Sherrod's going to Sue Breitbart...

[asterism]

you just going to run around trolling?

Trolling? Please define that for me since I have heard plenty of definitions. I assure you I am no troll.

or do you have something to counter jonathan turley?

I thought I made that pretty clear. For the slow classmates:

If Breitbart's emails and communications that show an agenda behind his media endeavors are damning then perhaps Ezra Klein is at risk also.

you know, given that your legal expertise must at least equal his if you're so smug.

Ah.

Are only credentialed attorneys with expertise that you consider relevant allowed to comment on this? What are your credentials?

 

[jillian]

you just going to run around trolling?

Trolling? Please define that for me since I have heard plenty of definitions. I assure you I am no troll.

or do you have something to counter jonathan turley?

I thought I made that pretty clear. For the slow classmates:

If Breitbart's emails and communications that show an agenda behind his media endeavors are damning then perhaps Ezra Klein is at risk also.

you know, given that your legal expertise must at least equal his if you're so smug.

Ah.

Are only credentialed attorneys with expertise that you consider relevant allowed to comment on this? What are your credentials?

i didn't say that, actually. but you should have some knowledge. spewing about ezra klein doesn't quite do it.

aside from the fact that we're talking about a wingnut shill who thinks its ok to edit tapes to make them false, please tell us where Ezra Klein has doctored tape to make a point. hence my response about having something to counter jonathan turley with.

 

[boedicca]

The Left should reconsider if they really want a precedent set for punative damages if someone decides that a video clip from a longer event is not flattering.

 

[Stephanie]

you know, you would think someone who is a laywer, they wouldn't go around SPEWING lies.

and would be a DEFENDER of our Freedoms of Speech instead of trying hard to have them shut down.

 

[Ravi]

Defamation of character isn't freedom of speech. Jeesh, you people are stupid.

 

[asterism]

you just going to run around trolling?

Trolling? Please define that for me since I have heard plenty of definitions. I assure you I am no troll.



I thought I made that pretty clear. For the slow classmates:

If Breitbart's emails and communications that show an agenda behind his media endeavors are damning then perhaps Ezra Klein is at risk also.

you know, given that your legal expertise must at least equal his if you're so smug.

Ah.

Are only credentialed attorneys with expertise that you consider relevant allowed to comment on this? What are your credentials?

i didn't say that, actually. but you should have some knowledge. spewing about ezra klein doesn't quite do it.

aside from the fact that we're talking about a wingnut shill who thinks its ok to edit tapes to make them false, please tell us where Ezra Klein has doctored tape to make a point. hence my response about having something to counter jonathan turley with.

I didn't spew. I made a comment about a strategic (and theoretical) legal maneuver that might bite someone else in the ass.

As to doctoring tapes, well NBC already did that. No successful lawsuit. CBS doctored memos, no successful lawsuit. If Ms. Sherrod is successful using Mr. Turley's strategy, Ezra Klein is toast, IMO.

 

[Luissa]

LOL, leave it to my friend jilly to donate to the circle jerkoff.

When you accuse someone of something, you should probably try not to do the very same thing you are accusing them of. But thanks for playin!

where did I call you a idiot?
go away, you bore me.

and you just proved that you can be that much of an idiot.

 

[boedicca]

Defamation of character isn't freedom of speech. Jeesh, you people are stupid.

It's not defamation to post or quote somebody's verbatim statements.

 

[Dr.House]

Defamation of character isn't freedom of speech. Jeesh, you people are stupid.

Who said it was?

 

[mal]

If Breitbart didn't do anything wrong, I'm sure he has nothing to worry about

The NAACP's Version of the Video is Edited... I have a Thread here about it.



peace...

 

[Luissa]

you know, you would think someone who is a laywer, they wouldn't go around SPEWING lies.

and would be a DEFENDER of our Freedoms of Speech instead of trying hard to have them shut down.

someone needs to do a little research on the first amendment..

 

[rightwinger]

Defamation of character isn't freedom of speech. Jeesh, you people are stupid.

It's not defamation to post or quote somebody's verbatim statements.

Lets let a jury decide. Its not just the outtake of what she said but the context it was put in. She was defined as a racist and the clip was presented to make the case she was a racist

The jury can also look at intent and whether he intended to inflict harm on her. Damages could get nasty here

 

[asterism]

you just going to run around trolling?

Can you justify this accusation? Is this what people get on the first day here?

 

[asterism]

Defamation of character isn't freedom of speech. Jeesh, you people are stupid.

It's not defamation to post or quote somebody's verbatim statements.

Lets let a jury decide. Its not just the outtake of what she said but the context it was put in. She was defined as a racist and the clip was presented to make the case she was a racist

The jury can also look at intent and whether he intended to inflict harm on her. Damages could get nasty here

Perhaps.

However wouldn't actual harm have to be proven first?

 

[Sherry]

you just going to run around trolling?

Can you justify this accusation? Is this what people get on the first day here?

Pretty much. Don't take it to heart.

 

[Ravi]

Defamation of character isn't freedom of speech. Jeesh, you people are stupid.

It's not defamation to post or quote somebody's verbatim statements.

Lets let a jury decide. Its not just the outtake of what she said but the context it was put in. She was defined as a racist and the clip was presented to make the case she was a racist

The jury can also look at intent and whether he intended to inflict harm on her. Damages could get nasty here

Yep...I wonder if he'll share a cell with his pimp? Oh, whoops...this is only a civil case.

 

[konradv]

I hope she does sue, she will open up one big can of worms.

it should be fun.

You got THAT right. It could reveal the CRAZY that pervades the right and turn around that presumed Republic Party landslide this fall!

 

[Luissa]

It's not defamation to post or quote somebody's verbatim statements.

Lets let a jury decide. Its not just the outtake of what she said but the context it was put in. She was defined as a racist and the clip was presented to make the case she was a racist

The jury can also look at intent and whether he intended to inflict harm on her. Damages could get nasty here

Perhaps.

However wouldn't actual harm have to be proven first?

I am sure they could prove the media going after trying to ruin her name, harmed her.

 

[boedicca]

Defamation of character isn't freedom of speech. Jeesh, you people are stupid.

It's not defamation to post or quote somebody's verbatim statements.

Lets let a jury decide. Its not just the outtake of what she said but the context it was put in. She was defined as a racist and the clip was presented to make the case she was a racist

The jury can also look at intent and whether he intended to inflict harm on her. Damages could get nasty here

Then she'd better be prepared for the same treatment in return. She is on record of accusing Fox News and the GOP of being RACIST without any proof.

 

[asterism]

you just going to run around trolling?

Can you justify this accusation? Is this what people get on the first day here?

Pretty much. Don't take it to heart.

Ok, thanks.

Learning the ropes here.