Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
We'll seeThe judge made the wrong decision, and he will be overturned.I have already agreed that the judge made the right decision based on several reasons. I even agree with some of your legal arguments. But yes they were smeared and wapo allowed it through sloppy and unprofessional journalism. Yes the media also lied by omission which is not a crime nor can one sue for it. Yes the judges reasoning was sound but in fact wapo did smear them and spin the story which demonstrates they are a worthless raq and no better than a tabloidwhat bendog is actually saying is - if someone disagrees with him, he gets butthurt at their attack.
he's pretty much being the posterboy of asshole liberals who can't take an alternative thought.
No what I'm saying is that even if every fact Nick alleged is assumed true, there's still no basis for him to sue, and if you're too fuckign thick to understand that, it's not my fault, Now fuck off
Yes there is
When one is smeared as he was it is precisely what lawsuits are for
First off, he wasn't "smeared", but even if he was, he has to PROVE DAMAGES. He has to prove that the "smear" caused him some quantifiable cost. He wasn't fired, expelled, or forced to move. He wasn't denied any legal rights because of these media attention, nor did he have any material or qualtifiable losses. There is a vast difference between being unhappy about the way you're portrayed in the press, and having a legal case for defamation.
No one lied about Sandmann. No newspaper or media called him racist. Many people called him racist, but not the media. The media coverage was remarkably fair, but conservatives don't like it. Tough!
Stop being such snowflakes whenever somebody says something about you that you don't like, even when it's true. The children behaved horribly. Their minders were negligent, and if they have come into the group of black protestors there, they would have done more than pound a drum in the kid's faces.
When I send my children on a school trip, it's not to protest against women having abortion rights. And I expect the chaperones to keep the children away from other protestors and those who could harm them. These chaperones encouraged the children in a way that would actually cause problems with the other protestors.
Rude, entitled and arrogant, will get you in big trouble every time. The children should not have been in this position in the first place, and that's on their chaperones.
Having said all of that your claims are PROVEN lies
Yes Phillips lied about Sandmann. He lied about being intimidated and he lied about having his way blocked
Sandmann behaved in an excellent manner. It is outstanding behavior to meekly smile and act passively when an aggressor is deliberately getting in your face confronting you and that is all Sandmann did.
The other kids yelled and laughed but that is typical teen behavior and not horrible. The chaperones encouraged nothing of the sort and you are full of ten kinds of crap about protesters. Protesters are everywhere in DC all the time. It does not matter what they were there to do they have every right to do so and not be smeared AS THEY WERE
He was not rude or entitled you sir are a proven coward and liar. The video PROVES beyond question that your narrative is a baldfaced lie
Poor kid. I hope his lawyers are pro bono or he is going to be paying their fees for decades, and have nothing to show for it.It's a long list of mostly wealthy people and companies. Sandmann is going to be a rich boy when this is all over:
Lawyers for Catholic Student Nick Sandmann Prepare to Sue for Libel
According to the Enquirer, the long list of people and outlets targeted includes:
- The Washington Post
- The New York Times
- Cable News Network, Inc. (CNN)
- The Guardian
- National Public Radio
- TMZ
- Atlantic Media Inc.
- Capitol Hill Publishing Corp.
- Diocese of Covington
- Diocese of Lexington
- Archdiocese of Louisville
- Diocese of Baltimore
- Ana Cabrera
- Sara Sidner
- Erin Burnett
- S.E. Cupp
- Elliot C. McLaughlin
- Amanda Watts
- Emanuella Grinberg
- Michelle Boorstein
- Cleve R. Wootson Jr.
