• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Lobbyist linked by Times to McCain sues paper

TheNextEra said:
Yes, this lawsuit is frivilous. The fact you support it, shows your hyper-partisnship.

The only one failing is you.:rofl This woman does not deserve millions.

But hey, it's the NYT and you hate them, so I guess that makes it alright.

Keep on failing Rev :2wave:
Click to expand...



Here is a question for you to cut and run from.


Why is it frivolous?
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Why is it frivolous?
Click to expand...

27 million for somebody talking about conflicts of interests you might have had? Are people in this country even remotely serious anymore? :roll:
 
Last edited:
Hatuey said:
27 million for somebody talking about conflicts of interests you might have had? :roll:
Click to expand...




Apparently comprehension is not strong with you today. This is not a conflict of interest deal, its a defamation lawsuit.


:2wave:
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Apparently comprehension is not strong with you today. This is not a conflict of interest deal, its a defamation lawsuit.


:2wave:
Click to expand...

The defamation lawsuit is based on a possible conflict of interest story printed by the New York Times. It seems like it's you who doesn't get it. 27 million is a sign of how frivolous this is.
 
Hatuey said:
The defamation lawsuit is based on a possible conflict of interest story printed by the New York Times. It seems like it's you who doesn't get it. 27 million is a sign of how frivolous this is.
Click to expand...





:lol: and since the NYtimes is printed of paper, this is really about trees. :roll:



I.e. it is a defamation suit filed because of the printing of a something defaming a person that is not true.
 
Media outlets, across the board, use every trick in the book, smoke and mirrors, to manipulate issues and elections. So do the politicians.

I think we all should be concerned that the media, and not just the NYT, is pushin' 24/7 to control our minds. FOX, MSNBC, NYT, WSJ, CNN. They are all not much more, if any, than the National Enquirer these days.

Hell, sue 'em all. I don't care.
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Here is a question for you to cut and run from.


Why is it frivolous?
Click to expand...

Noway in hell is the damage done to this woman worthy of millions of dollars to be awarded to her for.

That is why it is frivolous.
 
A trip to the day spa and a 50.00 Walmart gift card.
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
So how much is it worth? :roll:
Click to expand...

Maybe 60 bucks.

Did she take financial damage because of it? Lose business or something like that? If that happened because of the article; she may have recourse. But if not then you're not left with a lot of options. You can try to sue for an apology and retraction, but I'm not 100% sure you're entitled to money. Maybe court/lawyer fees.
 
Ikari said:
Maybe 60 bucks.

Did she take financial damage because of it? Lose business or something like that? If that happened because of the article; she may have recourse. But if not then you're not left with a lot of options. You can try to sue for an apology and retraction, but I'm not 100% sure you're entitled to money. Maybe court/lawyer fees.
Click to expand...

If the information in the article is true, she should get NOTHING, even if the article negatively impacted her job. She's the one that attended a fundraiser with McCain and then flew him on a corporate jet. We're supposed to feel sorry for her?
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Here is a question for you to cut and run from.


Why is it frivolous?
Click to expand...
What is wrong with you? Don't you know that any woman that meets a Presidental candidate should be accused of having an affair with him/her?
 
SWM said:
Holy crap, $27 mil? What does a guy have to do around here to get a major newspaper to accuse him of having an affair with John McCain? I want in on that action.
Click to expand...

****! I'd actually blow McCain for that kind of money!
 
Here's the link to the complaint she filed. Frankly, the pages I read sound bogus. IMHO

NY Times Sued Over McCain Affair Story - December 30, 2008

If you click on page 5, the attorney calls the plaintiff, "Mr. Iseman." Frankly, that is lazy proofreading. Someone should have caught that error.
 
Last edited:
Seriously. 27 million? Was she even making 27 million?
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
So how much is it worth? :roll:
Click to expand...

Not 27 million, that's for sure.

Seriously Rev, what damage has been done to her character to warrant 27 million dollars in damages?
 
Last edited:
TheNextEra said:
Not 27 million, that's for sure.

Seriously Rev, what damage has been done to her character to warrant 27 million dollars in damages?
Click to expand...





Why is THIS case the one you have a problem with?

Besides, isn't it the democrats who keep these lawyers fat and happy with the laws on compensation.... what john edwards, who? :lol:
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Why is THIS case the one you have a problem with?

Besides, isn't it the democrats who keep these lawyers fat and happy with the laws on compensation.... what john edwards, who? :lol:
Click to expand...

As usual, you failed to answer my question, what damage has been done to this person to warrant 27 million dollars. You are the one that supports the lawsuit, not me.
 
TheNextEra said:
As usual, you failed to answer my question, what damage has been done to this person to warrant 27 million dollars. You are the one that supports the lawsuit, not me.
Click to expand...
It's not up to you to decide what damages are warranted. It's up to the judge and jury that hear the case. :roll:
 
TheNextEra said:
As usual, you failed to answer my question, what damage has been done to this person to warrant 27 million dollars. You are the one that supports the lawsuit, not me.
Click to expand...

He has no answer to your question. Your question is quite irrelevant.

Why do you believe that in order to be supportive of Iseman's claim that a poster must persuade you that damages were suffered?

:roll:

Lets hope that the NYT goes to court on this. I'd love to see whether the Times would disclose their sources.
 
TheNextEra said:
Noway in hell is the damage done to this woman worthy of millions of dollars to be awarded to her for.

That is why it is frivolous.
Click to expand...

So you concede damages.

What do you think the damages are worth? Of course, if not $27 million?
 
aps said:
If the information in the article is true, she should get NOTHING, even if the article negatively impacted her job. She's the one that attended a fundraiser with McCain and then flew him on a corporate jet. We're supposed to feel sorry for her?
Click to expand...

Why do you hate the law?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom