The Douchebag got served on live TV.

Mar 27, 2026 2:40 PM

Lindell appeared to be served during an interview at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Grapevine, Texas. The video can be seen here.

Video shows a woman approaching Lindell and trying to hand him papers while telling him: “Hi, sorry to interrupt. I have this for you. You’ve been served.”

The “MyPillow Guy,” as Lindell is sometimes known, initially refused to take the papers and repeated the phrase “we’re on TV, please” more than 10 times. “I’m not accepting this,” he told the woman.

Eventually, he took the papers and threw them on the floor behind him before resuming the interview.

@op

4 months ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

"The video can be seen here."

4 months ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

See how he just ignores reality. This is a nod to the conservative mindset.

4 months ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

4 months ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

He can’t honestly deny he was served because it’s on video. But he will try to.

4 months ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

From one commenter under the New York Post's clip: "A process server is first going to try to do this privately at the residence. If that fails, then at the workplace. If both of those efforts fail, the server will track them down and serve them in a more public setting. It was obvious by his reaction when he saw her that he already recgonized her and was clearly trying to evade being served those papers. It is his own fault it had to be so public." FUCKING. HAH.

4 months ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

The videoconferencing be seen....... where?

4 months ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Is it me or is like CPAC like every fucking week.

4 months ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Amazing that he hasn't joined Rudy Giuliani yet in the graveyard of used up Trump cultists.

4 months ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Served what, court summons paperwork? If so, I hope his next interview he's approached by marshals.

4 months ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

He deserves all of the bad shit that happens to him.

4 months ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 0

Plus some

4 months ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

4 months ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

isn't that a crime?

4 months ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

What, not accepting the papers? It's not a crime, or even necessarily illegal, but you are screwing yourself over, since the lawsuit can proceed without you, and they can secure a default judgement against you, and you don't get to appeal. https://www.abclegal.com/pro-blog/why-you-shouldnt-avoid-being-served-with-legal-documents-process

4 months ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

oh, I didn't know that. thanks for the info and the sauce. For some reason I can't remember, I thought that taking the documents was tacit receipt and intentionally disposing of them was a crime.

4 months ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

There's federal and state laws against obstructing, interfering, or resisting an officer serving papers, but I think that has to be some act against the officer serving. https://psinstitute.com/us-laws-prohibiting-interference-with-service-of-process/ This article goes into several scenarios, including someone visibly disposing of the papers after being served: https://www.subpoenadelivery.com/process-service-on-evasive-defendants

4 months ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I don't know if Texas is different, I used to be a process server in California. the rule there was to serve the papers "in their presence." Accepting them or even touching the person wasn't required.

4 months ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

Passing out fliers, I learned that if you hold them at the edge of reach (ie a bit low) and shake them a bit, people will take hold of them to see what it is. It is some weird trait of monkey brains that makes them grabby-hands.

4 months ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Oh the lumpy pillow guy

4 months ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

THEY'RE NOT LUMPY!!! /s

4 months ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

"the video can be seen here" - doesnt post a link to the video

4 months ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Bro, never dodge service. It'll be worse if you do. If the service processor can prove they've made significant effort to serve someone and failed, in a lot of jurisdictions they can substitute service by other means, including but not limited to simply publishing a newspaper ad. At that point the lawsuit can proceed, and if you don't know you're being sued at this point, you are fucked.

4 months ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

But the judge may observe that she should have waited till the live interview was over. I mean, I don't agree, he's a douchebag.

4 months ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Knowing him and not knowing other details, I find it more likely he's been dodging for a while and cornering him at a public event was a hail mary and getting it on camera was icing on the cake. I'm less likely to believe the process server has just been lazy and decided to be an asshole. Until I learn more details.

4 months ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

You're probably right. Knowingly interrupting him live was probably done from experience. Regardless, he's a dick.

4 months ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

He thinks "we're on TV" is some kind of Jedi mind trick.