- Antonio Olivo
- Joe Heim
- Michael E. Miller
- Eli Rosenberg
- Isaac Stanley-Becker
- Kristine Phillips
- Sarah Mervosh
- Emily S. Rueb
- Maggie Haberman
- David Brooks
- Shannon Doyne
- Kurt Eichenwald
- Andrea Mitchell
- Savannah Guthrie
- Joy Reid
- Chuck Todd
- Noah Berlatsky
- Elisha Fieldstadt
- Eun Kyung Kim
- HBO
- Bill Maher
- Warner Media
- Conde Nast
- GQ
- Heavy.com
- The Hill
- The Atlantic
- Bustle.com
- Ilhan Omar
- Elizabeth Warren
- Kathy Griffin
- Alyssa Milano
- Jim Carrey
Yes, WAPO did outright lie about them. It also smeared them. Selective editing, if it changes the understanding of the facts, is the same as lying.We'll seeThe judge made the wrong decision, and he will be overturned.I have already agreed that the judge made the right decision based on several reasons. I even agree with some of your legal arguments. But yes they were smeared and wapo allowed it through sloppy and unprofessional journalism. Yes the media also lied by omission which is not a crime nor can one sue for it. Yes the judges reasoning was sound but in fact wapo did smear them and spin the story which demonstrates they are a worthless raq and no better than a tabloidNo what I'm saying is that even if every fact Nick alleged is assumed true, there's still no basis for him to sue, and if you're too fuckign thick to understand that, it's not my fault, Now fuck off
Yes there is
When one is smeared as he was it is precisely what lawsuits are for
First off, he wasn't "smeared", but even if he was, he has to PROVE DAMAGES. He has to prove that the "smear" caused him some quantifiable cost. He wasn't fired, expelled, or forced to move. He wasn't denied any legal rights because of these media attention, nor did he have any material or qualtifiable losses. There is a vast difference between being unhappy about the way you're portrayed in the press, and having a legal case for defamation.
No one lied about Sandmann. No newspaper or media called him racist. Many people called him racist, but not the media. The media coverage was remarkably fair, but conservatives don't like it. Tough!
Stop being such snowflakes whenever somebody says something about you that you don't like, even when it's true. The children behaved horribly. Their minders were negligent, and if they have come into the group of black protestors there, they would have done more than pound a drum in the kid's faces.
When I send my children on a school trip, it's not to protest against women having abortion rights. And I expect the chaperones to keep the children away from other protestors and those who could harm them. These chaperones encouraged the children in a way that would actually cause problems with the other protestors.
Rude, entitled and arrogant, will get you in big trouble every time. The children should not have been in this position in the first place, and that's on their chaperones.
Having said all of that your claims are PROVEN lies
Yes Phillips lied about Sandmann. He lied about being intimidated and he lied about having his way blocked
Sandmann behaved in an excellent manner. It is outstanding behavior to meekly smile and act passively when an aggressor is deliberately getting in your face confronting you and that is all Sandmann did.
The other kids yelled and laughed but that is typical teen behavior and not horrible. The chaperones encouraged nothing of the sort and you are full of ten kinds of crap about protesters. Protesters are everywhere in DC all the time. It does not matter what they were there to do they have every right to do so and not be smeared AS THEY WERE
He was not rude or entitled you sir are a proven coward and liar. The video PROVES beyond question that your narrative is a baldfaced lie
I always side with first amendment protection even when worthless unprofessional journalists abuse it as wapo did.
The smear job on these kids was real,. Wapo did not out right lie about them or smear them but it did an excellent job of generating the narrative through selective editing and unprofessional reporting.
they're walking a fine line and sooner or later they will fall over it.We'll seeThe judge made the wrong decision, and he will be overturned.I have already agreed that the judge made the right decision based on several reasons. I even agree with some of your legal arguments. But yes they were smeared and wapo allowed it through sloppy and unprofessional journalism. Yes the media also lied by omission which is not a crime nor can one sue for it. Yes the judges reasoning was sound but in fact wapo did smear them and spin the story which demonstrates they are a worthless raq and no better than a tabloidNo what I'm saying is that even if every fact Nick alleged is assumed true, there's still no basis for him to sue, and if you're too fuckign thick to understand that, it's not my fault, Now fuck off
Yes there is
When one is smeared as he was it is precisely what lawsuits are for
First off, he wasn't "smeared", but even if he was, he has to PROVE DAMAGES. He has to prove that the "smear" caused him some quantifiable cost. He wasn't fired, expelled, or forced to move. He wasn't denied any legal rights because of these media attention, nor did he have any material or qualtifiable losses. There is a vast difference between being unhappy about the way you're portrayed in the press, and having a legal case for defamation.
