Lawyers for Nick Sandmann File 250 Million Dollar Lawsuit Against Washington Post

[JimBowie1958]

Rotsa ruck with that. As for the disposition of this action, invest in paper shredders.

I just posted the evidence, you fucking retard. You refuse to respond to it.

Libtards only see what they want to see.

 

[JimBowie1958]

And he's just beginning! MAGA Nick Sandmanngave them 48 hours to apologize and was met with silence. Oh well, time to crack that whip!




Lawsuit in link.
For truth, for justice, for Nicholas!

How inconvenient that they STILL have no evidence, huh.

I put that challenge out a MONTH ago and never got a response. Not a single one. Zero.
"Apologize for"................................ what?

From your own link:


>> On January 19, 2019, the Post also posted to its Twitter page and published to approximately 13 million followers its First Article with the following false and defamatory captions, all within a span of 14 minutes, and all within the same thread:

• “In an interview with The Post, Omaha Tribe elder Nathan Phillips says he ‘felt like the spirit was talking through me’ as teens jeered and mocked him.”

• “He was singing the American Indian Movement song of unity that serves as a ceremony to send the spirits home. ‘It was getting ugly, and I was thinking: ‘I’ve got to find myself an exit out of this situation and finish my song at the Lincoln Memorial.’”

• “Phillips, who fought in the Vietnam War, says in an interview ‘I started going that way, and that guy in the hat stood in my way and we were at an impasse. He just blocked my way and wouldn’t allow me to retreat.’” <<

Whelp, guess what. That's a newspaper QUOTING Philips. Is the quote inaccurate? The fact is Philips DID make the statements, he WAS singing a NAm song, and the teens DID jeer and mock him --- "tomahawk chops" are right there in the video.

YOUR OWN LINK, Dumbass. Rotsa ruck with egomaniac attorneys getting their names in print by filing frivolous lawsuits for which they have no evidence. This will be laughed out of court, as it should be.

Video evidence and threats made. As a member of the walking brain dead, you should be prepared for a massive defeat.

Liberals dont concern themselves with truthfulness or honesty.


They only want to make a win for their side, Truth be damned.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Demonstrating malice isn't required if you aren't a public figure, fuckstick.

Read the complaint dumb fuck.

How would that prove malice is required?

Malice isn't required. Just irresponsibility. Especially since it's a minor child.

Know what else is required?

"Evidence".

You lose.

The evidence is all over the forum, shit for brains. You've been defaming Sandman since the whole thing started.

Pogo is likely a sock for some Sorosbot.

 

[JimBowie1958]

View attachment 246974
MAGA

Pic of a future millionaire courtesy of the Jeff Bezos Cult at the Washington Compost.

 

[Faun]

This is my last post to you until you learn to reply to my posts based on what's in them -- not what you imagine I'm saying.

He did respond to what was in your post, jackass.

No, fucking moron, he didn't. My post said the player in that photo was wearing a jersey which read, "Clark County," not "Clark University," as you moronically thought....

His reply to that post was, "I don't understand why you think that this 2012 photograph justifies Phony Veteran Nathan Phillips pestering of minor children or the Washington Post's character assassination of the same," which I never said it does. So how on Earth do you delude your fucking moronic self into thinking he addressed my post when I never said what he asked of me?

You obviously believe the photo is somehow relevant to what happened to Nick Sandman 7 years later. Otherwise, why would you be going on and on about it? Look at the title of this thread. That's what is being discussed, not some fucking photo from 7 years ago.

Fucking moron, I never said that photo has anything to do with Sandmann. I'm merely laughing my ass off at you for being such a fucking moron, you actually thought that uniform read, "university," as though there's a 'U' in the middle of the word, "university."

And why are you reminding me this thread is about Sandmann and not that photo -- when the only reason I talked about that photo was in response to YOU talking about that photo? Perhaps you should practice what you preach and not wander off about that photo if you don't want to talk about it?

As far as Sandmann's lawsuit, unless you've read what the Washington Post printed, you have nothing valid to say since you have no idea if the lawsuit is valid or not.

