| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#2
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Breitbart to be sued by Sherrod
On 7/30/10 4:32 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 11:53:06 -0400, Harry wrote: On 7/30/10 11:25 AM, wrote: On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 00:49:04 -0700, wrote: On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 22:37:20 -0400, wrote: 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. 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. Since she was a political appointee and not US Civil Service it would be easy to say she was a public figure. This will be an issue before the court. It will really come down to where she brings the suit and who is on the jury. If she is in DC she will likely win and since that is where Breitbart works, he has no reason to get a change of venue. The only way he can win is if he can successfully bring the freedom of the press argument up in appeal or of the judge dismisses it in motions but that is a very good possibility. The courts seem to come down on the side of journalists most of the time even if the journalist has an agenda. Again, the only winners will be the lawyers. Uh...I doubt Ms. Sherrod would be considered a "public figure" prior to Breitbart's attack for her purposes of pursuing a defamation lawsuit. And even if she were a public figure, Breitbart acted with malice. That negates any claim Breitbart might make that Ms. Sherrod was a public figure. Jurors in any fair-minded city where people of color are fairly represented will decide in her favor, I think. Let's not forget that Breitbart has a rep for being involved in defamatory news reports. The videos he funded against Acorn were found to be "highly edited" to make them inflammatory. My guess is that Breitbart will want to settle this out of court. I hope Ms. Sherrod tells him to go **** himself. We have some lawyers in the DC area who will turn Breitbart inside out. I hope he has significant assets to lose. The strange thing is, it will be the media that ends up supporting Breitbart. They don't want the precedent that an edited tape is slander no matter what the motive is. TV news is all edited tape. They will take a 40 minute speech and cherry pick out one line that makes the speaker look stupid, simply as what they do. There you go with that moral equivalency again. Breitbart's edited tape made a woman who was talking about the need for reconciliation into a racist. |
|
#3
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Breitbart to be sued by Sherrod
wrote in message ... On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 11:53:06 -0400, Harry ? wrote: On 7/30/10 11:25 AM, wrote: On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 00:49:04 -0700, wrote: On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 22:37:20 -0400, wrote: 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. 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. Since she was a political appointee and not US Civil Service it would be easy to say she was a public figure. This will be an issue before the court. It will really come down to where she brings the suit and who is on the jury. If she is in DC she will likely win and since that is where Breitbart works, he has no reason to get a change of venue. The only way he can win is if he can successfully bring the freedom of the press argument up in appeal or of the judge dismisses it in motions but that is a very good possibility. The courts seem to come down on the side of journalists most of the time even if the journalist has an agenda. Again, the only winners will be the lawyers. Uh...I doubt Ms. Sherrod would be considered a "public figure" prior to Breitbart's attack for her purposes of pursuing a defamation lawsuit. And even if she were a public figure, Breitbart acted with malice. That negates any claim Breitbart might make that Ms. Sherrod was a public figure. Jurors in any fair-minded city where people of color are fairly represented will decide in her favor, I think. Let's not forget that Breitbart has a rep for being involved in defamatory news reports. The videos he funded against Acorn were found to be "highly edited" to make them inflammatory. My guess is that Breitbart will want to settle this out of court. I hope Ms. Sherrod tells him to go **** himself. We have some lawyers in the DC area who will turn Breitbart inside out. I hope he has significant assets to lose. The strange thing is, it will be the media that ends up supporting Breitbart. They don't want the precedent that an edited tape is slander no matter what the motive is. TV news is all edited tape. They will take a 40 minute speech and cherry pick out one line that makes the speaker look stupid, simply as what they do. I doubt it. This isn't anything like the media's defense of Larry Flint. |
|
#4
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Breitbart to be sued by Sherrod
In article ,
says... On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 11:53:06 -0400, Harry ? wrote: On 7/30/10 11:25 AM, wrote: On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 00:49:04 -0700, wrote: On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 22:37:20 -0400, wrote: 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. 