No one lied about Sandmann. No newspaper or media called him racist. Many people called him racist, but not the media. The media coverage was remarkably fair, but conservatives don't like it. Tough!
Stop being such snowflakes whenever somebody says something about you that you don't like, even when it's true. The children behaved horribly. Their minders were negligent, and if they have come into the group of black protestors there, they would have done more than pound a drum in the kid's faces.
When I send my children on a school trip, it's not to protest against women having abortion rights. And I expect the chaperones to keep the children away from other protestors and those who could harm them. These chaperones encouraged the children in a way that would actually cause problems with the other protestors.
Rude, entitled and arrogant, will get you in big trouble every time. The children should not have been in this position in the first place, and that's on their chaperones.
Having said all of that your claims are PROVEN lies
Yes Phillips lied about Sandmann. He lied about being intimidated and he lied about having his way blocked
Sandmann behaved in an excellent manner. It is outstanding behavior to meekly smile and act passively when an aggressor is deliberately getting in your face confronting you and that is all Sandmann did.
The other kids yelled and laughed but that is typical teen behavior and not horrible. The chaperones encouraged nothing of the sort and you are full of ten kinds of crap about protesters. Protesters are everywhere in DC all the time. It does not matter what they were there to do they have every right to do so and not be smeared AS THEY WERE
He was not rude or entitled you sir are a proven coward and liar. The video PROVES beyond question that your narrative is a baldfaced lie
I always side with first amendment protection even when worthless unprofessional journalists abuse it as wapo did.
The smear job on these kids was real,. Wapo did not out right lie about them or smear them but it did an excellent job of generating the narrative through selective editing and unprofessional reporting.
It's already been posted 10,000 times that his lawyers are operating on a contingency fee basis.Poor kid. I hope his lawyers are pro bono or he is going to be paying their fees for decades, and have nothing to show for it.It's a long list of mostly wealthy people and companies. Sandmann is going to be a rich boy when this is all over:
Lawyers for Catholic Student Nick Sandmann Prepare to Sue for Libel
According to the Enquirer, the long list of people and outlets targeted includes:
- The Washington Post
- The New York Times
- Cable News Network, Inc. (CNN)
- The Guardian
- National Public Radio
- TMZ
- Atlantic Media Inc.
- Capitol Hill Publishing Corp.
- Diocese of Covington
- Diocese of Lexington
- Archdiocese of Louisville
- Diocese of Baltimore
- Ana Cabrera
- Sara Sidner
- Erin Burnett
- S.E. Cupp
- Elliot C. McLaughlin
- Amanda Watts
- Emanuella Grinberg
- Michelle Boorstein
- Cleve R. Wootson Jr.
- Antonio Olivo
- Joe Heim
- Michael E. Miller
- Eli Rosenberg
- Isaac Stanley-Becker
- Kristine Phillips
- Sarah Mervosh
- Emily S. Rueb
- Maggie Haberman
- David Brooks
- Shannon Doyne
- Kurt Eichenwald
- Andrea Mitchell
- Savannah Guthrie
- Joy Reid
- Chuck Todd
- Noah Berlatsky
- Elisha Fieldstadt
- Eun Kyung Kim
- HBO
- Bill Maher
- Warner Media
- Conde Nast
- GQ
- Heavy.com
- The Hill
- The Atlantic
- Bustle.com
- Ilhan Omar
- Elizabeth Warren
- Kathy Griffin
- Alyssa Milano
- Jim Carrey
They already have. Sandman will win this case in the end.they're walking a fine line and sooner or later they will fall over it.We'll seeThe judge made the wrong decision, and he will be overturned.I have already agreed that the judge made the right decision based on several reasons. I even agree with some of your legal arguments. But yes they were smeared and wapo allowed it through sloppy and unprofessional journalism. Yes the media also lied by omission which is not a crime nor can one sue for it. Yes the judges reasoning was sound but in fact wapo did smear them and spin the story which demonstrates they are a worthless raq and no better than a tabloidYes there is
When one is smeared as he was it is precisely what lawsuits are for
First off, he wasn't "smeared", but even if he was, he has to PROVE DAMAGES. He has to prove that the "smear" caused him some quantifiable cost. He wasn't fired, expelled, or forced to move. He wasn't denied any legal rights because of these media attention, nor did he have any material or qualtifiable losses. There is a vast difference between being unhappy about the way you're portrayed in the press, and having a legal case for defamation.
