Rachel Maddow, MSNBC sued for defamation

[Truthmatters]

Link?

You gotta lotta balls asking for Links with 99% of the unfounded/undocuments bullshit you post

jesus you turned into a complete liar in no time on this site huh?

 

[Warrior102]

Link?

You gotta lotta balls asking for Links with 99% of the unfounded/undocuments bullshit you post

jesus you turned into a complete liar in no time on this site huh?

Where have I ever lied ? Link ?

If you ask me the same of you, I'll just post your posting history.

You're not only the biggest liar on here - you're the dumbest poster on the Internet.

 

[Zona]

'Left-wing television commentators must be made to respect ... the law'

Rachel Maddow, MSNBC sued for defamation

Oh well, maybe it'll help her ratings, which are currently in the tank.

WND? Dude, I thought you were better than this. seriously, I did. Damn.

 

[Warrior102]

'Left-wing television commentators must be made to respect ... the law'

Rachel Maddow, MSNBC sued for defamation

Oh well, maybe it'll help her ratings, which are currently in the tank.

WND? Dude, I thought you were better than this. seriously, I did. Damn.

Better than what? I was merely posting a report of a pending lawsuit. You may draw your own decisions/discuss. I never ONCE said anything disrespectful regarding Ms. Maddow in this entire thread. I post - you discuss. Message/discussion board, correct?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Well, sponge bob's ratings are through the roof, i'm sure.

Because you spend all day watching it, now that you have the cartoon network?

I think there's a little more too it than that, Jillian.

 

[Rambunctious]

'Left-wing television commentators must be made to respect ... the law'

Rachel Maddow, MSNBC sued for defamation

Oh well, maybe it'll help her ratings, which are currently in the tank.

Looks like msnGE picked a fight with the wrong church, I think I will donate some $ to this mans congregation.

 

[Rozman]

I hope they sue the panties of her..... I wanna see what's doing in there...
Excuse me I just threw up in my mouth....

 

[Kiki Cannoli]

You gotta lotta balls asking for Links with 99% of the unfounded/undocuments bullshit you post

jesus you turned into a complete liar in no time on this site huh?

Where have I ever lied ? Link ?
If you ask me the same of you, I'll just post your posting history.

You're not only the biggest liar on here - you're the dumbest poster on the Internet.

She shoved the healthcare bill down our throats. Then she voted

* NO on the Border Security Bill
* NO on making the Republican tax cuts permanent
* NO on eliminating the marriage penalty
* NO on eliminating the death tax
* NO on creating Health Savings Accounts
* NO on the Defense of Marriage Act
* NO on the 1996 Welfare Reform Law (and NO on its reauthorization)
* NO on protecting the Pledge of Allegiance
* NO on banning partial-birth abortion
* NO on requiring a photo I.D. to ensure only legal voters vote
* NO on the Patriot Act
* NO on authorizing domestic tracking of terrorists
* NO on military tribunals and new interrogation rules for terrorist detainees

But this isn't about her shitty leadership, it's about Boehner - so, carry on.

When the speaker votes they are representing their constintuencies, and I can assure you Congresswoman Pelosi represented hers to perfection. You may not agree with those votes, but they are not performance indicators.

The Speaker of the House votes as a representative of HER consitituents?
So the Speaker of the House (Pelosi, or whomever), voted with the best interests of San Franciscans at heart, while seated in Washington, D.C. ?
Are you freaking high on meth?

And

The Speaker of the House votes as a representative of HER consitituents?
So the Speaker of the House (Pelosi, or whomever), voted with the best interests of San Franciscans at heart, while seated in Washington, D.C. ?
Are you freaking high on meth?

Why would you attack me personally? I realize that turbo infueled vitriol is the Rep producer on USMB, but I refuse to play.

Yes, the Speaker still represents his/her district. The Speaker need not be an elected member of Congress, but all have been.

Well, you must be on something to post a blatant lie as you did

The Speaker of the House, in that role, represents the House of Representatives, and the interests of the American people. Pelosi's voting record - as I pointed out - does not represent the overwhelming majority of the American people. She voted, according to lobby checks received. The jist of this thread was to discredit Boehner - who in no way, has performed as miserably as his predecessor.