The photo was post in this thread, which is about Sandmann, so the person who posted believes it has something to do with Sandmann, and you chimed in to defend it. Therefore you imagine it has something to do with Sandman. On the other hand, since the leftwing media has thoroughly disgraced itself with piling in on one smear after another, no one is going to accept the photo without ironclad proof.

Fucking moron, I chimed in to show everyone what a fucking moron you are. I said nothing in Defense of it. And you were very happy to talk about that picture until I pointed out it reads “Clark County,” not “Clark University.”

But g’head, tell everyone again how there’s a ‘U’ in the middle of the word, “university.”

That was fucking hysterical!

 

[Pogo]

What’s libelous about that, fucking moron?

Was it where they said he was standing a foot away from the drummer? He was.

Or was it where they said he wore a relentless smirk? He did.

If the phony Indian veteran has gotten in the face of an adult and started his shit, he would have spent the evening at the proctologist's office having his drum extracted. Is that why he picked a child?

There were a hundred students there. If they wanted to get violent, as you suggest an adult would have, Phillips would have had no chance. Fortunately, folks are not as violent as you.

Why do you think that most adults would have suffered the abuse that the phony veteran was dishing out gladly?

Mr. Phillips didn't think that, that's why he decided to pester well behaved children instead of adults.

So you're saying the little shit sized up the old man and figured he could get away with that Smirk?

Tell us something we don't know.

no, the Phony Veteran came up to the child, Sandmann was just minding his own beeswax.

The Black Congressional Israelites had been hollering all kinds of filth at the Covington children for an hour, and Phillips decided to get in on the fun.

ZERO of that addresses my post. Go learn how to read.

 

[justoffal]

And he's just beginning! MAGA Nick Sandmanngave them 48 hours to apologize and was met with silence. Oh well, time to crack that whip!

Lawsuit in link.
For truth, for justice, for Nicholas!

Why was a Catholic kid allowed to wear a MAGA hat on a class trip? Where were the chaperones? Where were the priests? The RCC always bragged that it was the arbiter of morals. BS! So glad I got out of it.

It's also time to look into that diocese and that school's tax exempt status. Tax laws allow churches to be involved in political causes....but NOT politicians. Almost all those kids were wearing "Trump" gear....NOT anti-choice gear. Maybe WaPo can also bring that up to the IRS, file a complaint.

--------------------------------------- yeah , time to go after tax exempt . 'catholic churches' are big time enablers of 'immigration' into the USA . Might as well go after the minority / black churches tax exempt status also as they are very political Bode .

The left never understands that slamming down the gavel means slamming it down for everything and for everyone. It's amazing how they rise up in an intellectually insulated bubble of self righteous indignation and then
Totally lose their shit over the consequences they cause themselves.

Jo

 

[Pogo]

There were a hundred students there. If they wanted to get violent, as you suggest an adult would have, Phillips would have had no chance. Fortunately, folks are not as violent as you.

Why do you think that most adults would have suffered the abuse that the phony veteran was dishing out gladly?

Mr. Phillips didn't think that, that's why he decided to pester well behaved children instead of adults.

So you're saying the little shit sized up the old man and figured he could get away with that Smirk?

Tell us something we don't know.

no, the Phony Veteran came up to the child, Sandmann was just minding his own beeswax.

The Black Congressional Israelites had been hollering all kinds of filth at the Covington children for an hour, and Phillips decided to get in on the fun.

Yes, and then the WP interviewed Phillips and printed his story. How is that libelous on the part of the WP?

It was libelous because they didn't check the facts even though they were readily available. Sandmann is a minor child, not a public figure, and you better be certain of the facts before you drag their reputations through the mud. Phillips is a well known bum, a man who pretends to be a combat veteran and all around shady character. Taking his word for it and putting a child at risk is a pretty vile tort.

Here's the thing, Evelyn Wood.

In order to establish 'libel" you need evidence of somebody making assertions they know are not true. For instance the way you just did above:

"Phillips is a well known bum, a man who pretends to be a combat veteran and all around shady character."
​

In this lawsuit however there is no such evidence of the WaPo (or anyone else) making ass-sertions about Smirk-Boi. The articles say there's video, and quotes several witnesses' comments. **ALL** of that is true. A clusterfuck of vague mythologies whined out by blogs and radio talking heads DOES NOT make some other entity "responsible" for it. Because it CAN'T.

