Covington High School Students About To Get PAID!

[jc456]

"The legal team behind Covington Catholic High School student Nick Sandmann are sending letters to various media organizations, celebrities and politicians it says completely misrepresented the confrontation between the teenager and Native American activists last month and potentially defamed their client.

Most of mainstream media and others vilified Sandmann, other students and Covington Catholic High School in general when the youths were shown on camera wearing MAGA hats in Washington, D.C., where they had participated in the Jan. 18 March for Life rally.

Despite clarification and apologies from many, comedian Bill Maher continued to denigrate Sandmann a week later.

McMurtry is joined in his legal campaign by lawyer L. Lin Wood of Atlanta. The letters tell the media outlets and individuals named to preserve all documents or recoded material associated with the incident, including emails connected with reporting the event.

"We are "very confident that we are going to prevail” and “attain justice.” At minimum, justice will come in the form of apologies and retractions, and could include further litigation", Lawyer Todd McMurtry.
-- McMurtry is joined in his legal campaign by lawyer L. Lin Wood of Atlanta"


Freshman D-Rep Ilhan Omar, already under fire for Anti-Semitic remarks, actually defamed and attacked the Covington High School kids AFTER she knew the fake news stories against them had been debunked:

"Freshman Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) is getting slammed on social media for attacking the Covington Catholic students Tuesday night, even after media outlets admitted to misreporting the viral encounter between the students and the Native American elder.

Omar claimed in a now-deleted tweet Tuesday night that Covington student Nick Sandmann and his friends had taunted black protesters and yelled racist epithets at the men before Native American activist Nathan Phillips approached them, even though video evidence of the encounter showed the black protesters hurling insults at the boys."

Rep. Ilhan Omar Spreads Fake News with Attack on Covington Students


Perhaps, like her D-Senator counter-parts who engaged in sexual misconduct, Omar might just use TAX DOLLARS to pay for the Covington Law Suit against her, should she refuse to apologize to them.





Lawyers For Covington Student Sending Warning Letters To Media, Celebrities


.

And once they have wealth, they will have a good political career in the works later on.

And once they ("they"? When did Nick Sandmann clone himself?) have this mystery "wealth" for mysterious reasons from mysterious sources nobody can cite, how exactly is he ("they") going to ride smirkability into a "political career"?

Secretary of Smirk?

It beats politicians coming in and then making a cool $30 million like Obama, thanks to getting elected

Disgusting.

Yet another non-answer. Well I'm used to it.

And yet another nickel for Pogo's Law. Thanks for that.

 

[Votto]

"The legal team behind Covington Catholic High School student Nick Sandmann are sending letters to various media organizations, celebrities and politicians it says completely misrepresented the confrontation between the teenager and Native American activists last month and potentially defamed their client.

Most of mainstream media and others vilified Sandmann, other students and Covington Catholic High School in general when the youths were shown on camera wearing MAGA hats in Washington, D.C., where they had participated in the Jan. 18 March for Life rally.

Despite clarification and apologies from many, comedian Bill Maher continued to denigrate Sandmann a week later.

McMurtry is joined in his legal campaign by lawyer L. Lin Wood of Atlanta. The letters tell the media outlets and individuals named to preserve all documents or recoded material associated with the incident, including emails connected with reporting the event.

"We are "very confident that we are going to prevail” and “attain justice.” At minimum, justice will come in the form of apologies and retractions, and could include further litigation", Lawyer Todd McMurtry.
-- McMurtry is joined in his legal campaign by lawyer L. Lin Wood of Atlanta"


Freshman D-Rep Ilhan Omar, already under fire for Anti-Semitic remarks, actually defamed and attacked the Covington High School kids AFTER she knew the fake news stories against them had been debunked:

"Freshman Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) is getting slammed on social media for attacking the Covington Catholic students Tuesday night, even after media outlets admitted to misreporting the viral encounter between the students and the Native American elder.

Omar claimed in a now-deleted tweet Tuesday night that Covington student Nick Sandmann and his friends had taunted black protesters and yelled racist epithets at the men before Native American activist Nathan Phillips approached them, even though video evidence of the encounter showed the black protesters hurling insults at the boys."

