Sherrod's going to Sue Breitbart...

[boedicca]

The fact that he USED her to make his point is why she is the victim, and in an even better position to sue. It's a nofuckingbrainer.

Oh. Now it's clear.

In order to hold your point of view, one must have nofuckingbrain. No wonder you post such nonsense.

 

[Ravi]

Slander:

Slander is the oral communication of false statements that are harmful to a person's reputation. If the statements are proven to be true, it is a complete defense to a charge of slander. Oral opinions that don't contain statements of fact don't constitute slander. Slander is an act of communication that causes someone to be shamed, ridiculed, held in contempt, lowered in the estimation of the community, or to lose employment status or earnings or otherwise suffer a damaged reputation. Slander is a subcategory of defamation.

Slander Law & Legal Definition

BreitBart is a POS. But legally, he did not slander her. Simply posting/airing what she actually did say without providing necessary context does not constitute slander.

Winning a slander/defamation lawsuit is high hurdle to overcome. Due to the protections offered by the 1st amendment.

But he also posted editorial comments at the beginning of the tape he "released" stating that she was engaging in racist actions in her USDA job currently...and that was not true.

 

[asterism]

Brietbarts lie cause emotional suffering and Sherrod to lose her job, she should sue so maybe these damn distorting, lying Republictards and Teabaggers will stop twisting facts to damage and destroy people for political gain.

She was offered a promotion. Saying "well I turned down more money because I was so distraught" won't exactly play well with a jury.

This really is going to be funny.

Newsflash: Except for the rabid rightwingers, the jury so far (the rest of America) is on her side.

Newsvine - POLL: Should Shirley Sherrod sue Andrew Breitbart over edited video tape or simply move on?

Are you personally attacking everyone who has a different opinion than yours?

I don't agree with "her side" and I am far from a rabid rightwinger. I've even talked to a staffer of a Democrat running in my district about volunteering for her campaign.

Are you trying to hamper my efforts?

 

[Ravi]

She was forced to resign after an incompetent employer overreacted. It's the employer's fault.

After someone maliciously posted information about her saying..."Look how your employee abuses her position"

Breitbart is scum and he knows it

Are you honestly saying that the employer isn't the one responsible for the harm? It was the source of information the employer saw?

So if my employer fired me for something false I would have a case against the gossip ***** and not the employer?


Too funny!

Read the post right above yours.

 

[DiveCon]

maybe we should set a precedent? There is already a problem with responsible journalism.

Bingo. That's the reason I hope to hell she does sue. It would at the very least force these assholes to think about the consequences before posting insulting material meant solely to enflame and bring down another person because of a political agenda.

I think I might agree with you here.

It would be nice to see the NAACP get ***** slapped for their baseless accusations about the TEA Party.

yeah, maybe they should sue the NAACP
they could share the same court and judge

 

[boedicca]

Slander:

Slander is the oral communication of false statements that are harmful to a person's reputation. If the statements are proven to be true, it is a complete defense to a charge of slander. Oral opinions that don't contain statements of fact don't constitute slander. Slander is an act of communication that causes someone to be shamed, ridiculed, held in contempt, lowered in the estimation of the community, or to lose employment status or earnings or otherwise suffer a damaged reputation. Slander is a subcategory of defamation.

Slander Law & Legal Definition

BreitBart is a POS. But legally, he did not slander her. Simply posting/airing what she actually did say without providing necessary context does not constitute slander.

Winning a slander/defamation lawsuit is high hurdle to overcome. Due to the protections offered by the 1st amendment.

But he also posted editorial comments at the beginning of the tape he "released" stating that she was engaging in racist actions in her USDA job currently...and that was not true.

Then please quote and link to those comments.

 

[RadiomanATL]

Slander:

Slander is the oral communication of false statements that are harmful to a person's reputation. If the statements are proven to be true, it is a complete defense to a charge of slander. Oral opinions that don't contain statements of fact don't constitute slander. Slander is an act of communication that causes someone to be shamed, ridiculed, held in contempt, lowered in the estimation of the community, or to lose employment status or earnings or otherwise suffer a damaged reputation. Slander is a subcategory of defamation.

Slander Law & Legal Definition

BreitBart is a POS. But legally, he did not slander her. Simply posting/airing what she actually did say without providing necessary context does not constitute slander.

