Bullshit.Bullshit. They could have chose not to negligently publish the defamatory lies about Sandmann. Publishing defamatory lies via an interview that they solicited from Phillips does not absolve them of wrongdoing.WaPo chose to publish the defamatory statements against Sandmann without performing due diligence to verify that they were true. They were therefore acting negligently when they failed to ascertain the veracity of the defamatory statements they published.The part of the lawsuit that wasn't dismissed had nothing to do with race. It was about Wapo publishing slanderous accusations made in an interview with Phillips. Even though Wapo had conclusive proof on video that Phillips' accusations were false, they continued to publish the interview. For example, they knew with 100% certainty that Sandmann did not block Phillips' retreat, as he claimed.My apologies for reviving a thread that's been in a coma for a year, but a certain magical canine with the power to make threads disappear (whom I will not name) keeps imploring people to post updates regarding the Sandman vs WaPo lawsuit in an existing thread. And this is the most recent thread regarding the lawsuit.SOOOOOOOOO............ just checking back in to this bullshit to find out "how the suit's going". You know, as I've been asking anyone and everyone where there is any evidence at all of said "defamation" since last January, hearing no response.
Anything at all? Anybody?
Oh wait --- here we go.
>> (CN) – A federal judge in Kentucky dismissed a $250 million libel and defamation lawsuit against the Washington Post, finding that the newspaper’s coverage of a January incident between a high school student and an American Indian activist was not defamatory in any way..... In his ruling, Bertelsman engages with almost none of the more bombastic claims levied by the lawsuit, and instead analyzes the 33 statements Sandmann claims were defamatory.Bertelsman found that some of the statements in question are actually not about Sandmann, and simply refer to the groups of people involved in the incident.The judge also said many of the statements are opinions, some of which are derived from Phillips himself who claimed that he felt “blocked” by the students.“Few principles of the law are as well-established as the rule that statements of opinion are not actionable in libel actions,” Bertelsman wrote. He continued that statements challenged by Sandmann do “not form the basis for a defamation claim.”Bertelsman went on to explain that even if an opinion could be found “erroneous,” it is still protected by the First Amendment. << --- Courthouse News, July 26Funny none of these Smirk-boi wankers had the stones to post that. An "oversight" I'm sure.
The site went down. Yeah that's it, the site went down huh huh huh.
So here's the update for you, Pogo:
Read it and weep.
Washington Post settles $250M suit with Covington teen Nick Sandmann
The Washington Post on Friday agreed to settle a monster $250 million lawsuit filed by Covington Catholic High School student Nick Sandmann over its botched coverage of his 2019 encounter with a Na…nypost.com
The Washington Post on Friday agreed to settle a monster $250 million lawsuit filed by Covington Catholic High School student Nick Sandmann over its botched coverage of his 2019 encounter with a Native American elder.
Sandmann declared the victory in a tweet on his 18th birthday. It’s unclear how much the newspaper settled for.
“On 2/19/19, I filed $250M defamation lawsuit against Washington Post. Today, I turned 18 & WaPo settled my lawsuit,” he wrote.
“Thanks to @ToddMcMurtry & @LLinWood for their advocacy. Thanks to my family & millions of you who have stood your ground by supporting me. I still have more to do,” he continued.
It is excellent news to hear that another one of the most vile and prolific anti-USA fake news outlets has been defeated by the Sandmann.
Thanks for the quote but I went ahead and clicked your link to see the whole thing. First thought, many chuckles at following a headline of the Noo Yawk Post. Nice touch.
--- Which headline declares a "win", but never does essplain how it's a "win". Some of A's lawyers negotiated with some of B's lawyers to the effect of "X number of dollars and we'll make this nuisance suit go away so you don't have to keep traipsing back into court on technicalities", which is the whole game.
--- You DO understand that "250 million dollars" is the amount the suit SOUGHT, not the amount anyone PAID, right? That is, assuming anyone paid anything at all.
All of which above is irrelevant to my point of however long ago it was, which was ---- *WHERE* did the WaPo (or CNN or whoever) declare that the kid's motivation was racial? Answer: nowhere mon frère. I read your link, and followed the link it linked to, and it ain't there. Which makes this just another SLAPP suit. Which is exactly how I always characterized it and typical Bitch McConnell bullshit propaganda.
The invitation to prove me wrong remains open, forever. Feel free to resurrect any old thread to that end on that glorious day in the year 4503 when you actually find it.
Sigh. Gullible's Travels....
Again I'm not seeing any link but let's just toss this salad as it stands for now.
Did WaPo publish an interview with Phillips? If so, unless it misrepresented what Phillips said, that's an accurate story. Was the interviewee's account either inaccurate, or slanderous? Well that's on him, it's his words. That doesn't affect the WaPo, which simply REPORTS WHAT HE SAID.
What's crucial here is WHO THE SPEAKER IS. If it's Phillips (or whatever subject) making a slanderous claim, then it's that subject responsible for that claim, not the entity reporting it. You can't change an interviewee's words just because you'd like them to have been something else. That would be dishonest.
But lo, the suit isn't against Phillips is it. None of them are.
That's why I keep asking for any evidence, anywhere, of a news reporting entity --- WaPo, NYT, CNN, NBC, any at all --- who THEMSELVES reported inaccurately. And to date, just to sound like a broken record, I have received Bupkis.
And negligence is all Sandmann, as a private person, had to show. If he was a public figure he would have had to prove they did it intentionally.
"Defamatory statements" you can't show, that's number one.
Here's number two:
You don't *NEED* to verify anybody's statements when you interview them. The interviewee is not a fucking reporter. You report what they said, accurately, whether it's true, false, speculation, opinion, defamatory or a fucking trigonometry equation. The news there is "SUBJECT SAID X". PERIOD, FULL STOP, WAITER CHECK PLEASE, CUE FAT LADY, ROLL CREDITS, FADE TO BLACK, FIN.
If you DON'T report what they said accurately, THEN you're in doodoo. The fact that your ass hurts over what the subject had to say is irrelevant to anything.
Apparently they did choose that, since no one, and I mean NO ONE, has ever been able to show us where they published any such thing.
---- and??
"A video went viral". It did. "Sandmann said this". He did. "Phillips said that". He did. The ENTIRE video is "A said this, B said that".
It's all true. Prove it isn't.
Oh by the way it's all on video, so you CAN'T.
You lose.
Now quit wasting my time and go get a life.