No one lied about Sandmann. No newspaper or media called him racist. Many people called him racist, but not the media. The media coverage was remarkably fair, but conservatives don't like it. Tough!
Stop being such snowflakes whenever somebody says something about you that you don't like, even when it's true. The children behaved horribly. Their minders were negligent, and if they have come into the group of black protestors there, they would have done more than pound a drum in the kid's faces.
When I send my children on a school trip, it's not to protest against women having abortion rights. And I expect the chaperones to keep the children away from other protestors and those who could harm them. These chaperones encouraged the children in a way that would actually cause problems with the other protestors.
Rude, entitled and arrogant, will get you in big trouble every time. The children should not have been in this position in the first place, and that's on their chaperones.
Having said all of that your claims are PROVEN lies
Yes Phillips lied about Sandmann. He lied about being intimidated and he lied about having his way blocked
Sandmann behaved in an excellent manner. It is outstanding behavior to meekly smile and act passively when an aggressor is deliberately getting in your face confronting you and that is all Sandmann did.
The other kids yelled and laughed but that is typical teen behavior and not horrible. The chaperones encouraged nothing of the sort and you are full of ten kinds of crap about protesters. Protesters are everywhere in DC all the time. It does not matter what they were there to do they have every right to do so and not be smeared AS THEY WERE
He was not rude or entitled you sir are a proven coward and liar. The video PROVES beyond question that your narrative is a baldfaced lie
I always side with first amendment protection even when worthless unprofessional journalists abuse it as wapo did.
The smear job on these kids was real,. Wapo did not out right lie about them or smear them but it did an excellent job of generating the narrative through selective editing and unprofessional reporting.
i'm hoping sooner.
Sandman is a little goon. All he'll get in his end is a sore anus.They already have. Sandman will win this case in the end.they're walking a fine line and sooner or later they will fall over it.We'll seeThe judge made the wrong decision, and he will be overturned.I have already agreed that the judge made the right decision based on several reasons. I even agree with some of your legal arguments. But yes they were smeared and wapo allowed it through sloppy and unprofessional journalism. Yes the media also lied by omission which is not a crime nor can one sue for it. Yes the judges reasoning was sound but in fact wapo did smear them and spin the story which demonstrates they are a worthless raq and no better than a tabloidFirst off, he wasn't "smeared", but even if he was, he has to PROVE DAMAGES. He has to prove that the "smear" caused him some quantifiable cost. He wasn't fired, expelled, or forced to move. He wasn't denied any legal rights because of these media attention, nor did he have any material or qualtifiable losses. There is a vast difference between being unhappy about the way you're portrayed in the press, and having a legal case for defamation.
No one lied about Sandmann. No newspaper or media called him racist. Many people called him racist, but not the media. The media coverage was remarkably fair, but conservatives don't like it. Tough!
Stop being such snowflakes whenever somebody says something about you that you don't like, even when it's true. The children behaved horribly. Their minders were negligent, and if they have come into the group of black protestors there, they would have done more than pound a drum in the kid's faces.
When I send my children on a school trip, it's not to protest against women having abortion rights. And I expect the chaperones to keep the children away from other protestors and those who could harm them. These chaperones encouraged the children in a way that would actually cause problems with the other protestors.
