Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
That's not libel....
People are entitled to their opinions and Rush's opinion is that Fluke is a slut...
Is calling an person an asshole libel?? is calling someone a racist libel? is calling someone a prick libel???
So what makes the word "slut" so fucking special??
You see you don't know anything about law or the Constitution...
That's not libel....
People are entitled to their opinions and Rush's opinion is that Fluke is a slut...
Is calling an person an asshole libel?? is calling someone a racist libel? is calling someone a prick libel???
So what makes the word "slut" so fucking special??
You see you don't know anything about law or the Constitution...
Once again, you are mis-representing what Mr Limbaugh said.
He specifically accused Ms Fluke of committing the crime of prostitution. He then went on to explain exactly how Ms Fluke was committing said crime, in his opinion.
That is, specifically, Libel.
However, again, I don't believe Mr Limbaugh should suffer any criminal prosecution here. And I don't think that this would in fact be prosecutable.
I'm just pointing out that it is Libel.
You do know that the pathological liar publishes a written transcript on his website, so MessiahRushie both libeled and slandered her! And he obviously believes he is vulnerable to a libel suit as he has recently scrubbed his website of his libelous statements!!!!That's not libel....
People are entitled to their opinions and Rush's opinion is that Fluke is a slut...
Is calling an person an asshole libel?? is calling someone a racist libel? is calling someone a prick libel???
So what makes the word "slut" so fucking special??
You see you don't know anything about law or the Constitution...
Once again, you are mis-representing what Mr Limbaugh said.
He specifically accused Ms Fluke of committing the crime of prostitution. He then went on to explain exactly how Ms Fluke was committing said crime, in his opinion.
That is, specifically, Libel.
However, again, I don't believe Mr Limbaugh should suffer any criminal prosecution here. And I don't think that this would in fact be prosecutable.
I'm just pointing out that it is Libel.
What you are pointing out is your complete fucking ignorance. I don't condone Rush's comments by any means but libel is the written word and slander is the spoken word. It's pretty fucking rich to write how everyone is ignorant when you don't even know the difference between the two legal classifications you are arguing.
You do know that the pathological liar publishes a written transcript on his website, so MessiahRushie both libeled and slandered her! And he obviously believes he is vulnerable to a libel suit as he has recently scrubbed his website of his libelous statements!!!!Once again, you are mis-representing what Mr Limbaugh said.
He specifically accused Ms Fluke of committing the crime of prostitution. He then went on to explain exactly how Ms Fluke was committing said crime, in his opinion.
That is, specifically, Libel.
However, again, I don't believe Mr Limbaugh should suffer any criminal prosecution here. And I don't think that this would in fact be prosecutable.
I'm just pointing out that it is Libel.
What you are pointing out is your complete fucking ignorance. I don't condone Rush's comments by any means but libel is the written word and slander is the spoken word. It's pretty fucking rich to write how everyone is ignorant when you don't even know the difference between the two legal classifications you are arguing.
I noticed you didn't post the quote from her testimony where she said she was "having so much sex, it's amazing she can still walk" as your MessiahRushie said. You obviously have no idea what she testified to, except for the shit you stupidly and mindlessly swallowed from the "Doctor Of Duplicity" without actually reading it for yourself.You do know that the pathological liar publishes a written transcript on his website, so MessiahRushie both libeled and slandered her! And he obviously believes he is vulnerable to a libel suit as he has recently scrubbed his website of his libelous statements!!!!What you are pointing out is your complete fucking ignorance. I don't condone Rush's comments by any means but libel is the written word and slander is the spoken word. It's pretty fucking rich to write how everyone is ignorant when you don't even know the difference between the two legal classifications you are arguing.
Actually no since as I said before, for it to legally qualify for libel or slander it has to be an intentionally false statement. Since Ms. Fluke testified to a reasonable effect the same, it is not a false statement, however distasteful you or I may find it. As such there is no case to be made except a losing one. But if you are your cronies on the left really want to provide a shining example of politically correctness run amok or your total disregard for the bill of rights, then by all means...prosecute. Good fucking luck too. Not only will you lose the case but you will make total asses of yourselves in the process.
Then again Ed....in depth thinking has never been your strong suit huh?
Actually, we are the ones that are advocating actually following law and not picking one single unconstitutional law that is unenforceable, would apply to a vast number of instances before this and trying to use it simply because it fits your agenda at the time.The "Rule Of Law" CON$erviNutzis will suddenly say "Fuck the Rule Of Law."
I let you figure out where it's from.The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there arent enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? Whats there it that for anyone?
Don't really need to in this case as it is unconstitutional in the first place. You cant limit speech because you don't like what is said.Its a law on the florida books folks.
Dont like the law then repeal the damned thing
No, she does not because, no matter what the details are, you must prove damages for a civil case and those damages need to be able to be monetarily reflected. There is room for 'pain and suffering' but it is going to be nigh impossible for her to show such sufficient evidence that she needs to be compensated and Rush's comments certainly had no negative effects in a professional sense. You do not get to sue because you are 'upset.' You need more than that or there would be a million cases a day for the most asinine shit.All I can say is hahahahahahahaha.
But ah no I don't think Rush should be arrested under an 1885 law. However I think Ms. Fluke might have a case in civil court.
The funny part is the comparison to Maher calling Gov. Palin a C___t as the butt of a joke and Rushes 53 derogtory comments made throughout his show.
Santormn got what he deserved.
"That's not to pick on homosexuality. It's not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be."
Actually, we are the ones that are advocating actually following law and not picking one single unconstitutional law that is unenforceable, would apply to a vast number of instances before this and trying to use it simply because it fits your agenda at the time.The "Rule Of Law" CON$erviNutzis will suddenly say "Fuck the Rule Of Law."
Applies well to you:
I let you figure out where it's from.The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there arent enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? Whats there it that for anyone?
Don't really need to in this case as it is unconstitutional in the first place. You cant limit speech because you don't like what is said.Its a law on the florida books folks.
Dont like the law then repeal the damned thing
No, she does not because, no matter what the details are, you must prove damages for a civil case and those damages need to be able to be monetarily reflected. There is room for 'pain and suffering' but it is going to be nigh impossible for her to show such sufficient evidence that she needs to be compensated and Rush's comments certainly had no negative effects in a professional sense. You do not get to sue because you are 'upset.' You need more than that or there would be a million cases a day for the most asinine shit.All I can say is hahahahahahahaha.
But ah no I don't think Rush should be arrested under an 1885 law. However I think Ms. Fluke might have a case in civil court.
The funny part is the comparison to Maher calling Gov. Palin a C___t as the butt of a joke and Rushes 53 derogtory comments made throughout his show.
Santormn got what he deserved.
"That's not to pick on homosexuality. It's not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be."
Socialists/Progressives do not believe in or support Free Speech. I've been saying that for years. Good to see some are finally listening. No Socialist/Communist Nation on Earth has ever supported and protected Free Speech. So why would America's Socialists be any different?
European nations that practice socialism protect free speech.
Gloria AllredIn a letter dated March 8, Allred, writing on behalf of the Womens Equal Rights Legal Defense and Education Fund, requested that Palm Beach County State Attorney Michael McAuliffe probe whether the conservative radio personality had violated Section 836.04 of the Florida Statutes by calling Georgetown University law student Sandra Fluke the two derogatory words.
The statute stipulates that anyone who speaks of and concerning any woman, married or unmarried, falsely and maliciously imputing to her a want of chastity is guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree. Allred explained that the statute recently came to her attention as having never been repealed, and that it could very well apply to Limbaughs remarks as his show is broadcast from West Palm Beach.
Read more: Gloria Allred seeks Rush Limbaugh prosecution - MJ Lee - POLITICO.com
Nobody patriotic, that's for sure!Actually, we are the ones that are advocating actually following law and not picking one single unconstitutional law that is unenforceable, would apply to a vast number of instances before this and trying to use it simply because it fits your agenda at the time.The "Rule Of Law" CON$erviNutzis will suddenly say "Fuck the Rule Of Law."
Applies well to you:
I let you figure out where it's from.The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there arent enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? Whats there it that for anyone?
Actually, we are the ones that are advocating actually following law and not picking one single unconstitutional law that is unenforceable, would apply to a vast number of instances before this and trying to use it simply because it fits your agenda at the time.The "Rule Of Law" CON$erviNutzis will suddenly say "Fuck the Rule Of Law."
Applies well to you:
I let you figure out where it's from.The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there arent enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? Whats there it that for anyone?