Rep. Ilhan Omar Spreads Fake News with Attack on Covington Students


Perhaps, like her D-Senator counter-parts who engaged in sexual misconduct, Omar might just use TAX DOLLARS to pay for the Covington Law Suit against her, should she refuse to apologize to them.





Lawyers For Covington Student Sending Warning Letters To Media, Celebrities


.

And once they have wealth, they will have a good political career in the works later on.

And once they ("they"? When did Nick Sandmann clone himself?) have this mystery "wealth" for mysterious reasons from mysterious sources nobody can cite, how exactly is he ("they") going to ride smirkability into a "political career"?

Secretary of Smirk?

It beats politicians coming in and then making a cool $30 million like Obama, thanks to getting elected

Disgusting.

Yet another non-answer. Well I'm used to it.

And yet another nickel for Pogo's Law. Thanks for that.

The bottom line is, it troubles you that money is still out there that opposes you politically.

Well keep voting Dim. They will soon take it all, then the opposition will be powerless..

 

[Pogo]

"The legal team behind Covington Catholic High School student Nick Sandmann are sending letters to various media organizations, celebrities and politicians it says completely misrepresented the confrontation between the teenager and Native American activists last month and potentially defamed their client.

Most of mainstream media and others vilified Sandmann, other students and Covington Catholic High School in general when the youths were shown on camera wearing MAGA hats in Washington, D.C., where they had participated in the Jan. 18 March for Life rally.

Despite clarification and apologies from many, comedian Bill Maher continued to denigrate Sandmann a week later.

McMurtry is joined in his legal campaign by lawyer L. Lin Wood of Atlanta. The letters tell the media outlets and individuals named to preserve all documents or recoded material associated with the incident, including emails connected with reporting the event.

"We are "very confident that we are going to prevail” and “attain justice.” At minimum, justice will come in the form of apologies and retractions, and could include further litigation", Lawyer Todd McMurtry.
-- McMurtry is joined in his legal campaign by lawyer L. Lin Wood of Atlanta"


Freshman D-Rep Ilhan Omar, already under fire for Anti-Semitic remarks, actually defamed and attacked the Covington High School kids AFTER she knew the fake news stories against them had been debunked:

"Freshman Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) is getting slammed on social media for attacking the Covington Catholic students Tuesday night, even after media outlets admitted to misreporting the viral encounter between the students and the Native American elder.

Omar claimed in a now-deleted tweet Tuesday night that Covington student Nick Sandmann and his friends had taunted black protesters and yelled racist epithets at the men before Native American activist Nathan Phillips approached them, even though video evidence of the encounter showed the black protesters hurling insults at the boys."

Rep. Ilhan Omar Spreads Fake News with Attack on Covington Students


Perhaps, like her D-Senator counter-parts who engaged in sexual misconduct, Omar might just use TAX DOLLARS to pay for the Covington Law Suit against her, should she refuse to apologize to them.





Lawyers For Covington Student Sending Warning Letters To Media, Celebrities


.

And once they have wealth, they will have a good political career in the works later on.

And once they ("they"? When did Nick Sandmann clone himself?) have this mystery "wealth" for mysterious reasons from mysterious sources nobody can cite, how exactly is he ("they") going to ride smirkability into a "political career"?

Secretary of Smirk?

It beats politicians coming in and then making a cool $30 million like Obama, thanks to getting elected

Disgusting.

Yet another non-answer. Well I'm used to it.

And yet another nickel for Pogo's Law. Thanks for that.

Pogo's Law cashes in a whopping five cents whenever some poster who can't think of an answer or an argument scrapes in desperation to "b--- but but O'bama!" "b-but...but Hillary!" "b-but... but Pelosi!" or whatever else was never the question. Also called "whataboutism", also called the Tu Quoque Fallacy.

I know, a nickel doesn't sound like much but multiply it by the number of times fallacists run this fallacy out on the field expecting different results, and I'm rolling in nickel rolls.

 

[bendog]

Suit is going nowhere . They are famous . That’s a very high standard to hit for libel .