Winning a slander/defamation lawsuit is high hurdle to overcome. Due to the protections offered by the 1st amendment.

But he also posted editorial comments at the beginning of the tape he "released" stating that she was engaging in racist actions in her USDA job currently...and that was not true.

Depending on how it was worded, she may have a case based on that.

But the video is irrelevant as far as a slander suit.

 

[asterism]

Tom Cruise got a settlement because he had actual proof that his ability to further enrich himself was hampered by smears.

That said, he had enough money to pursue an active defense, something that Ms. Sherrod doesn't have.

I just wonder why she isn't suing the party at fault, the party that cause the actual damage.

And Brietbart is the party at fault, he is the one who posted the video and claimed she was a racist. I do love how you guys continue to defend him, and some of you go even farther and attack her. She is the innocent party, and some continue to act like she is some how at fault.

Isn't it incredible that the people who are doing backflips in order to crucify Shirley Sherrod, the victim here, were the same ones practically in cardiac arrest over the alleged media attacks on Sarah Palin.

Why did you quote me with that statement? Am I doing backflips and am I saying anything negative about MS. Sherrod?

And what is it with these baseless accusations? Are ya'll all in on the joke that this is just new member hazing?

 

[Ravi]

Slander:

Slander Law & Legal Definition

BreitBart is a POS. But legally, he did not slander her. Simply posting/airing what she actually did say without providing necessary context does not constitute slander.

Winning a slander/defamation lawsuit is high hurdle to overcome. Due to the protections offered by the 1st amendment.

But he also posted editorial comments at the beginning of the tape he "released" stating that she was engaging in racist actions in her USDA job currently...and that was not true.

Then please quote and link to those comments.

Posted twice in this thread.

 

[asterism]

How is an edited video considered an "attack"?

So what other purpose might there have been?

Truth and a "Teachable Moment".

Breitbart was responding to the NAACP's attack on the Tea Party as being racist. He was giving them a lesson. And it was very telling how they and the Obama Administration reacted.

Yup. He even said so.

I'm sure he's willing to take his lumps, too.

 

[Ravi]

Slander:

Slander Law & Legal Definition

BreitBart is a POS. But legally, he did not slander her. Simply posting/airing what she actually did say without providing necessary context does not constitute slander.

Winning a slander/defamation lawsuit is high hurdle to overcome. Due to the protections offered by the 1st amendment.

But he also posted editorial comments at the beginning of the tape he "released" stating that she was engaging in racist actions in her USDA job currently...and that was not true.

Depending on how it was worded, she may have a case based on that.

But the video is irrelevant as far as a slander suit.

Yes, absolutely it is...it is his commentary that makes it slander, imo. Have you watched the video as he released it with the comments at the beginning?

 

[RadiomanATL]

But he also posted editorial comments at the beginning of the tape he "released" stating that she was engaging in racist actions in her USDA job currently...and that was not true.

Depending on how it was worded, she may have a case based on that.

But the video is irrelevant as far as a slander suit.

Yes, absolutely it is...it is his commentary that makes it slander, imo. Have you watched the video as he released it with the comments at the beginning?

I've only seen the segment of her, and the full clip.

I try to stay away from bloviating hack douchenozzles when it comes to political commentary.

 

[MaggieMae]

She did not "admit that in her federally appointed position, overseeing a billion dollars, she discriminates against people due to their race.

Yep, evevn Breitbart knows this.

Correction: While Ms. Sherrod made the remarks captured in the first video featured in this post while she held a federally appointed position, the story she tells refers to actions she took before she held that federal position. Video Proof: The NAACP Awards Racism?2010 - Big Government

I wonder why he had to post a correction?

The person who sent him the clips didn't provide a proper timeline. He has subsequently gotten access to the full tape and has more info. That's what happens with 24 hour news cycle.


When she made the remarks, she did work for the USDA. She showed very poor judgment as a government employee making such remarks to such an audience.

She was NOT working for the USDA at the time. Good grief, after all nonstop chatter over this and you still don't know that? Shirley Sherrod was working for a private advocacy group called Federation of Southern Cooperatives, established to help black farmers keep their land. Her speech was made to an NAACP audience.

Got it? Finally? Tuck that away in some corner of your pea brain. Please.

