflate himself with importance at the expense of his adversary du jour.


  5. If this is treated as a defamation suit, Diosdi will have a long way to Tipperary, in order to win it:

    “…In the United States, defamation cases are extremely difficult to win, thanks to the First Amendment. When allegedly defamatory statements pertain to a public figure, the plaintiff mustn’t just prove those statements were false. He has to prove the defendant made those statements with ‘actual malice’—that is, knowledge that they were false or with ‘reckless disregard’ for their falsity. Very few defamation plaintiffs can make it over the high bar of actual malice…”

    That is, assuming he would be fool enough to travel to the States to make his case before an American Court.

    So, good luck with that one.


  6. I loved Night Court…that picture brings back so many memories! Would love Harry as judge, Christine as the public defender and Dan as the prosecutor…I would definitely pay to watch that!!


  7. Just a bunch of empty words. I give this the odds of actually happening slightly higher than the odds of a unified, market driven exchange rate.

    But in the event Cabello is serious, i’m getting myself a ton of popcorn.


  8. Much like the parliamentary elections, coups, assassination attempts and economic wars, this trial will never come to pass.

    Cabello had to do or say something, even if it is complete vaporware. He will create a tempest in a teacup that reaches no further than Maiquetia and Telesur; the former reaching farther than the latter.


  9. In the 1930s, the author Graham Greene wrote some rather nasty comments about child star Shirley Temple. He didn’t get sued for libel in the US, but in Great Britain, where it is easier for the aggrieved party to win a libel case.

    Yes, the prospect of Godgiven suing the WSJ for libel is a howler.


  10. It’s going to be just another (the 15299781th) farce.

    Do you remember when Diosdado declared Cocchiola in Valencia was a criminal and would go to jail if he returned to Venezuela?
    Do you remember the many times Diosdado has said Capriles, among many others, has stolen money and done this and that and that he will present proofs of this very soon?

    Even if accusations in Venezuela turn out differently (see López), whatever a Venezuelan milico or boliburgués says is just to bluff, thug’s talk.


  11. This should be fun but truth is it will never happen. To whom will Diosdado sue the WSJ or ABC ? The U.S. or Spain?


  12. This is exactly the kind of Farce the opposition should sink its teeth on.

    They should start bombarding NarcoCabello with reminders, “so when’s the lawsuit against WST? How is that coming along? Every week, everywhere on El Nacional or the Internet, every month. The same for other farces like Dollar Today. They should exploit Dollar Today every day, mocking the Dictators, and their incapacity to do anything about it.

    But of course, MUDcrap is too incompetent. And the majority of people who believe in Jokes like this one to begin with a waaaaaaaaay too uneducated and/or corrupt to know any better.


  13. If DDC ever goes thru with the fantasy of suing the WSJ for libel ( and of course there are always clever lawyers in the US that can be hired to do a good job of pursuing the matter in court ) he runs the risk of having much which is undesirable or unsavory come out as part of an aggresive discovery process so that in the end there may rise new grounds for people to sue him for all sort of crimes , he would be opening a can of worms , We must hope that he is stupid enough to attempt it (which doesnt seem likely) .!!


  14. Just the fact that Europe and the US have become no-go zones for this kind of people is already reason to celebrate.


  15. What many people fail to notice is that this kind laughable announcements from the Dictators, are just part the PLANNED ongoing Circus, Planned Propaganda and is nothing new in Totalitarian regimes.

    You blame others, you create mirages, you lie everyday, you intimidate and repress. All part of the package.

    Educated people, like the 1.5 Million of professionals who left Guisozuela lon ago, the readers of blogs like this, and some in the opposition don’t buy any of these Obvious Aberrations, of course.

    Chavismo knows that all too well, and they don’t care: it’s not their targeted audience. NarcoCabello and Masburro talk to the under-educated populace, and/or their own 20% Enchufados, the 3 Million of the Dictatorship’s Payroll and their 32 “ministerios”.

    They know anyone who is not corrupted and/or uneducated will never buy these gargantuan Lies and constant Circus. I wonder why some of us still try to make any sense of it. They Know who they are fooling, and that’s enough for them: 40% of “support” with bribes and lies is enough for them to remain in power.

    That’s why Under-education is Corruption’s biggest ally. Works wonders for absurd Totalitarian Propaganda.