Which means, that you're closer to "libel" here than the WaPo was.

 

[justoffal]

He did respond to what was in your post, jackass.

No, fucking moron, he didn't. My post said the player in that photo was wearing a jersey which read, "Clark County," not "Clark University," as you moronically thought....

His reply to that post was, "I don't understand why you think that this 2012 photograph justifies Phony Veteran Nathan Phillips pestering of minor children or the Washington Post's character assassination of the same," which I never said it does. So how on Earth do you delude your fucking moronic self into thinking he addressed my post when I never said what he asked of me?

You obviously believe the photo is somehow relevant to what happened to Nick Sandman 7 years later. Otherwise, why would you be going on and on about it? Look at the title of this thread. That's what is being discussed, not some fucking photo from 7 years ago.

Fucking moron, I never said that photo has anything to do with Sandmann. I'm merely laughing my ass off at you for being such a fucking moron, you actually thought that uniform read, "university," as though there's a 'U' in the middle of the word, "university."

And why are you reminding me this thread is about Sandmann and not that photo -- when the only reason I talked about that photo was in response to YOU talking about that photo? Perhaps you should practice what you preach and not wander off about that photo if you don't want to talk about it?

As far as Sandmann's lawsuit, unless you've read what the Washington Post printed, you have nothing valid to say since you have no idea if the lawsuit is valid or not.

The photo was post in this thread, which is about Sandmann, so the person who posted believes it has something to do with Sandmann, and you chimed in to defend it. Therefore you imagine it has something to do with Sandman. On the other hand, since the leftwing media has thoroughly disgraced itself with piling in on one smear after another, no one is going to accept the photo without ironclad proof.

Fucking moron, I chimed in to show everyone what a fucking moron you are. I said nothing in Defense of it. And you were very happy to talk about that picture until I pointed out it reads “Clark County,” not “Clark University.”

But g’head, tell everyone again how there’s a ‘U’ in the middle of the word, “university.”

That was fucking hysterical!

Your GIF over usage spells huge insecurity.

Jo

 

[Pogo]

It's very difficult to prove you have been "hurt" when you have a history of blackface.

Without a source, subtitles or explanations, your pic is worthless.

Here ya go. Lots more pics there too.

It says they were "from" Covington high school. That doesn't mean the Covington high school team is playing here. Notice the player's shirt says "University" at the bottom, so this obviously isn't a high school game. So if it wasn't a high school game, then how do we know the students in the photo were actually from Covington High School?

It also says they "goaded" black members of the opposite team. Probably all the team members were black, and what does "goaded" mean? Did they shout "your mother wears army boots?" Goading the opposite team is quite common in basket ball games.

Overall, this picture is bullshit. It would have been all over the internet if it was credible.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Dayum, fucking moron, you sure do go out of your way to live up to that name, huh?

Fucking moron .... that says "Clark County," not Clark University.

Here's Covington Catholic HIGH SCHOOL on George Rogers Clark HIGH SCHOOL's schedule....

Schedule - George Rogers Clark Cardinals 2012-13 Basketball (Winchester, KY)

Yes, that was a HIGH SCHOOL game and yes, they played them and yes, that photo is of Covington Catholic High School students wearing black face at their own game,...

.... and yes, that's how we know the students in that photo were actually from Convington Catholic High School.

Yet again (I've lost count), you once again prove for the forum you are, by far, the biggest fucking moron on this site.

"County" doesn't have an "I" in it. the last three letters are "ITY," and you can't read the rest.

You can't prove a thing you posted.

It's a U. As in "DUMBASS".

>> ... Second, the photograph appeared to originate with a message board for Kentucky prep schools titled BluegrassPreps.com where it was posted on 7 December 2015, well before the controversy over the January 2019 viral video. The photograph was posted as part of a discussion on whether or not “The Colonel Crazies’ treatment of inbounders” — players making an inbound passes — should change, and the thread included posts from several individuals defending both the antics and the wearing of black paint as well.