Otherwise Hillary Clinton could sue these righty hack and news sites into oblivion.

Higher than that is the simple fact that in order to show "libel" you have to SHOW libel.

If you can't do that you're pretty much laughed out of court. And any attorney knows that.

--- which of course generates the question, if they know that, what the fuck are they implying they're going to "do" with no evidence?

Differences Between Defamation, Slander, and Libel

"Importance of Intent

Another crucial part of a defamation case is that the person makes the false statement with a certain kind of intent. The statement must have been made with knowledge that it was untrue or with reckless disregard for the truth (meaning the person who said it questioned the truthfulness but said it anyhow). If the person being defamed is a private citizen and not a celebrity or public figure, defamation can also be proven when the statement was made with negligence as to determining its truth (the person speaking should have known it was false or should have questioned it). This means it is easier to prove defamation when you are a private citizen. There is a higher standard required if you are a public figure."

Unlike all the wags I've been challenging I know exactly what defamation, slander and libel are. I had to as part of my career in media.

What I'm still "waiting" for (waiting in quotes because I know it isn't going to happen) is any evidence of said "libel" ------ a print story, a broadcast, a news web page ---- which, again, you'll notice, is a term no longer being used. Now rather than "libel" it's "other litigation" which is about as weasel-word as you can get for the English phrase "I got nothin'".

These simple wags have got to start recognizing a snow job when it hits them in the face.

Say hi to Sean Spicer down tuh the Office of Bluffing Unsubstantiated Libel Litigation Sporting Heavy Insane Threats (BULLSHIT)

If tweets were libel ..... LOL Actually that's interesting and I never considered it. Is tweet spoken or published?

 

[Pogo]

"The legal team behind Covington Catholic High School student Nick Sandmann are sending letters to various media organizations, celebrities and politicians it says completely misrepresented the confrontation between the teenager and Native American activists last month and potentially defamed their client.

Most of mainstream media and others vilified Sandmann, other students and Covington Catholic High School in general when the youths were shown on camera wearing MAGA hats in Washington, D.C., where they had participated in the Jan. 18 March for Life rally.

Despite clarification and apologies from many, comedian Bill Maher continued to denigrate Sandmann a week later.

McMurtry is joined in his legal campaign by lawyer L. Lin Wood of Atlanta. The letters tell the media outlets and individuals named to preserve all documents or recoded material associated with the incident, including emails connected with reporting the event.

"We are "very confident that we are going to prevail” and “attain justice.” At minimum, justice will come in the form of apologies and retractions, and could include further litigation", Lawyer Todd McMurtry.
-- McMurtry is joined in his legal campaign by lawyer L. Lin Wood of Atlanta"


Freshman D-Rep Ilhan Omar, already under fire for Anti-Semitic remarks, actually defamed and attacked the Covington High School kids AFTER she knew the fake news stories against them had been debunked:

"Freshman Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) is getting slammed on social media for attacking the Covington Catholic students Tuesday night, even after media outlets admitted to misreporting the viral encounter between the students and the Native American elder.

Omar claimed in a now-deleted tweet Tuesday night that Covington student Nick Sandmann and his friends had taunted black protesters and yelled racist epithets at the men before Native American activist Nathan Phillips approached them, even though video evidence of the encounter showed the black protesters hurling insults at the boys."

Rep. Ilhan Omar Spreads Fake News with Attack on Covington Students


Perhaps, like her D-Senator counter-parts who engaged in sexual misconduct, Omar might just use TAX DOLLARS to pay for the Covington Law Suit against her, should she refuse to apologize to them.





Lawyers For Covington Student Sending Warning Letters To Media, Celebrities


.

And once they have wealth, they will have a good political career in the works later on.

And once they ("they"? When did Nick Sandmann clone himself?) have this mystery "wealth" for mysterious reasons from mysterious sources nobody can cite, how exactly is he ("they") going to ride smirkability into a "political career"?

Secretary of Smirk?

It beats politicians coming in and then making a cool $30 million like Obama, thanks to getting elected

Disgusting.

Yet another non-answer. Well I'm used to it.