Don't really need to in this case as it is unconstitutional in the first place. You cant limit speech because you don't like what is said.Its a law on the florida books folks.
Dont like the law then repeal the damned thing
No, she does not because, no matter what the details are, you must prove damages for a civil case and those damages need to be able to be monetarily reflected. There is room for 'pain and suffering' but it is going to be nigh impossible for her to show such sufficient evidence that she needs to be compensated and Rush's comments certainly had no negative effects in a professional sense. You do not get to sue because you are 'upset.' You need more than that or there would be a million cases a day for the most asinine shit.All I can say is hahahahahahahaha.
But ah no I don't think Rush should be arrested under an 1885 law. However I think Ms. Fluke might have a case in civil court.
The funny part is the comparison to Maher calling Gov. Palin a C___t as the butt of a joke and Rushes 53 derogtory comments made throughout his show.
Santormn got what he deserved.
"That's not to pick on homosexuality. It's not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be."
What you are pointing out is your complete fucking ignorance. I don't condone Rush's comments by any means but libel is the written word and slander is the spoken word. It's pretty fucking rich to write how everyone is ignorant when you don't even know the difference between the two legal classifications you are arguing.
Defamation—also called calumny, vilification, traducement, slander (for transitory statements), and libel (for written, broadcast, or otherwise published words)—is the communication of a statement that makes a claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government, or nation a negative image. This can be also any disparaging statement made by one person about another, which is communicated or published. It is usually a requirement that this claim be false and that the publication is communicated to someone other than the person defamed
Libel:
1. a written statement in which a plaintiff in certain courts sets forth the cause of action or the relief sought
2. a written or oral defamatory statement or representation that conveys an unjustly unfavorable impression
libel 1) n. to publish in print (including pictures), writing or broadcast through radio, television or film, an untruth about another which will do harm to that person or his/her reputation, by tending to bring the target into ridicule, hatred, scorn or contempt of others. Libel is the written or broadcast form of defamation, distinguished from slander which is oral defamation.
You do know that the pathological liar publishes a written transcript on his website, so MessiahRushie both libeled and slandered her! And he obviously believes he is vulnerable to a libel suit as he has recently scrubbed his website of his libelous statements!!!!
Actually no since as I said before, for it to legally qualify for libel or slander it has to be an intentionally false statement. Since Ms. Fluke testified to a reasonable effect the same, it is not a false statement, however distasteful you or I may find it. As such there is no case to be made except a losing one. But if you are your cronies on the left really want to provide a shining example of politically correctness run amok or your total disregard for the bill of rights, then by all means...prosecute. Good fucking luck too. Not only will you lose the case but you will make total asses of yourselves in the process.
Then again Ed....in depth thinking has never been your strong suit huh?
I would love to see this slut file a civil suit against Rush...
It will promptly be dismissed and all of Rush's legal costs will be recouped at the expense of Fluke.
Fluke may as well pull cash out of her personal bank account and start burning it if she wants to sue Rush.
Truth is Rush has a better legal case against these underground sites that defame and slander him than Fluke has against him..
Isn't the whole intent of these progressives baseless attacks to cause him monetary loss???
Of course Rush won't pursue that route because as the old saying goes: "There is no such thing as bad publicity."
Actually no since as I said before, for it to legally qualify for libel or slander it has to be an intentionally false statement. Since Ms. Fluke testified to a reasonable effect the same, it is not a false statement, however distasteful you or I may find it. As such there is no case to be made except a losing one. But if you are your cronies on the left really want to provide a shining example of politically correctness run amok or your total disregard for the bill of rights, then by all means...prosecute. Good fucking luck too. Not only will you lose the case but you will make total asses of yourselves in the process.
Then again Ed....in depth thinking has never been your strong suit huh?
So, in your opinion, it is a true statement that any woman that has received subsidization to support their sex life from an insurance compnay is in fact a "whore" and a "prostitute".
Well, counselor, that is an interesting statement to make.
Especially since that would, logically, make any woman who has had the birth of a child paid for by their insurance, a whore.
Last I checked, a common result of sex, if contraception is not used, is childbirth.
At what point did insurance stop paying for childbirth exactly?
What, you mean they still do?
Well, isn't that interesting. I'm sure mothers around the nation will thank you for pointing out that you believe it is true that they are "whores" and "prostitutes".