Third, the photograph appeared to depict a game between Covington Catholic and “Clark County,” based on the uniform of the opposing player, a game that actually took place. The event was Covington Catholic’s season opening game at George Rogers Clark High School, which was held on 27 November 2012. An archived version of Covington Catholic’s school newspaper described their opponent as “Clark County” in that game, which Covington won 59-38. << --- Snopes​

Clark county is just a bit south of the wet trolley tracks in Wisconsin where the Democratic Party held their convention a month after the election was over, so you ain't exactly the most observant moron in the world, are ya.

 

[justoffal]

Why do you think that most adults would have suffered the abuse that the phony veteran was dishing out gladly?

Mr. Phillips didn't think that, that's why he decided to pester well behaved children instead of adults.

So you're saying the little shit sized up the old man and figured he could get away with that Smirk?

Tell us something we don't know.

no, the Phony Veteran came up to the child, Sandmann was just minding his own beeswax.

The Black Congressional Israelites had been hollering all kinds of filth at the Covington children for an hour, and Phillips decided to get in on the fun.

Yes, and then the WP interviewed Phillips and printed his story. How is that libelous on the part of the WP?

It was libelous because they didn't check the facts even though they were readily available. Sandmann is a minor child, not a public figure, and you better be certain of the facts before you drag their reputations through the mud. Phillips is a well known bum, a man who pretends to be a combat veteran and all around shady character. Taking his word for it and putting a child at risk is a pretty vile tort.

Here's the thing, Evelyn Wood.

In order to establish 'libel" you need evidence of somebody making assertions they know are not true. For instance the way you just did above:

Phillips is a well known bum, a man who pretends to be a combat veteran and all around shady character.
​

In this lawsuit however there is no such evidence of the WaPo (or anyone else) making ass-sertions about Smirk-Boi. The articles say there's video, and quotes several witnesses' comments. **ALL** of that is true.

Which means, that you're closer to "libel" here than the WaPo was.

Yes Ahem....you're making the assumption of perfection.... Though that did be nice it simply does not exist even in the city system.
WAPO did enough bullshitting to be liable
For an ouchie.....trust me no one is going to throw this out. They'll never get 250....but they might get 25.....

It will go to the Scotus for sure because it's time has come.



Jo

 

[22lcidw]

Why do you think that most adults would have suffered the abuse that the phony veteran was dishing out gladly?

Mr. Phillips didn't think that, that's why he decided to pester well behaved children instead of adults.

So you're saying the little shit sized up the old man and figured he could get away with that Smirk?

Tell us something we don't know.

no, the Phony Veteran came up to the child, Sandmann was just minding his own beeswax.

The Black Congressional Israelites had been hollering all kinds of filth at the Covington children for an hour, and Phillips decided to get in on the fun.

Yes, and then the WP interviewed Phillips and printed his story. How is that libelous on the part of the WP?

It was libelous because they didn't check the facts even though they were readily available. Sandmann is a minor child, not a public figure, and you better be certain of the facts before you drag their reputations through the mud. Phillips is a well known bum, a man who pretends to be a combat veteran and all around shady character. Taking his word for it and putting a child at risk is a pretty vile tort.

Here's the thing, Evelyn Wood.

In order to establish 'libel" you need evidence of somebody making assertions they know are not true. For instance the way you just did above:

"Phillips is a well known bum, a man who pretends to be a combat veteran and all around shady character."
​

In this lawsuit however there is no such evidence of the WaPo (or anyone else) making ass-sertions about Smirk-Boi. The articles say there's video, and quotes several witnesses' comments. **ALL** of that is true. A clusterfuck of vague mythologies whined out by blogs and radio talking heads DOES NOT make some other entity "responsible" for it. Because it CAN'T.

Which means, that you're closer to "libel" here than the WaPo was.

We do not listen to your excuses anymore. Unfortunatly to many others do. To watch someone go into CNN or MSNBC and do major damage or a McVeigh result would bring laughter throughout the land. They have gotten people hurt and killed. There is no sympathy for them.

 

[Pogo]

There were a hundred students there. If they wanted to get violent, as you suggest an adult would have, Phillips would have had no chance. Fortunately, folks are not as violent as you.

Why do you think that most adults would have suffered the abuse that the phony veteran was dishing out gladly?

Mr. Phillips didn't think that, that's why he decided to pester well behaved children instead of adults.

So you're saying the little shit sized up the old man and figured he could get away with that Smirk?