4 months ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Another person who believed that by backing Trump he would be rescued by Trump is things got messy, see also guiliani

4 months ago | Likes 29 Dislikes 0

Maybe one of them will pull a Charles J. Guiteau

4 months ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Another destructive piece of trash in need of a good Kirkin'

4 months ago | Likes 113 Dislikes 3

Wow

4 months ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 18

Crack kills, just not as fast as exploding jugulars

4 months ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

4 months ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Source: https://www.newsweek.com/mike-lindell-served-with-documents-live-on-air-11744927

The video linked in the article is a twitter link. here's a reddit version: h
ttps://www.reddit.com/r/TrueAnon/comments/1s4r5bu/mike_lindell_was_served_with_a_lawsuit_today/

4 months ago | Likes 23 Dislikes 0

[deleted]

[deleted]

4 months ago (deleted Mar 27, 2026 5:35 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

You think Imgur isn't social media?..

4 months ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

4 months ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

If you want it, you find it. Demanding other people dig that up when they've already provided you multiple places where it's posted is a bit ridiculous.

4 months ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 2

If you can find one sure, go for it.

4 months ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

HA HA HA.

4 months ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 7

IT SAYS THE VIDEO CAN BE SEEN HERE BUT THERE IS NO FAIL! Link plz.

4 months ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

if you don't want to give Twitter the clicks, https://nitter.poast.org/i/status/2037401719059943518

4 months ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Thanks, I noticed too late.

4 months ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Heh, asshole. (him, not you) (Well, you might be. I don't know you.)

4 months ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Sometimes, but I feel bad about it ;P

4 months ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Calls the process server a deranged leftist. Justice is deranged and woke in their view.

4 months ago | Likes 158 Dislikes 2

"Gawt danged woman takin' all our good jerbs!" -lindell's shady, greasy ass, probably

4 months ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Unironically how they see it, yes. Justice doesn't account for hierarchy, which is one of their most deep-seated beliefs - being part of the "in-group", Lindell feels he should be above the law

4 months ago | Likes 22 Dislikes 0

I'm betting the process server tried nicely before doing this and I love it! Not only is there video evidence but so many witnesses too!

4 months ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

That's what they've always thought. Justice has always been the scariest enemy of conservatism.

4 months ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Frank Wilhoit said it best: "conservatism is fundamentally about creating a hierarchical legal system with one group protected but not bound by the law, and another bound but not protected"

4 months ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

And they're really old days people would settle their differences with the dual. Does that fat fuck want that?

4 months ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

lindell couldn't even settle differences with a pillow fight.

4 months ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It’s consequences in general. Consequences are for others.

4 months ago | Likes 50 Dislikes 0

Video here:

4 months ago | Likes 193 Dislikes 0

He took them and threw them, that counts, he took them!

4 months ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Yeah, not how it works, Mikey. A camera isn't a shield.

4 months ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

"the party of law and order"

4 months ago | Likes 42 Dislikes 0

And personal responsibility

4 months ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 0

I like how the reporter tries to laugh it off, then it slowly dawns on him that it's real and "hey this could actually be a better story".

4 months ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 0

but it's not like she's the one pressing charges. If she's a hired process server, she probably doesn't know much about it

4 months ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Thank you for posting the video.

4 months ago | Likes 82 Dislikes 0

Sweet

4 months ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

He took them from her, therefore he accepted them. Even if he tossed them aside, he took them.

4 months ago | Likes 67 Dislikes 0

it's no longer a requirement, they just make an effort to get that done because otherwise they will have to properly document even more details confirming they did a reasonable effort to deliver them to the right person and believe they did it to the best of their abilities. there is a timeline to get this done, beyond that a different legal process takes over regardless of the person being served or not.

4 months ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

BTW, please anyone correct me if I said anything wrong, this was just my understanding from some time ago and I might be mistaken in some aspects (or all of them).

