Sherrod's going to Sue Breitbart...

[asterism]

Ah.

Not opinion, fact that he thought was fact. What procedures did he use to verify his sources and the information?

The guy's a journalist. Surely journalists practice their trade, no?

I'm really failing to see your point here. Are you defending Dan Rather?

The man was forced to resign due to his slander.

Was he? Can this be proven? Is he still working?

Perhaps he just transferred himself out of CBS due to political pressure. I'm unaware of any statement by CBS that he was forced to resign.

If that is the case though, would you be happy if Breitbart was forced to resign from BigGovernment.com while still free to pursue his other interests?

The only reason the Bush administration certainly wasn't going to bring the issue to court was that they couldn't actually prove the actual point was false, just that the data he used to prove his point was false. And certainly Bush did not want to have to bring this matter in front of a judge, as it would have been politically harmful to him.

Ah.

Is that a proven fact or just your opinion?

In this case, the entire premise is false, as proved by the part of the edited video that was intentionally left out..

Ah, so it's the editing that is the problem here. Has the NAACP or the Obama Administration put up the entire unedited video? Links would be good if they have.

As far as Alan Grayson goes, I'm not really sure what you are referring to...

Not really familiar enough with the guy's record to give an informed opinion on the subject.

Ok.

 

[boedicca]

The fact that he USED her to make his point is why she is the victim, and in an even better position to sue. It's a nofuckingbrainer.

Oh. Now it's clear.

In order to hold your point of view, one must have nofuckingbrain. No wonder you post such nonsense.

As I've said over and over, you have a real serious problem with comprehension, genius. I said the STATEMENT by Dr. House was a nofuckingbrainer. I mean, really, that's a nofuckingbrainer. READ!!

There you go again. It must really suck being you, going through life with nofuckingbrain.

 

[DiveCon]

I live on the planet "New York City" and I can tell you that no-one is liking Rangel 'round these parts.

If he's not removed from congress, he will lose the next election.

you mean NYC would vote for a REPUBLICAN?

Naw, he'd lose in the primaries.

ah, true

 

[asterism]

So you're saying I have a case against T R U T H O U T for defamation of character and emotional anguish. Ok. Know any lawyers?

Given the scope of the readership of said posts, and how the small number of viewers would affect any "emotional anguish" you might have, I'd say a judge might award you about $3.50.

But, hey, go ahead and try.

Would that $3.50 be justified in your view?

And sorry, but I can't see $3.50 without thinking about Chef's Dad and the Loch Ness Monster.

 

[Vast LWC]

That's absolutely incorrect. The memogate documents were outed as forgeries. Their is no point in arguing whether the content of a forgery is true or false. The documents themselves were bogus and that speaks for their veracity.

The "Fake But Accurate" excuse fell flat.

The memo-gate documentation was not the only proof of Bush's absence from duty.

In fact, it has been posited many times that the memo-gate documents were intentionally leaked by a Karl Rove operative to discredit the story.

To this day, it has not been conclusively proved that Bush was present for duty during the time in question.

Now, Bush being AWOL is not necessarily the case. I'm just saying that his innocence has not been conclusively proven, which is why they did not want to make it a court case.

I do not assume that he is in fact guilty of the accusations, however.

 

[asterism]

Surely you jest. Mental anguish is very easy to prove. It's usually why punitive damages are often much higher than actual damages.

Is that so? Learn something new everyday.

Are you a lawyer? I have a case in mind against Larry King.

 

[DiveCon]

That's absolutely incorrect. The memogate documents were outed as forgeries. Their is no point in arguing whether the content of a forgery is true or false. The documents themselves were bogus and that speaks for their veracity.

The "Fake But Accurate" excuse fell flat.

The memo-gate documentation was not the only proof of Bush's absence from duty.

In fact, it has been posited many times that the memo-gate documents were intentionally leaked by a Karl Rove operative to discredit the story.

To this day, it has not been conclusively proved that Bush was present for duty during the time in question.

LOL yeah, cause Karl Rove would have used a Kinkos in Waco TX
LOL

 

[asterism]

And Brietbart is the party at fault, he is the one who posted the video and claimed she was a racist. I do love how you guys continue to defend him,

Use of the phrase "you guys" in a post responding to my post causes me mental anguish. I am not defending "him" (aka Breitbart) one bit. You have slandered the name of a public person by including me in that false and baseless attack on my character.

