TexasCHLforum.com

This is an interesting legal theory at play. As I understand it, for Powell to have defamed Dominion, they must prove that her claims were false and she knew it, the claims were believed, and the claims damaged their reputation (i.e. caused a loss). But in trying to show the claims were false, Dominion labelled them "outlandish", "wild accusations", "highly improbable", or "impossible". So Powell is arguing that their complaint contains allegations that show the claims could not be believed by any reasonable person. If this is true, the defamation claim fails for not meeting the requirements. Dominion would now have to prove that their reputation was damaged and some loss occurred because the mythical "reasonable" person believed these claims and reacted in a manner that harmed them. That could be a tough row to hoe.

If this succeeds, it proves to me that Powell,or whichever of her current attorneys came up with this defense, is a much better lawyer than I thought earlier.

What is that saying? It is an interesting move, let's see how that works out for them.