Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#101
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Breitbart to be sued by Sherrod
"Harry" wrote in news:i3bmfq$b93$1
@news.eternal-september.org: In your professional opinion, do you think Plume is lying about her law degree? Sad to say, I can't rule out the possibility that she is telling the truth. In my personal opinion she's awfully frustrated. My guess is she has the degree, but she's so blinded by anger toward everything, situation and person, that she hasn't been able to accomplish anything with it. I've seen the type many times over the years. Maybe she didn't pass the bar. I'll say one thing, she needs to find another word for "moron." She's way over the statute of limitations on that one. A little google action reveals about 170 artices with her as the author and that word used. Oh I have a synonym for moron: "nom=de=plume." |
#102
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Breitbart to be sued by Sherrod
On Aug 4, 8:53*am, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
wrote in message ... jps wrote in : On Tue, 3 Aug 2010 04:34:05 +0000 (UTC), wrote: jps wrote in : On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 06:22:42 +0000 (UTC), wrote: jps wrote in om: On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 22:37:20 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 17:32:29 -0700, jps wrote: Breitbart is an asshole who should get his ass kicked but I imagine he will win on *first amendment grounds. She's not a public figure and he targeted her specifically and unfairly characterized her in order to cause her harm. That isn't protected under the 1st amendment. Ha Ha, you poor dumb lame armchair lawyers. It will never get to 1st amendment, malice or anything else. Truth is complete defense to liable. Nothing he posted was untrue. The video was not edited, it was truncated. There is a huge difference. He showed part, but the part he showed was real. She said those remarks, and if she took them back five minutes later, that's her problem. And she admitted to being a racist when she met the farmer. Maybe she reformed, but again, too bad. And then there is the opinion defense which probably protects his written comments about her being a racist. And BTW, who the **** cares if she was a public figure when she made he speech, the question is, is she a public figure when the alleged libel was committed. If you're a public figure, the media can print stories that you cheated in 2nd grade with relative impunity (Bush snorted coke back in college and deserted the National Guard. BTW, did Dan Rather ever half to pay Bush on that one?) If you have any reason to believe it to be true, even if not, and the "victim" is a public figure, the public figure is screwed. Is Shirley Sherrod a public figure? HA! not even debatable. Of course she is! She's an appointed government official who's fitness for her position, not to metion whether she broke federal law by discriminating, has been called into question. This guy has so many defenses, the only issue is if he can't get backers and she buries him in legal fees. Otherwise, when the day is done, maybe on appeal, he wins hands down. You may hate him, I don't particularly like him, but don't kid yourself, he gets off. Speaking of armchair lawyers, your rap sounds like it comes directly from the comforts of a barcalounger. He intended to libel her by presenting the purposefully edited tape and then characterizing her actions as racist when he knew full well there was more to the story. It's not the editing job alone that hangs him by the balls, it's the whole package of mischaracterization and libel. I do have a very nice recliner, but that doesn't negate the fact that I am a real live lawyer with a degree and eveything. I even passed the bar almost 30 years ago. You should be able to tell I'm a lawyer from my arrogant attitude and didactic tone. Anyway, whether he intended to libel her or not simply doesn't matter if he never committed liable in the first place. Bar exam question: What are the elements of libel? Answer: 1.A false and defamatory statement concerning another; 2.The unprivileged publication of the statement to a third party; 3.If the defamatory matter is of public concern, fault amounting at least to negligence on the part of the publisher; and 4.Damage to the plaintiff. If you don't get past the first element, then nothing else matters. So, tell me, where is the "false statement?" Please tell us what type of law you've practiced for the past 30 years? *Real estate? Finally a reasonable question. Yes, as a matter of fact, my practice did in the past include real estate for several years. Mostly I advised corporations in their business transactions, contracts, M&A, that sort of thing. For the last ten years I've been the general counsel of a nationwise logistics company. With executives spouting their mouths off all over the place, in print or live, I deal with libel and slander issues all of the time. Almost anytime someone is fired the issue arises as well. I'm sure there are bigger experts in the field, but I think I know the basics and the real world on this issue better the amateurs on this board. They can question my creditials, or they can learn a thing or two. And BTW, I consider myself neither conservative or liberal, more libertarian than anything; socially liberal, economically conservative. I'm a life long democrat who voted for Reagan and both Bushs. I don't like left wing democrats or right wing republicans, but lately the dems bother me more because they are just as partisan as the GOP, but are hypocrites about it. Anyone who believes you're a lawyer is dumber than you. Anyone who believes you are older than 12 is dumber than you. |
#104
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Breitbart to be sued by Sherrod
On 8/5/10 7:42 AM, BAR wrote:
In , says... On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 20:48:19 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 16:18:15 -0700, wrote: All I've heard about are proposals to extend the Bush tax cuts. Oh no, they want to make 'em bigger!!!! I have heard some convincing arguments that they should just let them all expire. Anything else will require another 2000 page bill with loopholes for someone. Why wouldn't they simply renew the cuts for all but the top %? You mean they wouldn't leave well enough alone? It is about fairness. If you want a progressive system then my cheeseburger should cost $2 and your cheeseburger schould cost $6. My house should cost $250K and your house, exactly the same and right next door to mine, should cost $2M. And, the car I paid $20K for should cost you $100K. You have the money and you can afford to pay more for these things so you should. Just take all the money over what I pay as a tax. Just think when you go to the grocery store there are no prices on items. But, when you get to the checkout counter and all of your items have been scanned, you enter your SSN, and the computer figures out what you can afford to pay and charges you that amount. Your analogies...suck. |
#105
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Breitbart to be sued by Sherrod
wrote in message