    • “That’s why Under-education is Corruption’s biggest ally. Works wonders for absurd Totalitarian Propaganda.”

      Agree, but I’d add more. When education is insufficient, is impoverished, and does not develop critical thinking skills, it welcomes totalitarian propaganda. And critical thinking skills have long been undeveloped, especially among females, or 51% of the population. (Keep ’em dumb and chasing impractical beliefs.)


        • Fair points by Hausmann, but he takes a exclsively Statistical approach in little, recent chunks of history in a few countries. Why doesn’t he mention Norway or Singapore or Chile?

          He then admits Education is nevertheless indispensable for anything, to begin with, including productivity, and that’s obvious in today’s economies. I agree with your point instead, is the Quality of education that matters, not how many years in school, or if 95% can read and write tele-novelas.. It’s people’s capacity to think for themselves, the tools for critical analysis.

          A Dictatorship like Chavismo cannot develop these days with the same ridiculous Circus and Propaganda, unless you have an ignorant big piece of the population. (Please save the Nazi Germany comparisons for the 1939 Recession, with no Internet or even TV..)


    • “Educated people, like the 1.5 Million of professionals who left Guisozuela lon ago, the readers of blogs like this, and some in the opposition don’t buy any of these Obvious Aberrations, of course.”

      The problem is that they did back in 1998… That’s their unforgivable sin.


      • Not really. The estimated 1.5 Million have left during Chavismo, especially the last 7-10 years. Of those, analysts have estimated 90% are educated Professionals, middle and upper-middle class, mostly. Massive “Brain Drain” phenomenon indeed, for a country with only 30 Million, half of that infants or elderly, and the rest vastly under-educated (‘alphabetism’ means shit, as Venezuelans continue to prove everyday, I agree with Syd there).

        Of course, the brightest (like my parents who saw this crap coming) might have left a bit earlier, in the 90’s. j/k.. And that’s no “unforgivable sin, dude. That’s just a smart choice.

        At any rate, all this ridiculous propaganda is clearly designed for the uneducated Masses who have no idea what an International court of Law is about, or a lawsuit, much less legal concepts like Defamation or Perjury.


        • I don’t think it’s accurate to say that educated people didn’t support Chavez back in the time.

          Leftists tend to support fellow leftists, solidarity permeate their relations. It’s a real cult.
          Quico was Chavista. The economist Francisco Rodriguez worked for the regime. Maybe not your parents (kudos for them), but their friends certainly did.

          There’s a Portuguese saying that goes like: “An ugly son doesn’t have a father.”, meaning that no one is brave enough to step up and claim proudly: “That son is mine!!!.”, when the child is ugly. Well, truth be told, the mess Venezuela is in have many parents, both educated and uneducated. The poor, powerless and uneducated wouldn’t be able to do all that chaos alone,

          And I’m sorry to say this, but I think that to support Chavez when you are uneducated is far more acceptable than when you are educated, that’s why I called it ‘unforgivable sin’. Anyway, they know who they are, and will die knowing what they did. That’s punishment enough for a lifetime, hehe.


          • Mark,

            Why don’t you shut your mouth and go comment on a blog about the poshest areas of Rio de Janeiro?

            I always rejected Chávez and I knew many people who could be classified in your mind as “leftist” (I am not one, but anyway) who warned about Chávez.
            Actually, this thing is more complicated than a left-right struggle.


            • Funny that I live in a country which is a neighbour of Venezuela, which also happens to be directed affected by all the Chavismo’s mistakes, yet, for a reason that only you seem to know which is, you, on the other side of the globe, living in Europe “for decades”, not even remotely affected by anything that Chavismo does or doesn’t, separated by ‘only’ an ocean, would be more entitled than me to express your opinions. Is this some sort of joke?


      • Marc dixit: “The problem is that they [1.5 million professionals] did [leave Vzla] back in 1998…”

        Gross overgeneralization, when not false in the main.