Need more clairification?

Within the USMB culture I do believe that posting bad information qualifies one as a liar.

ETA: http://www.usmessageboard.com/congr...nce-that-boehner-is-worst-speaker-ever-4.html

 

[Political Junky]

World "NUT"Daily only has a reporter on staff that has been nominated for two Pulitzers and the same gentleman holds the second most seniority on the W.H. Press Corps, that site is pretty lame let me tell you.

and? that means it's not a rightwingnut rag?

which writer, btw? and where was he working when nominated?

btw, i have a friend who won a pulitzer... doesn't make any newspaper she works for a quality paper.

Les Kinsolving was nominated twice for Pulitzers while at WND .

Let us know when he wins, he's always good for a laugh at press conferences.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

He once made a statement on the radio criticizing his fellow Christians for not taking a stronger stand about the "gay" rights lobby promoting homosexuality in schools. According to the ministry announcement, he made a strong reference to Muslims taking the issue more seriously than Christians, referring to Islamic law, but did not condone their practices. It was Bradlee's intent to focus attention on the issue, not to advocate harm to anyone, the statement said.

Despite the clear statement by Dean on his ministry's website and elsewhere that he was not calling for the execution of homosexuals, according to the announcement, "MSNBC's Rachel Maddow and others seized on and accused Dean on her show of supporting the killing of homosexuals, as is the practice in some radical Islamic countries. This seriously has harmed Dean and the ministry, who pride themselves on respect and love for all people."

Dean doesn’t want to have homosexuals killed, he just wants them discriminated against and relegated to second-class citizenship status, that’s not showing ‘respect and love for all people’:

Republican Sen. Paul Gazelka was a guest on Bradlee Dean‘s Saturday evening radio program to talk about the amendment to put a ban on same-sex marriage into the Minnesota Constitution. Over the course of the program, which is part of Dean’s controversial ministry, You Can Run But You Cannot Hide, Gazelka spoke about activist judges and concerns that Republicans might be labeled “homophobes” or “bigots.” Dean and sidekick Jake McMillian said that homosexuals are criminals and America will be destroyed if homosexuality isn’t criminalized.

“We want you to cover this topic of the marriage amendment,” McMillian said to Gazelka. “The immoral crowd, a lot of folks don’t want to see this happen.”

Sen. Gazelka to Bradlee Dean: Gay marriage ban supporters aren’t bigots | Minnesota Independent: News. Politics. Media.

On his blog, controversial minister Bradlee Dean of You Can Run But You Cannot Hide ministries took credit for the passage of a bill that put a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage on the ballot in 2012. Dean said that he’s been “attacked” by the media who are pushing an “illegal agenda” and claims — incorrectly — that sodomy is against the law in the United States. “I believe that I have done my duty,” he wrote. “The people of the great state of Minnesota now have the power to vote. It is now up to you to decide for your posterity what kind of future that you want to have for them. The power is in your hands.”

Dean complained about the treatment he has received by the media. “When doing high schools across the country we noticed that when the media began to push an illegal agenda called the gay agenda (sodomy is illegal in this country) we started getting attacked from the media,” he wrote.

Sodomy laws, which were often used to imprison gays and lesbians as recently as the 1980s, were declared unconstitutional in Minnesota in 2001 and nationwide in 2003.

Dean has frequently spoken of the need to enforce sodomy laws against gays and lesbians who he views as criminals.

Bradlee Dean takes credit for passing anti-gay marriage amendment | Minnesota Independent: News. Politics. Media.

So Dean advocates violating the Constitution by discriminating against gays and violating the law in the process.

The depositions will be interesting.

 

[whitehall]

Anybody know the MSNBC president's name as well as you know FOX? Well now you do, it's Phil Griffin and according to the article Griffin admits that MSNBC caters to the progressive left.

 

[Political Junky]

Anybody know the MSNBC president's name as well as you know FOX? Well now you do, it's Phil Griffin and according to the article Griffin admits that MSNBC caters to the progressive left.

Well, he's honest about it.
Fox still claims to be fair and balanced.