... "Harry" wrote in news:i3bmfq$b93$1 @news.eternal-september.org: In your professional opinion, do you think Plume is lying about her law degree? Sad to say, I can't rule out the possibility that she is telling the truth. In my personal opinion she's awfully frustrated. My guess is she has the degree, but she's so blinded by anger toward everything, situation and person, that she hasn't been able to accomplish anything with it. I've seen the type many times over the years. Maybe she didn't pass the bar. I'll say one thing, she needs to find another word for "moron." She's way over the statute of limitations on that one. A little google action reveals about 170 artices with her as the author and that word used. Oh I have a synonym for moron: "nom=de=plume." Pity she won't see this. Maybe if her name was in the subject line? |
#106
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Breitbart to be sued by Sherrod
"Harry " wrote in message
news On 8/5/10 7:42 AM, BAR wrote: In , says... On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 20:48:19 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 16:18:15 -0700, wrote: All I've heard about are proposals to extend the Bush tax cuts. Oh no, they want to make 'em bigger!!!! I have heard some convincing arguments that they should just let them all expire. Anything else will require another 2000 page bill with loopholes for someone. Why wouldn't they simply renew the cuts for all but the top %? You mean they wouldn't leave well enough alone? It is about fairness. If you want a progressive system then my cheeseburger should cost $2 and your cheeseburger schould cost $6. My house should cost $250K and your house, exactly the same and right next door to mine, should cost $2M. And, the car I paid $20K for should cost you $100K. You have the money and you can afford to pay more for these things so you should. Just take all the money over what I pay as a tax. Just think when you go to the grocery store there are no prices on items. But, when you get to the checkout counter and all of your items have been scanned, you enter your SSN, and the computer figures out what you can afford to pay and charges you that amount. Your analogies...suck. It's called leveling the playing field, Obama style. |
#107
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Breitbart to be sued by Sherrod
|
#108
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Breitbart to be sued by Sherrod
In article ,
says... On 8/5/10 7:42 AM, BAR wrote: In , says... On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 20:48:19 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 16:18:15 -0700, wrote: All I've heard about are proposals to extend the Bush tax cuts. Oh no, they want to make 'em bigger!!!! I have heard some convincing arguments that they should just let them all expire. Anything else will require another 2000 page bill with loopholes for someone. Why wouldn't they simply renew the cuts for all but the top %? You mean they wouldn't leave well enough alone? It is about fairness. If you want a progressive system then my cheeseburger should cost $2 and your cheeseburger schould cost $6. My house should cost $250K and your house, exactly the same and right next door to mine, should cost $2M. And, the car I paid $20K for should cost you $100K. You have the money and you can afford to pay more for these things so you should. Just take all the money over what I pay as a tax. Just think when you go to the grocery store there are no prices on items. But, when you get to the checkout counter and all of your items have been scanned, you enter your SSN, and the computer figures out what you can afford to pay and charges you that amount. Your analogies...suck. So do you, spoofer. -- The stupider you sound, the more Republican votes you'll get |
#109
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Breitbart to be sued by Sherrod
On Thu, 5 Aug 2010 07:42:41 -0400, BAR wrote:
In article , says... On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 20:48:19 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 16:18:15 -0700, jps wrote: All I've heard about are proposals to extend the Bush tax cuts. Oh no, they want to make 'em bigger!!!! I have heard some convincing arguments that they should just let them all expire. Anything else will require another 2000 page bill with loopholes for someone. Why wouldn't they simply renew the cuts for all but the top %? You mean they wouldn't leave well enough alone? It is about fairness. If you want a progressive system then my cheeseburger should cost $2 and your cheeseburger schould cost $6. My house should cost $250K and your house, exactly the same and right next door to mine, should cost $2M. And, the car I paid $20K for should cost you $100K. You have the money and you can afford to pay more for these things so you should. Just take all the money over what I pay as a tax. Just think when you go to the grocery store there are no prices on items. But, when you get to the checkout counter and all of your items have been scanned, you enter your SSN, and the computer figures out what you can afford to pay and charges you that amount. Dildo-brain. Have you read any of the reports that show the wealthy gaining ground while the middle and lower income groups are losing ground? Is that what you'd call fair? |
#110
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Breitbart to be sued by Sherrod
On 8/5/10 11:49 AM, jps wrote:
On Thu, 5 Aug 2010 07:42:41 -0400, wrote: In , says... On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 20:48:19 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 16:18:15 -0700, wrote: All I've heard about are proposals to extend the Bush tax cuts. Oh no, they want to make 'em bigger!!!! I have heard some convincing arguments that they should just let them all expire. Anything else will require another 2000 page bill with loopholes for someone. Why wouldn't they simply renew the cuts for all but the top %? You mean they wouldn't leave well enough alone? It is about fairness. If you want a progressive system then my cheeseburger should cost $2 and your cheeseburger schould cost $6. My house should cost $250K and your house, exactly the same and right next door to mine, should cost $2M. And, the car I paid $20K for should cost you $100K. You have the money and you can afford to pay more for these things so you should. Just take all the money over what I pay as a tax. Just think when you go to the grocery store there are no prices on items. But, when you get to the checkout counter and all of your items have been scanned, you enter your SSN, and the computer figures out what you can afford to pay and charges you that amount. Dildo-brain. Have you read any of the reports that show the wealthy gaining ground while the middle and lower income groups are losing ground? Is that what you'd call fair? Individual income over $250000 should be federally taxed at a rate of 49%. For couples who file jointly, if one of the pair has income over $250,000, there should be a surtax that taxes *that* income over $250,000 at the 49% rate. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Harvey S. Mars should be sued by Karin Kaufman's eventual guardian (OT) | Electronics |