And yet another nickel for Pogo's Law. Thanks for that.

The bottom line is, it troubles you that money is still out there that opposes you politically.

Well keep voting Dim. They will soon take it all, then the opposition will be powerless..

Actually the bottom line is you still can't answer the question.

Even if you could there is nothing "political" about the Smirking Gun situation anyway. When did "smirking" take on a political party?

EEEEE-jit.

 

[Votto]

And once they have wealth, they will have a good political career in the works later on.

And once they ("they"? When did Nick Sandmann clone himself?) have this mystery "wealth" for mysterious reasons from mysterious sources nobody can cite, how exactly is he ("they") going to ride smirkability into a "political career"?

Secretary of Smirk?

It beats politicians coming in and then making a cool $30 million like Obama, thanks to getting elected

Disgusting.

Yet another non-answer. Well I'm used to it.

And yet another nickel for Pogo's Law. Thanks for that.

The bottom line is, it troubles you that money is still out there that opposes you politically.

Well keep voting Dim. They will soon take it all, then the opposition will be powerless..

Actually the bottom line is you still can't answer the question.

Even if you could there is nothing "political" about the Smirking Gun situation anyway. When did "smirking" take on a political party?

EEEEE-jit.

Trump done it.

Everyone knows he is the source of all the world's problems.

Just look at all the indictments. Everyone in Washington are angels EXCEPT Trump and those directly around him.

Coincidence?

 

[easyt65]

Libel / Defamation: Making the claim that the boys actually said something they did not legally falls under 'Libel' and 'Defamation'.

"The First Amendment allows plaintiffs to recover proved compensatory damages (such as loss of business opportunities, loss of social standing, and emotional distress stemming from those harms) based on a showing that the defendant speakers' errors were negligent."
--- CNN and other media outlets that raced to the airwaves and print with the Fake News stories about the kids based on a few seconds of the hour-long+ video they had in their possession yet CHOSE not to view until it all blew up in their faces is a slam dunk case of proven 'Negligence'.

"But before plaintiffs recover other damages -- such as "presumed damages," which don't require a showing of specific loss, or punitive damages -- they have to show that the defendants knew their statements were false or likely false (the misnamed "actual malice" standard)."
--- These news agencies, having the entire video in their possession, should have known what they were reporting was false. If the case goes before a JUDGE the case gets shut down. With the amount of hate and distrust for the media these days, if it goes before a jury trial it is a slight toss up.

The only one who REALLY has the biggest opportunity to get screwed HARD here is the newly elected Muslim Dem who attacked the kids EVEN AFTER IT WAS WIDELY TELEVISED THAT ALL THE STORIES ABOUT THEM WERE FALSE.
- The trouble is that the law here states the individual can most probably only be found guilty IF, despite the fact it was 'debunked', they still believed it to be true they kept their accusation up (on-line, web page, tweet, etc...) Omar eventually deleted her Tweet attacking the boys.

There IS extremely shaky ground for any law suit to be filed against those who recklessly and falsely attacked the kids. Even in Omar's case, for example, because she took her known false attack down yet refuses to apologize, that just makes her a Liberal fake news asshole, not guilty of Libel / Defamation.

Probably the strongest case against anyone might probably be against those who called for violence against them, such as CNN saying, 'Someone should punch that kid in the face'.

Anyone calling for / inciting violence against these kids COULD face charges 18 U.S. Code § 373 - Solicitation to commit a crime of violence

And lawyers could really REACH by attempting to file a lawsuit over 'cyber-bullying', which all 50 states now have laws against.
- Twitter, Facebook, and even the media's web pages that blasted the kids with the fake news stories could potentially be argued to be part of that 'cyber' bullying.


I am not saying there is a STRONG legal case, but there is a legal basis lawyers could use, especially if they think they could get a jury trial. The vile media coverage and horrific calls for violence against kids could potentially end up costing people / the media a pretty penny, if not in PR alone.


The fake news pricks, Hollywood scumbags, and Libtards like Omar should just do the right thing - own up to their own fake news mistake and apologize. It's the least they owe these kids.