 

[Yurt]

Slander:

Slander is the oral communication of false statements that are harmful to a person's reputation. If the statements are proven to be true, it is a complete defense to a charge of slander. Oral opinions that don't contain statements of fact don't constitute slander. Slander is an act of communication that causes someone to be shamed, ridiculed, held in contempt, lowered in the estimation of the community, or to lose employment status or earnings or otherwise suffer a damaged reputation. Slander is a subcategory of defamation.

Slander Law & Legal Definition

BreitBart is a POS. But legally, he did not slander her. Simply posting/airing what she actually did say without providing necessary context does not constitute slander.

Winning a slander/defamation lawsuit is high hurdle to overcome. Due to the protections offered by the 1st amendment.

But he also posted editorial comments at the beginning of the tape he "released" stating that she was engaging in racist actions in her USDA job currently...and that was not true.

he did not specifically say that

next

 

[Zona]

Good luck with that.

You'll need it.

As long as fox is around, he will have a job. Just like mark fuhrman, just like Rove, just like pretty much every disgraced ass hole on the tube. They all have homes with Fox.

 

[Vast LWC]

Ah.

Not opinion, fact that he thought was fact. What procedures did he use to verify his sources and the information?

The guy's a journalist. Surely journalists practice their trade, no?

I'm really failing to see your point here. Are you defending Dan Rather?

The man was forced to resign due to his slander.

The only reason the Bush administration certainly wasn't going to bring the issue to court was that they couldn't actually prove the actual point was false, just that the data he used to prove his point was false. And certainly Bush did not want to have to bring this matter in front of a judge, as it would have been politically harmful to him.

In this case, the entire premise is false, as proved by the part of the edited video that was intentionally left out..

As far as Alan Grayson goes, I'm not really sure what you are referring to...

Any number of lies and slanders that Grayson has uttered - "Die Quickly" comes to mind.[/QUOTE]

Not really familiar enough with the guy's record to give an informed opinion on the subject.

 

[Zona]

Slander:

Slander Law & Legal Definition

BreitBart is a POS. But legally, he did not slander her. Simply posting/airing what she actually did say without providing necessary context does not constitute slander.

Winning a slander/defamation lawsuit is high hurdle to overcome. Due to the protections offered by the 1st amendment.

But he also posted editorial comments at the beginning of the tape he "released" stating that she was engaging in racist actions in her USDA job currently...and that was not true.

he did not specifically say that

next

Fox did. Not next, lets deal with this lie.

 

[MaggieMae]

Do you have a link to him saying Sherrod is "an obvious racist" or something of that nature? IOW, directed AT her and not the NAACP...

Was it to cause "harm to the poor woman" or to the NAACP?

It's an important distinction...

From the blog, the link is in a few of my above posts.

also from the blog:

In the first video, Sherrod describes how she racially discriminates against a white farmer. She describes how she is torn over how much she will choose to help him. And, she admits that she doesn’t do everything she can for him, because he is white. Eventually, her basic humanity informs that this white man is poor and needs help. But she decides that he should get help from “one of his own kind”. She refers him to a white lawyer.

Uh, so? That's even more damaging evidence that Brietbart was attempting to establish that she is racist. (Of course carefully omitted was the part where the white lawyer took the farmer's money and never did squat.)

 

[boedicca]

But he also posted editorial comments at the beginning of the tape he "released" stating that she was engaging in racist actions in her USDA job currently...and that was not true.

Then please quote and link to those comments.

Posted twice in this thread.

Then it should be quite easy for you to post them in context with the source link to support your comment. I'm not inclined to hunt them down to do your homework for you.

So, in their absence, you have offered no proof, just hyperbole.

 

[MaggieMae]

Oh boy, now Maybe Palin can go after all the bloggers and even the Lamestream media for the damage they have caused her.

I say we go GET EM.

Palin is a public figure.


She'll never sue cause she knows she'd lose.

Sherrod is a public figure now also whether she wanted to be our not. She was a government employee at the time and was giving a public speech. What happened to her was wrong but she has been offered more than aqueduct compensation for her troubles. Breitbart reputation is forever tarnished and he will be hard pressed to ever have any credibility. She can throw salt in the wound he created but I doubt she will get much other than further tarnishing an already crappy reputation.

SHE WAS NOT A GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE AT THE TIME!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Do you idiots actually ENJOY being dumbed down?