I am deeply offended that you would ever accuse me of defending anyone named Breitbart.

Well then we all must need new glasses. So sue us.

Is that what it will take to get you to stop making false accusations?

 

[asterism]

Yup. He even said so.

I'm sure he's willing to take his lumps, too.

And not only did the Obama administration apologize, but they made amends immediately, with a better job.

Sounds like she's got a tough case to sell as victim. She was so victimized by this ordeal that she turned down a promotion that was a result of this ordeal.

Good luck with that.

 

[asterism]

He thought he was stating fact, and was wrong. Which is why he was forced to resign.

Ah.

Not opinion, fact that he thought was fact. What procedures did he use to verify his sources and the information?

The guy's a journalist. Surely journalists practice their trade, no?

As far as Alan Grayson goes, I'm not really sure what you are referring to...

Any number of lies and slanders that Grayson has uttered - "Die Quickly" comes to mind.

Ironically, no one has been able to prove Dan Rather was wrong, either.

That's just funny right there.

So the memos weren't fake?

 

[asterism]

Bingo. That's the reason I hope to hell she does sue. It would at the very least force these assholes to think about the consequences before posting insulting material meant solely to enflame and bring down another person because of a political agenda.

I think I might agree with you here.

It would be nice to see the NAACP get bitch slapped for their baseless accusations about the TEA Party.

In the aftermath of that, certain tea party members have come forth and said that last summer's ugly displays did indeed fuel the flames. It's hard to get past those images, you know. Those same [higher profile] tea party people would love to see the radicals take a hike. If they can accomplish that, they will be seen as credible, but not until.

Interesting spin.

Still no proof of NAACP's baseless accusations. And which "certain tea party members" have come forth? How have they been vetted? After PMSNBC's creative editing of video and linking open carry with racism (while editing out the part where the guy with the rifle was black), I don't think I believe too much.

 

[Vast LWC]

Was he? Can this be proven? Is he still working?

Perhaps he just transferred himself out of CBS due to political pressure. I'm unaware of any statement by CBS that he was forced to resign.

Rather later sued CBS because he claimed they forced him to resign. That's pretty indicative, I'd say.

If that is the case though, would you be happy if Breitbart was forced to resign from BigGovernment.com while still free to pursue his other interests?

Since Rather's reputation and career was built upon his record of integrity as a CBS anchorman, an equal punishment for Breitbart would be to have his site (Breitbart.com) shut down,a s he runs the site.

And yes, that would in fact satisfy me.

Ah.

Is that a proven fact or just your opinion?

Ah, so it's the editing that is the problem here. Has the NAACP or the Obama Administration put up the entire unedited video? Links would be good if they have.

The unedited video has been distributed among the media and shown widely. What purpose would be served by repetition from a different source?

 

[asterism]

Newsflash: Except for the rabid rightwingers, the jury so far (the rest of America) is on her side.

Newsvine - POLL: Should Shirley Sherrod sue Andrew Breitbart over edited video tape or simply move on?

Are you personally attacking everyone who has a different opinion than yours?

I don't agree with "her side" and I am far from a rabid rightwinger. I've even talked to a staffer of a Democrat running in my district about volunteering for her campaign.

Are you trying to hamper my efforts?

Riiiight...

Are you now questioning my integrity?

 

[boedicca]

Since Rather's reputation and career was built upon his record of integrity as a CBS anchorman, an equal punishment for Breitbart would be to have his site (Breitbart.com) shut down,a s he runs the site.

And yes, that would in fact satisfy me.

Of course it would satisfy you.

CBS didn't go off the air - but you want to shut down an alternate media outlet because the owner posted something you don't like on a completely different site.

The original July 19th posting did not appear on Breitbart.com - it appeared on the BigGovernment group blog, which has dozens of contributors, and thousands of members who comment on posted pieces. It's a blog/community site - not a news site.

 

[Yurt]

Was he? Can this be proven? Is he still working?

Perhaps he just transferred himself out of CBS due to political pressure. I'm unaware of any statement by CBS that he was forced to resign.

Rather later sued CBS because he claimed they forced him to resign. That's pretty indicative, I'd say.

If that is the case though, would you be happy if Breitbart was forced to resign from BigGovernment.com while still free to pursue his other interests?