 

[Zona]

'Left-wing television commentators must be made to respect ... the law'

Rachel Maddow, MSNBC sued for defamation

Oh well, maybe it'll help her ratings, which are currently in the tank.

WND? Dude, I thought you were better than this. seriously, I did. Damn.

Better than what? I was merely posting a report of a pending lawsuit. You may draw your own decisions/discuss. I never ONCE said anything disrespectful regarding Ms. Maddow in this entire thread. I post - you discuss. Message/discussion board, correct?

Is your next link going to come from Foxnews.com?

 

[Full-Auto]

WND? Dude, I thought you were better than this. seriously, I did. Damn.

Better than what? I was merely posting a report of a pending lawsuit. You may draw your own decisions/discuss. I never ONCE said anything disrespectful regarding Ms. Maddow in this entire thread. I post - you discuss. Message/discussion board, correct?

Is your next link going to come from Foxnews.com?

The other networks are DNC lapdogs. The coverage of the gun running by democrats proves that.

 

[Zona]

Better than what? I was merely posting a report of a pending lawsuit. You may draw your own decisions/discuss. I never ONCE said anything disrespectful regarding Ms. Maddow in this entire thread. I post - you discuss. Message/discussion board, correct?

Is your next link going to come from Foxnews.com?

The other networks are DNC lapdogs. The coverage of the gun running by democrats proves that.

And fox is not allowed to talk about its owner and the problems he has. Say I am wrong..Its the biggest "news" story out there and they barely talk about it....

 

[rdean]

From your article: According to the ministry announcement, he made a strong reference to Muslims taking the issue more seriously than Christians, referring to Islamic law, but did not condone their practices

Let me get this, pardon the word, "straight". This guy suggested American Christians should take the gays as seriously as the Muslims, but don't "hurt" them?????

Somehow, I don't believe it's a round a bout way of supporting gay marriage. What is it this guy wants done to the gays? Besides not "hurt" them. Right wingers hurt everything they touch. I think it's part of their culture.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Anybody know the MSNBC president's name as well as you know FOX? Well now you do, it's Phil Griffin and according to the article Griffin admits that MSNBC caters to the progressive left.

Ironically the Right's defense of the bias of guys like Hannity, Limbaugh, and many others has for ages been that they don't pretend otherwise.

I guess if MSNBC, from the top down, isn't pretending otherwise, they merit comparable praise and defense from the Right.

Certainly the Right wouldn't want to be two-faced about something like this now would it?

 

[Avatar4321]

They are going to need to show that Maddow and MSNBC had malicious intent with their statements. It's a fairly high standards. So if anyone thinks they are going to have an easy case to prove, you are clearly mistaken.

However, I can't say they don't have an argument to consider. After all, saying someone wants to kill a group of people when they dont is pretty darn malicious. The main question is going to be whether they can show that Maddow and MSNBC knew it was a lie (or had reason to know it was a lie). That's probably going to be the biggest hurdle to overcome.

Needless to say, I dont think this case is as open and shut as either side would like to pretend it is.

 

[Avatar4321]

Anybody know the MSNBC president's name as well as you know FOX? Well now you do, it's Phil Griffin and according to the article Griffin admits that MSNBC caters to the progressive left.

Ironically the Right's defense of the bias of guys like Hannity, Limbaugh, and many others has for ages been that they don't pretend otherwise.

I guess if MSNBC, from the top down, isn't pretending otherwise, they merit comparable praise and defense from the Right.

Certainly the Right wouldn't want to be two-faced about something like this now would it?

What exactly is wrong with bias? The issue is defamation. Not bias. You can hold to a specific viewpoint and be biased toward that viewpoint without lying about those you consider the opposition. It would be nice if people realized that.

 

[Warrior102]

WND? Dude, I thought you were better than this. seriously, I did. Damn.

Better than what? I was merely posting a report of a pending lawsuit. You may draw your own decisions/discuss. I never ONCE said anything disrespectful regarding Ms. Maddow in this entire thread. I post - you discuss. Message/discussion board, correct?

Is your next link going to come from Foxnews.com?

Huh?

It shouldn't matter if it comes from Marvel Comic Books. News is news. It is a fact that MSNBC and Rachel are being sued. It doesn't matter who "covers" it, it's a fact.