Jury finds MyPillow founder defamed former employee for a leading voting equipment company
A federal jury in Colorado on Monday found that one of the nation's most prominent election conspiracy theorists, MyPillow founder Mike Lindell, defamed a former employee for a leading voting equipment company after the 2020 presidential election.
The employee, Eric Coomer, was awarded $2.3 million in damages. He had sued after Lindell called him a traitor and accusations about him stealing the election were streamed on Lindell's online media platform.
Coomer was the security and product strategy director at Denver-based Dominion Voting Systems, whose voting machines became the target of elaborate conspiracy theories among allies of President Donald Trump, who continues to falsely claim that his loss to Democrat Joe Biden in 2020 was due to widespread fraud.
Dominion won a $787 million settlement in a defamation lawsuit it filed against Fox News over its airing of false claims against the company and has another lawsuit against the conservative network Newsmax.
Newsmax apologized to Coomer in 2021 for airing false allegations against him.
Coomer said during the two-week Lindell trial that his career and life were destroyed by the statements. His lawyers said Lindell either knew the statements were lies, or conveyed them recklessly without knowing if they were true.
Lindell's lawyers denied the claims and said his online platform, formerly known as Frankspeech, is not liable for statements made by others.
Lindell said he went to trial to draw attention to the need to get rid of electronic voting machines that have been targeted in a web of conspiracy theories. He said he used to be worth about $60 million before he started speaking out about the 2020 election and is now $10 million in debt.
Reviews, recounts and audits in the battleground states where Trump contested his loss in 2020 all affirmed Democrat Joe Biden's victory. Trump's attorney general at the time said there was no evidence of widespread fraud, and Trump and his allies lost dozens of court cases seeking to overturn the result.
Lindell stuck by his false claims that the 2020 presidential election was stolen during the trial, but did not call any experts to present evidence of his claims.
Lindell said his beliefs that the 2020 election was tainted by fraud were influenced by watching the 2020 HBO documentary 'Kill Chain' and by the views of Trump's former national security adviser, Michael Flynn. In an interview for a documentary Lindell made in 2021, Flynn said foreign interference was going to happen in U.S. elections, and Lindell said he had no reason to doubt the claim since Flynn had worked for both political parties in intelligence.
Lindell distanced himself from an account by a Colorado podcaster who claimed to have heard a conference call from the anti-fascist group Antifa before the 2020 election. The podcast claimed that on the call someone named Eric from Dominion said he would make sure that Trump would not win, a story that was recounted on Frankspeech during a 2021 event. Lindell said he only learned about that during the trial.
Lindell said he never accused Coomer of rigging the election, but he did say he was upset because he said Newsmax blocked him from being able to go on air to talk about voting machines after it apologized to Coomer. Coomer denied there was any such deal to block Lindell under his agreement with the network.
Coomer's lawyers tried to show how their client's life was devastated by the conspiracy theories spreading about him. Lindell was comparatively late to seize on Coomer, not mentioning him until February 2021, well after his name had been circulated by other Trump partisans.
Coomer said the conspiracy theories cost him his job, his mental health and the life he'd built and said Lindell's statements were the most distressing of all. He specifically pointed to a statement on May 9, 2021, when Lindell described what he believed Coomer had done as 'treason.'
Lindell's attorneys argued that Coomer's reputation was already in tatters by the time Lindell mentioned him. They said that was partly because of Coomer's own Facebook posts disparaging Trump, which the former Dominion employee acknowledged were 'hyperbolic' and had been a mistake.
Lindell denied making any statements he knew to be false about Coomer and testified that he has called many people traitors. His lawyers argued the statements were about a matter of public concern — elections — and therefore protected by the First Amendment.
But Coomer's lawyers said the statements crossed the line into defamation because Lindell accused Coomer of treason, a crime.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBS News
24 minutes ago
- CBS News
Judge orders Kilmar Abrego Garcia's release before trial, but he will likely be detained by ICE
A Tennessee judge on Sunday ordered the release of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, whose mistaken deportation has become a flashpoint in President Trump's immigration crackdown, while he awaits a federal trial on human smuggling charges. But he is not expected to be allowed to go free. At his June 13 detention hearing, prosecutors said U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement would take Abrego Garcia into custody if he were released on the criminal charges, and he could be deported before he has a chance to stand trial. U.S. Magistrate Judge Barbara Holmes has scheduled a hearing for Wednesday to discuss the conditions of Abrego Garcia's release. The U.S. government has already filed a motion to appeal the judge's release order. Holmes acknowledged in her ruling Sunday that determining whether Abrego Garcia should be released is "little more than an academic exercise" because ICE will likely detain him. But the judge wrote that everyone is entitled to the presumption of innocence and "a full and fair determination of whether he must remain in federal custody pending trial." Holmes wrote that the government failed to prove that Abrego was a flight risk, that he posed a danger to the community or that he would interfere with proceedings if released. "Overall, the Court cannot find from the evidence presented that Abrego's release clearly and convincingly poses an irremediable danger to other persons or to the community," the judge wrote. Abrego Garcia has pleaded not guilty to the smuggling charges that his attorneys have characterized as an attempt to justify the deportation mistake after the fact. The acting U.S. attorney for the Middle District of Tennessee, Rob McGuire, argued on June 13 that the likely attempt by ICE to try to deport him was one reason to keep him in jail. But Holmes said then that she had no intention of "getting in the middle of any ICE hold." "If I elect to release Mr. Abrego, I will impose conditions of release, and the U.S. Marshal will release him." If he is released into ICE