wrote in message
...
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.




--
Me

"Harry ?" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
...
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.




--
Me - stupid

On Jul 30, 5:02*am, "Harry ?" wrote:
wrote in message

...

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.

--
Me

Well, let's look at the requirements for a libel conviction:

1. You have to know it's false.

He obviously had to have the full tape in order to edit it, so that's
a given.

2. It has to be done with intent to injure.

Yeah, that's pretty much a given to.

Looks to me like Breitbart's ass is grass.

On 7/30/10 3:20 PM, Siobhan Medeiros wrote:
On Jul 30, 5:02 am, "Harry wrote:
wrote in message

...

On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 17:32:29 -0700, wrote:

Breitbart is an asshole who should get his ass kicked but I imagine he
will win on first amendment grounds.

--
Me

Well, let's look at the requirements for a libel conviction:

1. You have to know it's false.

He obviously had to have the full tape in order to edit it, so that's
a given.

2. It has to be done with intent to injure.

Yeah, that's pretty much a given to.

Looks to me like Breitbart's ass is grass.


The operative word is...malice. Breitbart knew what he was doing, knew
his version of the tape was grossly misleading, and knew it would harm
the woman's reputation.