Rude, entitled and arrogant, will get you in big trouble every time. The children should not have been in this position in the first place, and that's on their chaperones.
Having said all of that your claims are PROVEN lies
Yes Phillips lied about Sandmann. He lied about being intimidated and he lied about having his way blocked
Sandmann behaved in an excellent manner. It is outstanding behavior to meekly smile and act passively when an aggressor is deliberately getting in your face confronting you and that is all Sandmann did.
The other kids yelled and laughed but that is typical teen behavior and not horrible. The chaperones encouraged nothing of the sort and you are full of ten kinds of crap about protesters. Protesters are everywhere in DC all the time. It does not matter what they were there to do they have every right to do so and not be smeared AS THEY WERE
He was not rude or entitled you sir are a proven coward and liar. The video PROVES beyond question that your narrative is a baldfaced lie
I always side with first amendment protection even when worthless unprofessional journalists abuse it as wapo did.
The smear job on these kids was real,. Wapo did not out right lie about them or smear them but it did an excellent job of generating the narrative through selective editing and unprofessional reporting.
i'm hoping sooner.
That is so mature.Sandman is a little goon. All he'll get in his end is a sore anus.They already have. Sandman will win this case in the end.they're walking a fine line and sooner or later they will fall over it.We'll seeThe judge made the wrong decision, and he will be overturned.I have already agreed that the judge made the right decision based on several reasons. I even agree with some of your legal arguments. But yes they were smeared and wapo allowed it through sloppy and unprofessional journalism. Yes the media also lied by omission which is not a crime nor can one sue for it. Yes the judges reasoning was sound but in fact wapo did smear them and spin the story which demonstrates they are a worthless raq and no better than a tabloid
Having said all of that your claims are PROVEN lies
Yes Phillips lied about Sandmann. He lied about being intimidated and he lied about having his way blocked
Sandmann behaved in an excellent manner. It is outstanding behavior to meekly smile and act passively when an aggressor is deliberately getting in your face confronting you and that is all Sandmann did.
The other kids yelled and laughed but that is typical teen behavior and not horrible. The chaperones encouraged nothing of the sort and you are full of ten kinds of crap about protesters. Protesters are everywhere in DC all the time. It does not matter what they were there to do they have every right to do so and not be smeared AS THEY WERE
He was not rude or entitled you sir are a proven coward and liar. The video PROVES beyond question that your narrative is a baldfaced lie
I always side with first amendment protection even when worthless unprofessional journalists abuse it as wapo did.
The smear job on these kids was real,. Wapo did not out right lie about them or smear them but it did an excellent job of generating the narrative through selective editing and unprofessional reporting.
i'm hoping sooner.
Explain how one is a goon when one stands and smiles?Sandman is a little goon. All he'll get in his end is a sore anus.They already have. Sandman will win this case in the end.they're walking a fine line and sooner or later they will fall over it.We'll seeThe judge made the wrong decision, and he will be overturned.I have already agreed that the judge made the right decision based on several reasons. I even agree with some of your legal arguments. But yes they were smeared and wapo allowed it through sloppy and unprofessional journalism. Yes the media also lied by omission which is not a crime nor can one sue for it. Yes the judges reasoning was sound but in fact wapo did smear them and spin the story which demonstrates they are a worthless raq and no better than a tabloid
Having said all of that your claims are PROVEN lies
Yes Phillips lied about Sandmann. He lied about being intimidated and he lied about having his way blocked
Sandmann behaved in an excellent manner. It is outstanding behavior to meekly smile and act passively when an aggressor is deliberately getting in your face confronting you and that is all Sandmann did.
The other kids yelled and laughed but that is typical teen behavior and not horrible. The chaperones encouraged nothing of the sort and you are full of ten kinds of crap about protesters. Protesters are everywhere in DC all the time. It does not matter what they were there to do they have every right to do so and not be smeared AS THEY WERE
He was not rude or entitled you sir are a proven coward and liar. The video PROVES beyond question that your narrative is a baldfaced lie
I always side with first amendment protection even when worthless unprofessional journalists abuse it as wapo did.