custody, that is "above my pay grade," she said. The judge suggested that the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security could work out between themselves whether the government's priority is to try him on the criminal charges or deport him. No date has been set for the trial. Will Allensworth, an assistant federal public defender representing Abrego Garcia at the detention hearing, told Holmes that "it's not necessarily accurate that he would be immediately deported." A 2019 immigration judge's order prevents Abrego Garcia, who had been living in Maryland, from being deported to his home country of El Salvador, Allensworth said in court. That's because he faces a credible threat from gangs there, according to court papers. The government could deport him to a third country, but immigration officials would first be required to show that third country was willing to keep him and not simply deport him back to El Salvador, Allensworth said. The smuggling charges stem from a 2022 traffic stop for speeding in Tennessee during which Abrego Garcia was driving a vehicle with nine passengers. Although officers suspected possible smuggling, he was allowed to go on his way with only a warning. At the detention hearing, McGuire said cooperating witnesses have accused Abrego Garcia of trafficking drugs and firearms and of abusing the women he transported, among other claims. Although he is not charged with such crimes, McGuire said they showed Abrego Garcia to be a dangerous person who should remain in jail pretrial. Abrego Garcia's attorneys have characterized the smuggling case as a desperate attempt to justify the mistaken deportation. The investigation was launched weeks after the U.S. government deported Abrego Garcia and the Supreme Court ordered the administration to facilitate his return amid mounting public pressure. Chris Newman, an attorney who represents Abrego Garcia's family, previously told CBS News, "The Trump administration is very invested in making this a referendum on the immigration debate, which, as you know, has become coarsened and polarized." "And that is one way to look at it. And I think certainly a lot of people view it that way. I don't view it that way. I view this as a core constitutional order case, a core due process case," Newman said. "And it just so happens that a Salvadoran immigrant is defending bedrock constitutional protections for all of us." Most people in ICE custody who are facing criminal charges are not kept in the U.S. for trial but deported, Ohio State University law professor César Cuauhtémoc García Hernández said. The U.S. will likely try to deport Abrego Garcia quickly without going before an immigration judge, the professor said. The government would not need a conviction to deport him because Abrego Garcia came to the U.S. illegally. "The legal standard is laxer," García Hernández said. "The government's argument is on stronger legal footing." However an immigration judge rules, the decision can be appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals, García Hernández said. And the board's ruling can then be contested in a federal appeals court.
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Sophie Cunningham Assigns Blame For The Caitlin Clark Incident
Sophie Cunningham Assigns Blame For The Caitlin Clark Incident originally appeared on The Spun. Indiana Fever star Sophie Cunningham has broken her silence on coming to Caitlin Clark's defense. Cunningham, who was traded from the Phoenix Mercury to the Indiana Fever this offseason, came to Clark's defense during a recent Indiana Fever vs. Connecticut Sun game earlier this week. The Fever topped the Sun, 88-71, but in the third quarter, all hell broke loose. Advertisement Clark was poked in the eye by Sun guard Jacy Sheldon. Clark and Sheldon then got into it, before the Indiana Fever guard was knocked to the ground by another Sun player. Multiple technical fouls were awarded. Later in the game, Cunningham took Sheldon to the ground on a fastbreak layup attempt. She ended up getting ejected from the game for the foul. Over the weekend, Cunningham, who starred collegiately at Missouri, broke her silence on the incident. She made it clear that she believes that's her role with the team. 'I think the refs had a lot to do with that. It was a build up for a couple years now of them just not, not protecting the star player in the WNBA. And so at the end of the day, I'm going to protect my teammates, that's what I do," she said. Sophie Cunningham spoke Cunningham believes that it was the referees' fault for letting things escalate to that point. She believes that other teams have gotten away with too much when it comes to defending Clark. It clearly doesn't sound like Cunningham is planning on changing anything moving forward. Advertisement Sophie Cunningham Assigns Blame For The Caitlin Clark Incident first appeared on The Spun on Jun 22, 2025 This story was originally reported by The Spun on Jun 22, 2025, where it first appeared.
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
OpenAI scrubs news of Jony Ive deal amid trademark dispute
OpenAI has removed news of its deal with Jony Ive's io from its website. The takedown comes amid a trademark dispute filed by iyO, an AI hardware startup. OpenAI said it doesn't agree with the complaint and is "reviewing our options." Turns out "i" and "o" make for a popular combination of vowels in the tech industry. Sam Altman's OpenAI launched a very public partnership with io, the company owned by famed Apple designer Jony Ive, in May. The announcement included a splashy video and photos of the two of them looking like old friends. On Sunday, however, OpenAI scrubbed any mention of that partnership from its website and social media. That's because iyO, a startup spun out of Google's moonshot factory, X, and which sounds like io, is suing OpenAI, io, Altman, and Ive for trademark infringement. iyO's latest product, iyO ONE, is an "ear-worn device that uses specialized microphones and bone-conducted sound to control audio-based applications with nothing more than the user's voice," according to the suit iyO filed on June 9. The partnership between OpenAI and io, meanwhile, is rumored to be working on a similarly screen-less, voice-activated AI device. According to its deal with OpenAI, Ive's firm will lead creative direction and design at OpenAI, focusing on developing a new slate of consumer devices. When the deal was announced, neither party shared specific details about future products. However, Altman said the partnership would shape the "future of AI." iyO approached OpenAI earlier this year about a potential collaboration and funding. OpenAI declined that offer, however, and says it is now fighting the trademark lawsuit. "We don't agree with the complaint and are reviewing our options," OpenAI told Business Insider. Read the original article on Business Insider