        The problem, Marc, pre-dates your cherry-picked diagnosis. Rather, the problems (plural) had much more to do with the growing Guisozuela between 1958-1998, the spoils alternatively shared between two parties; the gargantuan appetites for foreign-bank loans in the late 1970s to early 1980s, jacking up inflation rates; the lack of a solid vision for the country on a good and strong political base; the lack of attention to good education among the poor; the lack of controls at border crossings whereby immigrants were viewed simply as electoral fodder — easy cédulas for all; the lack of diversity in tested and well-known leadership in the wings; the lack of critical hearing skills among even the educated when listening to the babble from Chávez in 1998, 10% of it hitting the mark, the rest belonging in the loony bin; the years of discontent from the poor; the frivolity index turned up high; and so many more other pitfalls.

        Little wonder that Fidel Castro was rubbing his hands in glee, on a *happy* island not far away.


        • Zeroing in a little more accurately….Your guess Marc, misses a critical feature. The educated who left Vzla in or before 1998 just washed their hands of politics. There really was little reason to vote, given the offerings. Suggest you take a closer look at the abstention levels in the 1998 elections for more accuracy when diagnosing.


          • I would have left too if I were Venezuelan.

            And the abstention levels actually support my diagnosis, that the educated chose to either wash their hands or support Chavez. The latter happening more often then the former.


            • Oh brother. The one that needs critical thinking skills is you, Marc, when you bloviate and alter, after the fact, your initial *diagnosis*. Unless you can prove that “abstention levels actually support my diagnosis, that the educated chose to either wash their hands or support Chavez..” Looks like you want your cake and eat it too. Not possible in the real world. Grow up. You can’t prove that abstention means support for Chávez. That’s just stupid talk, frankly, and it points to a lack of logic in your educational formation. If this nonsense continues, there’s no point in even *discussing* with you.


              • That’s fine to me, because it pointless to discuss something we seem to agree about it, that the educated believed Chávez’ lies when the country needed them most (you actually have just said that, but using different words). And sorry, but there’s no logical mistake in what I’ve said, because to not take part in that crucial elections was to vote for Chávez. I don’t know if I’m being too subtle, though.

                Have a nice day.


        • Sorry, but I think I expressed myself badly. What I was trying to say was:

          “The problem is that they [1.5 million professionals] did [buy Chavez’ lies and voted for him] back in 1998…”

          And I think you agree with me when you say this:

          “the lack of critical hearing skills among even the educated when listening to the babble from Chávez in 1998”


          • No, Marc, you’re not getting it. Again, look at the abstention numbers among voters in 1998. It’s not that the educated who left Vzla bought Chávez’s lies and voted for him back in 1998. It’s that they voted for no one.

            Stop spreading lies, Marc, and do your homework before spouting.

            Again: look at the abstention levels in the 1998 votes. And pull-eeze, don’t use two individuals who voted for Chávez, or worked in his government, as proof that 1.5 million professionals voted for Chávez. Thanks in advance.


          • Marc, you need to change to another Bossanova station. Syd is right, abstentionism was huge. But more importantly, people were indeed tired of the AD/Copey crap, and even some of the more educated Venezuelans were Fooled by Chavez the first time around: Chavez was very effective disguising his authoritarian nature, promising to leave after 4 years, preserve personal property, etc, etc. He lied and lied, so even educated professionals (some of them writers in this blog) fell for it the first time. Nearly 100% of those quickly realized they had been fooled, unlike the majority of the uneducated populace, for whom it has taken 16 years to realize the mess they’re in. Get it?


            • “He lied and lied, so even educated professionals (some of them writers in this blog) fell for it the first time.”

              I believe that you are admitting for the first time that formal education isn’t the ultimate cure to prevent the ascension of this kind of bastards. Congratulations my friend! Maybe you are going to change your radio station too from now on? Or am I being too optimistic?

              And at our ideological Latin American Universities, chances are very high that your professors will actually support Chavismo, specially if you choose humanities degrees.


              • Who said “education is the ultimate cure” for anything? Read above, not gonna repeat it. In your case, you seem to be somewhat educated yet lazy or dumb, at this point.


          • “Who said “education is the ultimate cure” for anything? Read above, not gonna repeat it.”

            You’ve been saying this every day. And just did above again:

            “A Dictatorship like Chavismo cannot develop these days with the same ridiculous Circus and Propaganda, unless you have an ignorant big piece of the population. (Please save the Nazi Germany comparisons for the 1939 Recession, with no Internet or even TV..)”