Tell us something we don't know.

no, the Phony Veteran came up to the child, Sandmann was just minding his own beeswax.

The Black Congressional Israelites had been hollering all kinds of filth at the Covington children for an hour, and Phillips decided to get in on the fun.

Yes, and then the WP interviewed Phillips and printed his story. How is that libelous on the part of the WP?

They printed Phillip's story as if it was the unvarnished truth, and they didn't bother to investigate or interview anything that contradicted his story.

WRONG, trolley-trax Boi. They QUOTED Philips, and several others.

What would you have them do, change the quote to shit he never said?

 

[Pogo]

Without a source, subtitles or explanations, your pic is worthless.

Here ya go. Lots more pics there too.

It says they were "from" Covington high school. That doesn't mean the Covington high school team is playing here. Notice the player's shirt says "University" at the bottom, so this obviously isn't a high school game. So if it wasn't a high school game, then how do we know the students in the photo were actually from Covington High School?

It also says they "goaded" black members of the opposite team. Probably all the team members were black, and what does "goaded" mean? Did they shout "your mother wears army boots?" Goading the opposite team is quite common in basket ball games.

Overall, this picture is bullshit. It would have been all over the internet if it was credible.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Dayum, fucking moron, you sure do go out of your way to live up to that name, huh?

Fucking moron .... that says "Clark County," not Clark University.

Here's Covington Catholic HIGH SCHOOL on George Rogers Clark HIGH SCHOOL's schedule....

Schedule - George Rogers Clark Cardinals 2012-13 Basketball (Winchester, KY)

Yes, that was a HIGH SCHOOL game and yes, they played them and yes, that photo is of Covington Catholic High School students wearing black face at their own game,...

.... and yes, that's how we know the students in that photo were actually from Convington Catholic High School.

Yet again (I've lost count), you once again prove for the forum you are, by far, the biggest fucking moron on this site.

"County" doesn't have an "I" in it. the last three letters are "ITY," and you can't read the rest.

You can't prove a thing you posted.

It's a U. As in "DUMBASS".

>> ... Second, the photograph appeared to originate with a message board for Kentucky prep schools titled BluegrassPreps.com where it was posted on 7 December 2015, well before the controversy over the January 2019 viral video. The photograph was posted as part of a discussion on whether or not “The Colonel Crazies’ treatment of inbounders” — players making an inbound passes — should change, and the thread included posts from several individuals defending both the antics and the wearing of black paint as well.

Third, the photograph appeared to depict a game between Covington Catholic and “Clark County,” based on the uniform of the opposing player, a game that actually took place. The event was Covington Catholic’s season opening game at George Rogers Clark High School, which was held on 27 November 2012. An archived version of Covington Catholic’s school newspaper described their opponent as “Clark County” in that game, which Covington won 59-38. << --- Snopes​

Clark county is just a bit south of the wet trolley tracks in Wisconsin where the Democratic Party held their convention a month after the election was over, so you ain't exactly the most observant moron in the world, are ya.

And just to turn the knife yet again Fingerboy ---- let's see what your fantasy "Clark University" actually is, if it exists.

>> Clark University is an American private research university located in Worcester, Massachusetts. The University is located in Worcester's Main South neighborhood. << (Wiki)​

Get that? A private research university, in New England, put a basketball team together so it could drive all night to Kentucky and play a basketball game so you could score your internet message board "points". What a great team.

 

[Faun]

No, fucking moron, he didn't. My post said the player in that photo was wearing a jersey which read, "Clark County," not "Clark University," as you moronically thought....

His reply to that post was, "I don't understand why you think that this 2012 photograph justifies Phony Veteran Nathan Phillips pestering of minor children or the Washington Post's character assassination of the same," which I never said it does. So how on Earth do you delude your fucking moronic self into thinking he addressed my post when I never said what he asked of me?

You obviously believe the photo is somehow relevant to what happened to Nick Sandman 7 years later. Otherwise, why would you be going on and on about it? Look at the title of this thread. That's what is being discussed, not some fucking photo from 7 years ago.

Fucking moron, I never said that photo has anything to do with Sandmann. I'm merely laughing my ass off at you for being such a fucking moron, you actually thought that uniform read, "university," as though there's a 'U' in the middle of the word, "university."