4 months ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

I mean... He's right here on video shown that they did their best reasonable attempt to serve it to him. He took the papers - and it was on video.

4 months ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

I meant the process itself I described in my previous reply

4 months ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Douchebag got served and there is video evidence to prove it. Fuck that ass rimmer.

4 months ago | Likes 441 Dislikes 4

Yep. He took hold of them. Her job was completed.

4 months ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

v

4 months ago | Likes 29 Dislikes 0

Smoke me kipper, I'll be home for breakfast!

4 months ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

What have you got against ass rimmers?

4 months ago | Likes 23 Dislikes 0

Liddel seems like the sort who wouldn't even give a courtesy reach around

4 months ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Power move, definitely puts him in a deeper corner. He won't be able to just keep dodging/ignoring it

4 months ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I bet that's precisely why she did it then because she knew he would deny getting them.

4 months ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Fun fact! You don't actually even need video evidence. In lots of jurisdictions, you just need a process server to say under oath they tried to give them the papers and were refused and then the court will allow them to be mailed or dropped off at the door.

4 months ago | Likes 116 Dislikes 0

The author Michael Wolf has been having this issue with his Slapp lawsuit against Melania.

4 months ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

The thing is, he didn't even refuse. He took the papers from her. Sure he threw them away right after, but he accepted them

4 months ago | Likes 59 Dislikes 0

Correct.

4 months ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 0

Up here, a 'lawyer' who spends most of her time as a right-wing faux journalist and targets marginalized groups tried to serve her own suit to someone who wouldn't let her near and she just left them on a couch. Became a running joke about her.

4 months ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 1

Is it illegal to deny or toss away papers if you get served? I'm not too familiar with all the laws, but it sounds like a dick move

4 months ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

My assumption was the "serving" is to prove you received the papers. Throwing them away just means you'll lose your lawsuit and can't claim you didn't know or something like that.

4 months ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Thanks for the info, I hope he gets in some sort of trouble because of it.

4 months ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

He's still around? I didn't think even MAGA cared about him anymore.

4 months ago | Likes 67 Dislikes 1

Dipshit is even runnin for governor somewhere

4 months ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Grifter gotta grift.

4 months ago | Likes 29 Dislikes 0

lol. He ruined himself and destroyed his business all in support of dear leader. And he didn’t even get a government contract for pillows as a reward.

4 months ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 0

I saw his latest infomercial the other day he’s pushing his new bullshit mattress topper now.

4 months ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

They don't. That's why his shit is making it to court.

4 months ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Well, he lost everything “for the cause” so he has to keep giving or else admit to himself that he majorly screwed up, which is impossible for numerous white men

4 months ago | Likes 28 Dislikes 4

That didn't have to be racist . Just sexist is fine.

4 months ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 4

I understand your shallow perception of the world. Common as a fart. However, narcissism is color blind.

4 months ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

You had me nodding up until you made it about race, which has nothing to do with it.

4 months ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 4

Yeah, if they'd ended with "conservative" instead they'd probably have five times as many upvotes. If you look at their profile bio you can see they're a smug piece of shit though so the choice was likely intentional.

4 months ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

4 months ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 2

Sunk cost fallacy in action. "If I admit I was wrong, then I wasted all that time being wrong."

No, that time was already wasted. You just have to decide what to do with your time going forward: Continue to waste it being wrong, or use it to make things better, and undo the previous damage.

The people doing the former out of a misguided belief that they can eventually justify it as all having been worth it are, in a nutshell, idiots. And cowards, for being afraid of admitting the plain truth.

4 months ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

There's also ego there, not just lost time and money.

4 months ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Well, of course. Ego is the only thing that drives sunk cost fallacious thinking. Every single time. If not for ego, they would be able to recognize that the time and/or money spent is gone, and not coming back. Continuing to be wrong just to avoid that admission is 100% a product of ego.

4 months ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0