            Francisco Rodríguez (economist) was no ignorant, he did have internet and TV. Yet supported Chávez. Why? That’s the important question to be asked if you don’t want to repeat this cursed revolution over and over again. I have the answer for you, though: ideological sympathy. Same as Quico. They know that. Ask them. People like them made all this mess possible, not the powerless and uneducated. You can argue that they were a rarity, but then you will be the one who are either dumb or lazy.


            • Translation: If you’re what Marc considers “left of center”, you are guilty for Chavismo.

              This is coming from the same guy who still thinks climate change is just a made up conspiracy and anyone who didn’t believe the same was a fanatic, and as evidence linked to an article by “Dr” Benny Paiser. (To save you the trouble of googling, Benny Paiser is a joke, he’s a social anthropologist, not a scientist, and embarrassed himself when he actually tried to engage a scientist (he had to publicly retract the only claim he ever put forth for review))


              • “If you’re what Marc considers “left of center”, you are guilty for Chavismo.”

                Not really, you probably haven’t read a lot of Gramsci or Lenin in your life. Not all leftists have the power to change a country like that. The toothless, the powerless, the poor, the uneducated would have NEVER been able to do this revolution alone even if they were the most radical leftist kind of people on Earth. Anyway, you don’t sound very bright, so it’s understandable that you don’t get that… But learn for once that to blame the desperate uneducated masses alone for all this chaos like you probably do is just completely absurd.

                The correct quote would be: If you’re what Marc considers educated, rich, owner of media outlets, owner of the means of production, intellectual, middle class, professor, politician etc etc., you are indeed guilty of Chavismo, because you made this revolution possible when you choose to either blatantly support Chavez or to just shrug and do nothing at Venezuela’s “finest hour”. And to blame “naivety” won’t convince anyone because you were not “naive” back then. You just choose to listen to your ideological convictions. Was Francisco Rodriguez naive or uneducated? Certainly not! Anyway, they know who they are, and most of them have already repaired their past mistakes by fighting against Chavismo with the same determination that they had fought to elect Chavez. This is not about witch hunt, mind you, this is solely about learning from past mistakes to not repeat them again in the future.

                And about the climate change thing, I understand that you are a follower of Al Gore, I wouldn’t expect anything different from you! Good luck!


  16. U.S. Courts have dismissed absent plaintiff lawsuits on the basis that no one else has standing to appear. In the attached case, a uS born jihadist living in Yemen had his father sue to prevent him from being targeted in a drone strike, “without due process”. The Court said the Dad had no standing to sue, because HE wasn’t being targeted. The Court invited the son to come on back home and access the courts himself if he felt aggrieved.


  17. Do we know if the suit against the WSJ is brought in the USA? Just a detail I was wondering about. The El Nacional article was not clear on that. Maybe a court on some small Caribbean island where everything is done by affidavit evidence would take jurisdiction over this.

    But yes, the thought of a trial in a New York court…too good to be true…


      • I can see him getting a ruling from the TSJ or some other kangaroo court without an open trial but that would be just boring. The TSJ, as we know, has jurisdiction over everything.


    • Normally, you sue in a jurisdiction where your opponent has assets, because you are trying to repair damage to your reputation by the receipt of monetary damages. Once the court makes a finding and fixes damages, you then attach the assets of your opponents, sell them, or otherwise extract financial benefit. You can’t expect success through international enforcement. While U.S. Courts feel that British, German, or French Courts deserve respect, even then international enforcement is iffy. If it’s only the High Court of Grand Fenwick, or Venezuela, making an award based on affidavits, no U.S. Court will give effect to the judgment.


  18. As fun as it is to imagine, it isn’t going to happen. The threat is for Venezuelan domestic consumption only. But, in case he is reading this, DC, I double dog dare you!


  19. Three words: Power of Attorney.

    Diosdado Cabello, doesn’t need to set foot in the United States of America to present his civil libel at the District Courts. The entirety of the libel can be managed through Diosdado’s appointed attorneys.

    In regard to the “Viva Voce” argument. Diosdado indeed can be summoned by the District Court on behalf of the Plaintiff, the Defendant, or as a request by the Court itself, via subpoena, which he could comply with telephonically, via consular channels (in accordance with Private International Law), or fail to comply with the discovery process, which will hurt his case in proving libel on behalf of the Defendant.

    Yet in every single one of the aforementioned scenarios Diosdado Cabello doesn’t need to set a single foot on U.S. soil.


Comments are closed.