And why are you reminding me this thread is about Sandmann and not that photo -- when the only reason I talked about that photo was in response to YOU talking about that photo? Perhaps you should practice what you preach and not wander off about that photo if you don't want to talk about it?

As far as Sandmann's lawsuit, unless you've read what the Washington Post printed, you have nothing valid to say since you have no idea if the lawsuit is valid or not.

The photo was post in this thread, which is about Sandmann, so the person who posted believes it has something to do with Sandmann, and you chimed in to defend it. Therefore you imagine it has something to do with Sandman. On the other hand, since the leftwing media has thoroughly disgraced itself with piling in on one smear after another, no one is going to accept the photo without ironclad proof.

Fucking moron, I chimed in to show everyone what a fucking moron you are. I said nothing in Defense of it. And you were very happy to talk about that picture until I pointed out it reads “Clark County,” not “Clark University.”

But g’head, tell everyone again how there’s a ‘U’ in the middle of the word, “university.”

That was fucking hysterical!

You GIF over usage spells huge insecurity.

Jo

Your inability to spell a 4 letter word reveals even more about you. Meanwhile, images are here for our disposal to accentuate thoughts which would normally be restricted to written words only.

 

[Pogo]

Rotsa ruck with that. As for the disposition of this action, invest in paper shredders.

I just posted the evidence, you fucking retard. You refuse to respond to it.

Libtards only see what they want to see.

Fingerfuck posted no "evidence". I challenged him, and anyone else, to demonstrate any such evidence a fucking MONTH ago. Got literally ZERO. And still have ZERO.

You go ahead and find it. Be the first.

Dickhead.

 

[Pogo]

So you're saying the little shit sized up the old man and figured he could get away with that Smirk?

Tell us something we don't know.

no, the Phony Veteran came up to the child, Sandmann was just minding his own beeswax.

The Black Congressional Israelites had been hollering all kinds of filth at the Covington children for an hour, and Phillips decided to get in on the fun.

Yes, and then the WP interviewed Phillips and printed his story. How is that libelous on the part of the WP?

It was libelous because they didn't check the facts even though they were readily available. Sandmann is a minor child, not a public figure, and you better be certain of the facts before you drag their reputations through the mud. Phillips is a well known bum, a man who pretends to be a combat veteran and all around shady character. Taking his word for it and putting a child at risk is a pretty vile tort.

Here's the thing, Evelyn Wood.

In order to establish 'libel" you need evidence of somebody making assertions they know are not true. For instance the way you just did above:

"Phillips is a well known bum, a man who pretends to be a combat veteran and all around shady character."
​

In this lawsuit however there is no such evidence of the WaPo (or anyone else) making ass-sertions about Smirk-Boi. The articles say there's video, and quotes several witnesses' comments. **ALL** of that is true. A clusterfuck of vague mythologies whined out by blogs and radio talking heads DOES NOT make some other entity "responsible" for it. Because it CAN'T.

Which means, that you're closer to "libel" here than the WaPo was.

We do not listen to your excuses anymore. Unfortunatly to many others do. To watch someone go into CNN or MSNBC and do major damage or a McVeigh result would bring laughter throughout the land. They have gotten people hurt and killed. There is no sympathy for them.

Neither "sympathy" nor "excuses" have any function here. What you need is called "evidence". And you don't have it.
And I've been telling you that for a FUCKING MONTH. Exactly how stupid does that make you.

 

[justoffal]

So you're saying the little shit sized up the old man and figured he could get away with that Smirk?

Tell us something we don't know.

no, the Phony Veteran came up to the child, Sandmann was just minding his own beeswax.

The Black Congressional Israelites had been hollering all kinds of filth at the Covington children for an hour, and Phillips decided to get in on the fun.

Yes, and then the WP interviewed Phillips and printed his story. How is that libelous on the part of the WP?

It was libelous because they didn't check the facts even though they were readily available. Sandmann is a minor child, not a public figure, and you better be certain of the facts before you drag their reputations through the mud. Phillips is a well known bum, a man who pretends to be a combat veteran and all around shady character. Taking his word for it and putting a child at risk is a pretty vile tort.