Since Rather's reputation and career was built upon his record of integrity as a CBS anchorman, an equal punishment for Breitbart would be to have his site (Breitbart.com) shut down,a s he runs the site.

And yes, that would in fact satisfy me.

Ah.

Is that a proven fact or just your opinion?

Ah, so it's the editing that is the problem here. Has the NAACP or the Obama Administration put up the entire unedited video? Links would be good if they have.

The unedited video has been distributed among the media and shown widely. What purpose would be served by repetition from a different source?

another liberal who hates the 1st amendment

 

[asterism]

Was he? Can this be proven? Is he still working?

Perhaps he just transferred himself out of CBS due to political pressure. I'm unaware of any statement by CBS that he was forced to resign.

Rather later sued CBS because he claimed they forced him to resign. That's pretty indicative, I'd say.[/quote]

Ah.

How'd that work out? If I sue you for defamation does that indicate anything? I think I'm starting to understand the law according to you now.

Maybe I can sue Obama for lying. He said that nobody who makes less than $250,000 would pay more in taxes - "not one dime."

If that is the case though, would you be happy if Breitbart was forced to resign from BigGovernment.com while still free to pursue his other interests?

Since Rather's reputation and career was built upon his record of integrity as a CBS anchorman, an equal punishment for Breitbart would be to have his site (Breitbart.com) shut down,a s he runs the site.[/quote]

Strange. Rather gets to take his severance and go work for Current TV, CBS gets to keep the BS in CBS. You however have the preference of shutting down a media outlet.


Yeah, I think we can see the bias here.

And yes, that would in fact satisfy me.

Of course. It appears to me that this isn't about any sort of fairness, it's about taking someone down you don't like.

Ah.

Is that a proven fact or just your opinion?

Ah, so it's the editing that is the problem here. Has the NAACP or the Obama Administration put up the entire unedited video? Links would be good if they have.

The unedited video has been distributed among the media and shown widely. What purpose would be served by repetition from a different source?

Evidence.

"He posted an edited video. GET HIM!"

"Um, so did you."

 

[The Infidel]

Would that $3.50 be justified in your view?

And sorry, but I can't see $3.50 without thinking about Chef's Dad and the Loch Ness Monster.

Tree-Fitty

 

[Vast LWC]

another liberal who hates the 1st amendment

The first amendment is not protection against slander lawsuits.

If part of the judgement in said lawsuit is a court order to shut down the media outlet that is doing the slander, I would not be adverse to that result, no.

The truth has become malleable in the "new media".

There are no facts anymore, just a bunch of talking heads spouting opinions. If the laws surrounding slander and libel are strengthened I would certainly not be adverse to that.

If you want to claim that my desire to stop people from blatantly lying in the press to slander their political opponents is unconstitutional, well then go for it. I'm fine with my position.

 

[Vast LWC]

Was he? Can this be proven? Is he still working?

Perhaps he just transferred himself out of CBS due to political pressure. I'm unaware of any statement by CBS that he was forced to resign...

...Ah.

How'd that work out? If I sue you for defamation does that indicate anything? I think I'm starting to understand the law according to you now.

Maybe I can sue Obama for lying. He said that nobody who makes less than $250,000 would pay more in taxes - "not one dime."

Strange. Rather gets to take his severance and go work for Current TV, CBS gets to keep the BS in CBS. You however have the preference of shutting down a media outlet.


Yeah, I think we can see the bias here.

Of course. It appears to me that this isn't about any sort of fairness, it's about taking someone down you don't like.

Ah.

Is that a proven fact or just your opinion?

Evidence.

"He posted an edited video. GET HIM!"

"Um, so did you."

Breitbart OWNS and RUNS the media outlet in question. Therefore, to punish him in the same way Rather was punished, he would have to have his outlet shut down.

And personally, I don't care if it's Breitbart or not. I believe that ALL the media has got to start taking some responsibility for their blatant spin and falsehoods.

I think MSNBC, FoxNews, and several other stations need to either fire some people for their lies or be held responsible legally also.

But hey, that's just my opinion.

 

[L.K.Eder]

Sherrod's going to Sue Breitbart...

Who is Sue Breitbart? Is that Andy's wife?

And why is she going to her?

what kind of silly name is breitbart anyway. it sounds like an ent name.

an ent who is totally drunk or stoned.