The smear job on these kids was real,. Wapo did not out right lie about them or smear them but it did an excellent job of generating the narrative through selective editing and unprofessional reporting.
i'm hoping sooner.
Explain how one is a goon when one stands and smiles?Sandman is a little goon. All he'll get in his end is a sore anus.They already have. Sandman will win this case in the end.they're walking a fine line and sooner or later they will fall over it.We'll seeThe judge made the wrong decision, and he will be overturned.
I always side with first amendment protection even when worthless unprofessional journalists abuse it as wapo did.
The smear job on these kids was real,. Wapo did not out right lie about them or smear them but it did an excellent job of generating the narrative through selective editing and unprofessional reporting.
i'm hoping sooner.
So now you admit you are basically full of shit and Sandmann acted like a better person than you areExplain how one is a goon when one stands and smiles?Sandman is a little goon. All he'll get in his end is a sore anus.They already have. Sandman will win this case in the end.they're walking a fine line and sooner or later they will fall over it.We'll see
I always side with first amendment protection even when worthless unprofessional journalists abuse it as wapo did.
The smear job on these kids was real,. Wapo did not out right lie about them or smear them but it did an excellent job of generating the narrative through selective editing and unprofessional reporting.
i'm hoping sooner.
Huh! You inferred all that from a smile!So now you admit you are basically full of shit and Sandmann acted like a better person than you areExplain how one is a goon when one stands and smiles?Sandman is a little goon. All he'll get in his end is a sore anus.They already have. Sandman will win this case in the end.they're walking a fine line and sooner or later they will fall over it.
i'm hoping sooner.
Good job
No I inferred it from your inability to answer a simple questionHuh! You inferred all that from a smile!So now you admit you are basically full of shit and Sandmann acted like a better person than you areExplain how one is a goon when one stands and smiles?Sandman is a little goon. All he'll get in his end is a sore anus.They already have. Sandman will win this case in the end.
Good job
How...perfect.
Because he was wearing a MAGA hat, silly.Explain how one is a goon when one stands and smiles?Sandman is a little goon. All he'll get in his end is a sore anus.They already have. Sandman will win this case in the end.they're walking a fine line and sooner or later they will fall over it.We'll seeThe judge made the wrong decision, and he will be overturned.
I always side with first amendment protection even when worthless unprofessional journalists abuse it as wapo did.
The smear job on these kids was real,. Wapo did not out right lie about them or smear them but it did an excellent job of generating the narrative through selective editing and unprofessional reporting.
i'm hoping sooner.
They already have. Sandman will win this case in the end.
You mean like saying Ted Cruz's dad helped kill Kennedy?Since when does the First Amendment make it legal to libel someone?
Jim Carey shouldn't pay a cent. He should instead tweet every day about what a Nazi goon the kid is.They won't think it's so funny when they lose a million dollar judgement.Kathy Griffin and Jim Carrey
I'm pretty sure Jim Carrey can laugh off a million dollars.
All I did was smile. Explain how one is "basically full of shit" when one stands and smiles.No I inferred it from your inability to answer a simple questionHuh! You inferred all that from a smile!So now you admit you are basically full of shit and Sandmann acted like a better person than you areExplain how one is a goon when one stands and smiles?Sandman is a little goon. All he'll get in his end is a sore anus.
Good job
How...perfect.
Which proves you are a fool
He lost his first court battle.They already have. Sandman will win this case in the end.
Covington Teen Lost His First Court Battle, But Will Probably Win His Next
They already have. Sandman will win this case in the end.
Covington Teen Lost His First Court Battle, But Will Probably Win His Next
I never said you were for smiling.All I did was smile. Explain how one is "basically full of shit" when one stands and smiles.No I inferred it from your inability to answer a simple questionHuh! You inferred all that from a smile!So now you admit you are basically full of shit and Sandmann acted like a better person than you areExplain how one is a goon when one stands and smiles?
Good job
How...perfect.
Which proves you are a fool