Here's the thing, Evelyn Wood.

In order to establish 'libel" you need evidence of somebody making assertions they know are not true. For instance the way you just did above:

"Phillips is a well known bum, a man who pretends to be a combat veteran and all around shady character."
​

In this lawsuit however there is no such evidence of the WaPo (or anyone else) making ass-sertions about Smirk-Boi. The articles say there's video, and quotes several witnesses' comments. **ALL** of that is true. A clusterfuck of vague mythologies whined out by blogs and radio talking heads DOES NOT make some other entity "responsible" for it. Because it CAN'T.

Which means, that you're closer to "libel" here than the WaPo was.

We do not listen to your excuses anymore. Unfortunatly to many others do. To watch someone go into CNN or MSNBC and do major damage or a McVeigh result would bring laughter throughout the land. They have gotten people hurt and killed. There is no sympathy for them.

More than anything else I believe the judicial community will be anxious to see some modern rulings that will focus the now archaic Libel laws into the new age media complex. They are fifty years behind and need to be updated. By focusing on Sandmann's Smirk and also inferring that they knew for sure that the high school kids were the instigators Wapo gambled that the potential for their use of wide spread media coverage causing life time harm to the young man's life was worth the risk and protected by free speech. To a certain extent they are correct but they are also wrong to a certain extent. That's why the the deep experience of the Lin Wood law firm for instance caused them to go for such a huge number....they know it will be mitigated by the parts of the Libel Law that protect free speech...but do not protect defamation. Look for 25 to 30 million to be awarded.

But there's more here. Bezos owns the Post....and it has long been rumored that he rules the headlines. Hopefully he has kept that relationship nebulous....if any emails surface or any kind of communication surfaces that indicates he had anything to do with the paper's decision to vilify Covington high school kids.....enter Bob Barr and his trust busting team! Now 25 million will seem a mere pittance compared to what the DOJ might do to AMAZON....and believe me they are looking to do something. Barr has been a long time critic of what he considers to be a virtual Monopoly in Amazon, Google and Facebook.

JO

 

[ZZ PUPPS]

WaPo will settle out of court. They don't want to be front page news.

 

[justoffal]

You obviously believe the photo is somehow relevant to what happened to Nick Sandman 7 years later. Otherwise, why would you be going on and on about it? Look at the title of this thread. That's what is being discussed, not some fucking photo from 7 years ago.

Fucking moron, I never said that photo has anything to do with Sandmann. I'm merely laughing my ass off at you for being such a fucking moron, you actually thought that uniform read, "university," as though there's a 'U' in the middle of the word, "university."

And why are you reminding me this thread is about Sandmann and not that photo -- when the only reason I talked about that photo was in response to YOU talking about that photo? Perhaps you should practice what you preach and not wander off about that photo if you don't want to talk about it?

As far as Sandmann's lawsuit, unless you've read what the Washington Post printed, you have nothing valid to say since you have no idea if the lawsuit is valid or not.

The photo was post in this thread, which is about Sandmann, so the person who posted believes it has something to do with Sandmann, and you chimed in to defend it. Therefore you imagine it has something to do with Sandman. On the other hand, since the leftwing media has thoroughly disgraced itself with piling in on one smear after another, no one is going to accept the photo without ironclad proof.

Fucking moron, I chimed in to show everyone what a fucking moron you are. I said nothing in Defense of it. And you were very happy to talk about that picture until I pointed out it reads “Clark County,” not “Clark University.”

But g’head, tell everyone again how there’s a ‘U’ in the middle of the word, “university.”

That was fucking hysterical!

You GIF over usage spells huge insecurity.

Jo

Your inability to spell a 4 letter word reveals even more about you. Meanwhile, images are here for our disposal to accentuate thoughts which would normally be restricted to written words only.

Yes well if all you have is the android complaint then I suspect you are as weak as you appear. I have noticed that you avoid direct debate in favor of ankle biting and of course you too are subject to the occasional post of a spelling error which most people are too grown up to bother with. You are a true lefty...exploit whatever you can exploit and avoid real issues...much better to ankle bite.

Images here are for are amusement and use, that's true. Food is for our consumption that is also true. Yet there are those that are morbidly obese as those that are merely well fed.

JO