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. Since she was a political appointee and not US Civil Service it would be easy to say she was a public figure. This will be an issue before the court. It will really come down to where she brings the suit and who is on the jury. If she is in DC she will likely win and since that is where Breitbart works, he has no reason to get a change of venue. The only way he can win is if he can successfully bring the freedom of the press argument up in appeal or of the judge dismisses it in motions but that is a very good possibility. The courts seem to come down on the side of journalists most of the time even if the journalist has an agenda. Again, the only winners will be the lawyers. Uh...I doubt Ms. Sherrod would be considered a "public figure" prior to Breitbart's attack for her purposes of pursuing a defamation lawsuit. And even if she were a public figure, Breitbart acted with malice. That negates any claim Breitbart might make that Ms. Sherrod was a public figure. Jurors in any fair-minded city where people of color are fairly represented will decide in her favor, I think. Let's not forget that Breitbart has a rep for being involved in defamatory news reports. The videos he funded against Acorn were found to be "highly edited" to make them inflammatory. My guess is that Breitbart will want to settle this out of court. I hope Ms. Sherrod tells him to go **** himself. We have some lawyers in the DC area who will turn Breitbart inside out. I hope he has significant Bingo, we have a winner. Someone who understands what happened in this case and what happens with the press all of the time. |
|
#5
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Breitbart to be sued by Sherrod
On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 17:35:03 -0400, BAR wrote:
In article , says... On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 11:53:06 -0400, Harry ? wrote: On 7/30/10 11:25 AM, wrote: On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 00:49:04 -0700, wrote: On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 22:37:20 -0400, wrote: 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. 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. Since she was a political appointee and not US Civil Service it would be easy to say she was a public figure. This will be an issue before the court. It will really come down to where she brings the suit and who is on the jury. If she is in DC she will likely win and since that is where Breitbart works, he has no reason to get a change of venue. The only way he can win is if he can successfully bring the freedom of the press argument up in appeal or of the judge dismisses it in motions but that is a very good possibility. The courts seem to come down on the side of journalists most of the time even if the journalist has an agenda. Again, the only winners will be the lawyers. Uh...I doubt Ms. Sherrod would be considered a "public figure" prior to Breitbart's attack for her purposes of pursuing a defamation lawsuit. And even if she were a public figure, Breitbart acted with malice. That negates any claim Breitbart might make that Ms. Sherrod was a public figure. Jurors in any fair-minded city where people of color are fairly represented will decide in her favor, I think. Let's not forget that Breitbart has a rep for being involved in defamatory news reports. The videos he funded against Acorn were found to be "highly edited" to make them inflammatory. My guess is that Breitbart will want to settle this out of court. I hope Ms. Sherrod tells him to go **** himself. We have some lawyers in the DC area who will turn Breitbart inside out. I hope he has significant Bingo, we have a winner. Someone who understands what happened in this case and what happens with the press all of the time. Bull****. |
|
#6
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Breitbart to be sued by Sherrod
|
|
#7
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Breitbart to be sued by Sherrod
On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 16:32:49 -0400, wrote:
On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 11:53:06 -0400, Harry ? wrote: On 7/30/10 11:25 AM, wrote: On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 00:49:04 -0700, wrote: On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 22:37:20 -0400, wrote: 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. 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. Since she was a political appointee and not US Civil Service it would be easy to say she was a public figure. This will be an issue before the court. It will really come down to where she brings the suit and who is on the jury. If she is in DC she will likely win and since that is where Breitbart works, he has no reason to get a change of venue. The only way he can win is if he can successfully bring the freedom of the press argument up in appeal or of the judge dismisses it in motions but that is a very good possibility. The courts seem to come down on the side of journalists most of the time even if the journalist has an agenda. Again, the only winners will be the lawyers. Uh...I doubt Ms. Sherrod would be considered a "public figure" prior to Breitbart's attack for her purposes of pursuing a defamation lawsuit. And even if she were a public figure, Breitbart acted with malice. That negates any claim Breitbart might make that Ms. Sherrod was a public figure. Jurors in any fair-minded city where people of color are fairly represented will decide in her favor, I think. Let's not forget that Breitbart has a rep for being involved in defamatory news reports. The videos he funded against Acorn were found to be "highly edited" to make them inflammatory. My guess is that Breitbart will want to settle this out of court. I hope Ms. Sherrod tells him to go **** himself. We have some lawyers in the DC area who will turn Breitbart inside out. I hope he has significant assets to lose. The strange thing is, it will be the media that ends up supporting Breitbart. They don't want the precedent that an edited tape is slander no matter what the motive is. TV news is all edited tape. They will take a 40 minute speech and cherry pick out one line that makes the speaker look stupid, simply as what they do. There's a difference between editing for brevity and editing for effect. There's a further difference between reasonable representation and outright malice. Anyone viewing the end product couldn't help but find Breitbart guilty of willful misrepresentation to harm Ms. Sherrod's reputation. |
| 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 | |||
Hybrid Mode