18 U.S. Code § 373 - Solicitation to commit a crime of violence

Laws, Policies & Regulations

 

[easyt65]

Actually the bottom line is you still can't answer the question.

Even if you could there is nothing "political" about the Smirking Gun situation anyway. When did "smirking" take on a political party?

EEEEE-jit.

Welcome to George Orwell's '1984' and the liberal introduction of his book's 'FACE CRIME'.

 

[Pogo]

Libel / Defamation: Making the claim that the boys actually said something they did not legally falls under 'Libel' and 'Defamation'.

"The First Amendment allows plaintiffs to recover proved compensatory damages (such as loss of business opportunities, loss of social standing, and emotional distress stemming from those harms) based on a showing that the defendant speakers' errors were negligent."
--- CNN and other media outlets that raced to the airwaves and print with the Fake News stories about the kids based on a few seconds of the hour-long+ video they had in their possession yet CHOSE not to view until it all blew up in their faces is a slam dunk case of proven 'Negligence'.

"But before plaintiffs recover other damages -- such as "presumed damages," which don't require a showing of specific loss, or punitive damages -- they have to show that the defendants knew their statements were false or likely false (the misnamed "actual malice" standard)."
--- These news agencies, having the entire video in their possession, should have known what they were reporting was false. If the case goes before a JUDGE the case gets shut down. With the amount of hate and distrust for the media these days, if it goes before a jury trial it is a slight toss up.

The only one who REALLY has the biggest opportunity to get screwed HARD here is the newly elected Muslim Dem who attacked the kids EVEN AFTER IT WAS WIDELY TELEVISED THAT ALL THE STORIES ABOUT THEM WERE FALSE.
- The trouble is that the law here states the individual can most probably only be found guilty IF, despite the fact it was 'debunked', they still believed it to be true they kept their accusation up (on-line, web page, tweet, etc...) Omar eventually deleted her Tweet attacking the boys.

There IS extremely shaky ground for any law suit to be filed against those who recklessly and falsely attacked the kids. Even in Omar's case, for example, because she took her known false attack down yet refuses to apologize, that just makes her a Liberal fake news asshole, not guilty of Libel / Defamation.

Probably the strongest case against anyone might probably be against those who called for violence against them, such as CNN saying, 'Someone should punch that kid in the face'.

Anyone calling for / inciting violence against these kids COULD face charges 18 U.S. Code § 373 - Solicitation to commit a crime of violence

And lawyers could really REACH by attempting to file a lawsuit over 'cyber-bullying', which all 50 states now have laws against.
- Twitter, Facebook, and even the media's web pages that blasted the kids with the fake news stories could potentially be argued to be part of that 'cyber' bullying.


I am not saying there is a STRONG legal case, but there is a legal basis lawyers could use, especially if they think they could get a jury trial. The vile media coverage and horrific calls for violence against kids could potentially end up costing people / the media a pretty penny, if not in PR alone.


The fake news pricks, Hollywood scumbags, and Libtards like Omar should just do the right thing - own up to their own fake news mistake and apologize. It's the least they owe these kids.


18 U.S. Code § 373 - Solicitation to commit a crime of violence

Laws, Policies & Regulations

And yet ------------------- you still can't show us any evidence of CNN saying "somebody should punch that kid in the face".

Shall we post the definition of the term "evidence" now?

Libel / Defamation: Making the claim that the boys actually said something they did not legally falls under 'Libel' and 'Defamation'.

Here AGAIN ---- **where** did some news outlet "nake the claim that the boys actually said something they did not"?
Oopsie Doopsie.

"But before plaintiffs recover other damages -- such as "presumed damages," which don't require a showing of specific loss, or punitive damages -- they have to show that the defendants knew their statements were false or likely false (the misnamed "actual malice" standard)."

Once AGAIN ---- what "statements"?

Held over for a third straight week --- the challenge no one can answer. The perfect way to bring to a libel trial --- with "evidence" of "statements" that were so effective in their scurrilous objective to defame a teenager, that nobody can think of any even after three weeks.

 

[easyt65]

If tweets were libel ..... LOL Actually that's interesting and I never considered it. Is tweet spoken or published?

Forget 'Libel'.

All 50 states have 'Cyber-bullying' Laws now. Can a, offensive 'Tweet' be argued to be 'cyber-bullying'?

 

[easyt65]

And yet ------------------- you still can't show us any evidence of CNN saying "somebody should punch that kid in the face".

You've got Google, moron. When this story happened it was being shown a LOT.....but suddenly Pelosi and snowflakes get amnesia. "I don't remember my fellow Democrat saying such a thing'. Bwuhahaha.....

 

[jc456]

Libel / Defamation: Making the claim that the boys actually said something they did not legally falls under 'Libel' and 'Defamation'.

"The First Amendment allows plaintiffs to recover proved compensatory damages (such as loss of business opportunities, loss of social standing, and emotional distress stemming from those harms) based on a showing that the defendant speakers' errors were negligent."
--- CNN and other media outlets that raced to the airwaves and print with the Fake News stories about the kids based on a few seconds of the hour-long+ video they had in their possession yet CHOSE not to view until it all blew up in their faces is a slam dunk case of proven 'Negligence'.

"But before plaintiffs recover other damages -- such as "presumed damages," which don't require a showing of specific loss, or punitive damages -- they have to show that the defendants knew their statements were false or likely false (the misnamed "actual malice" standard)."
--- These news agencies, having the entire video in their possession, should have known what they were reporting was false. If the case goes before a JUDGE the case gets shut down. With the amount of hate and distrust for the media these days, if it goes before a jury trial it is a slight toss up.

The only one who REALLY has the biggest opportunity to get screwed HARD here is the newly elected Muslim Dem who attacked the kids EVEN AFTER IT WAS WIDELY TELEVISED THAT ALL THE STORIES ABOUT THEM WERE FALSE.
- The trouble is that the law here states the individual can most probably only be found guilty IF, despite the fact it was 'debunked', they still believed it to be true they kept their accusation up (on-line, web page, tweet, etc...) Omar eventually deleted her Tweet attacking the boys.

There IS extremely shaky ground for any law suit to be filed against those who recklessly and falsely attacked the kids. Even in Omar's case, for example, because she took her known false attack down yet refuses to apologize, that just makes her a Liberal fake news asshole, not guilty of Libel / Defamation.

Probably the strongest case against anyone might probably be against those who called for violence against them, such as CNN saying, 'Someone should punch that kid in the face'.

Anyone calling for / inciting violence against these kids COULD face charges 18 U.S. Code § 373 - Solicitation to commit a crime of violence

And lawyers could really REACH by attempting to file a lawsuit over 'cyber-bullying', which all 50 states now have laws against.
- Twitter, Facebook, and even the media's web pages that blasted the kids with the fake news stories could potentially be argued to be part of that 'cyber' bullying.


I am not saying there is a STRONG legal case, but there is a legal basis lawyers could use, especially if they think they could get a jury trial. The vile media coverage and horrific calls for violence against kids could potentially end up costing people / the media a pretty penny, if not in PR alone.


The fake news pricks, Hollywood scumbags, and Libtards like Omar should just do the right thing - own up to their own fake news mistake and apologize. It's the least they owe these kids.


18 U.S. Code § 373 - Solicitation to commit a crime of violence

Laws, Policies & Regulations

yeah intent. they intended on defamation of the church, the school, the kids, and their parents. they went all bust the catholics on this one. They are truly in a world of hurt on this. I've been waiting, and low and behold, here we go, this will be fun watching the back tracking and the apologies coming out of the woodwork, however, payment will indeed strike the right, or correct chord.

 

[The Original Tree]

George Orwell was a prophet and The DemNazi Party is who he warned us about.

"It was terribly dangerous to let your thoughts wander when you were in any public place or within range of a telescreen. The smallest thing could give you away. A nervous tic, an unconscious look of anxiety, a habit of muttering to yourself – anything that carried with it the suggestion of abnormality, of having something to hide. In any case, to wear an improper expression on your face (to look incredulous when a victory was announced, for example) was itself a punishable offense. There was even a word for it in Newspeak: facecrime, it was called.

1984

 

[Pogo]

And yet ------------------- you still can't show us any evidence of CNN saying "somebody should punch that kid in the face".

You've got Google, moron. When this story happened it was being shown a LOT.....but suddenly Pelosi and snowflakes get amnesia. "I don't remember my fellow Democrat saying such a thing'. Bwuhahaha.....

*I* don't need a Google, moron --- *I* didn't make the claim.

 

[jc456]

And yet ------------------- you still can't show us any evidence of CNN saying "somebody should punch that kid in the face".

You've got Google, moron. When this story happened it was being shown a LOT.....but suddenly Pelosi and snowflakes get amnesia. "I don't remember my fellow Democrat saying such a thing'. Bwuhahaha.....

*I* don't need a Google, moron --- *I* didn't make the claim.

well the lawyers made it, so you should be asking them then. right? Still unclear what it is you think you got on anyone in this thread? please explain?

 

[easyt65]

'CNN’s Bakari Sellers deleted a tweet saying that someone should punch Sandmann and his classmates in the face.'

Covington Catholic Students Are Considering Legal Action

 

[Pogo]

'CNN’s Bakari Sellers deleted a tweet saying that someone should punch Sandmann and his classmates in the face.'

Covington Catholic Students Are Considering Legal Action

So you still don't understand the vast chasm of difference between "CNN" and "a tweet".

That's SO cute.

Congratulations on figuring out how to Google though.

 

[easyt65]

And yet ------------------- you still can't show us any evidence of CNN saying "somebody should punch that kid in the face".

You've got Google, moron. When this story happened it was being shown a LOT.....but suddenly Pelosi and snowflakes get amnesia. "I don't remember my fellow Democrat saying such a thing'. Bwuhahaha.....

*I* don't need a Google, moron --- *I* didn't make the claim.

No, you just claim vile PsOS like CNN, who chose to go after KIDS instead of the 'Stolen Valor' Vet and a Black Hate Group, did / said nothing wrong.

 

[easyt65]

'CNN’s Bakari Sellers deleted a tweet saying that someone should punch Sandmann and his classmates in the face.'

Covington Catholic Students Are Considering Legal Action

So you still don't understand the vast chasm of difference between "CNN" and "a tweet".

That's SO cute.

Going down swinging, huh? WHO was the Tweet from, dumbass? Oh yeah....

'CNN’s Bakari Sellers'

Sellers is one of the Fake News Network's cast of liars and propaganda pushers, self-professed 'journalists' who rushed to demonize kids rather than watch the whole video to get the story right. They just saw the MAGA hats and wanted to demonize the kids for wearing the hats. CNN, the ridiculous propaganda-pushers who SHOULD have taken 2 minutes to use Google to know what the hell they were talking about before reporting the Va Gov was a REPUBLICAN!

But you go right on ahead protecting your beloved Fake News Trump-Hating CNN.

 

[Pogo]

'CNN’s Bakari Sellers deleted a tweet saying that someone should punch Sandmann and his classmates in the face.'

Covington Catholic Students Are Considering Legal Action

So you still don't understand the vast chasm of difference between "CNN" and "a tweet".

That's SO cute.

Going down swinging, huh? WHO was the Tweet from, dumbass? Oh yeah....

'CNN’s Bakari Sellers'

Sellers is one of the Fake News Network's cast of liars and propaganda pushers, self-professed 'journalists' who rushed to demonize kids rather than watch the whole video to get the story right. They just saw the MAGA hats and wanted to demonize the kids for wearing the hats. CNN, the ridiculous propaganda-pushers who SHOULD have taken 2 minutes to use Google to know what the hell they were talking about before reporting the Va Gov was a REPUBLICAN!

But you go right on ahead protecting your beloved Fake News Trump-Hating CNN.

Whelp, according to your own post it was from a " Bakari Sellers".

I STILL don't see anything from "CNN". NOR is "someone should (do whatever)" a reporting of any kind of "news" anyway. It's what we call "opinion".

Guess that's it then. I accept your concession but please provide it in writing.