• 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!

Outsted USDA employee Sherrod plans to sue blogger

Redress said:
I assume nothing, which you would know if you read the thread. I am simply pointing out the difference between the two allegations.
Click to expand...

My "you" is typically just a generalization...so my response was really more of a "assuming it can be proved that Breitbart did such a thing etc etc ..." and not really a "you, Redress think this."

Sorry for any confusion.
 
Last edited:
Redress said:
I assume nothing, which you would know if you read the thread. I am simply pointing out the difference between the two allegations.
Click to expand...

Double post.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Negligence.
She still has a case.
Click to expand...

Only in the imagionation of people that want to believe that. REality says otherwise. Here's my bet, she WON'T sue,a nd if she tries BB will demand it go to trial and she'll drop the suit.
 
Redress said:
I think a big part of the case will revolve around whether he had the whole tape(we have only his claim he did not, and he has proven to be less than reliable), whether he had reason to suspect it was edited to create a false impression, and whether he put a reasonable effort into finding out if the video was accurate.
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter if he had the whole tape or not. What he put up on the internet is what he put up on the internet.

Let me make another observation. Breitbart's report on this was changed soon after the original report came out, but I bet dollars to donuts that either Sherrod or someone she knows has screen shots of the original.
 
danarhea said:
Actually, with all due respect, you missed my point. There is a difference between having an opinion and manipulating evidence. Today I made the claim that most voters in Arizona are racist. By your logic, Arizonans have the right to sue my. But they can't. This was my OPINION. Same with Sherrod. Saying that Breitbart was racist was her opinion. On the other hand, Breitbart used manipulated video to give an appearance that Sherrod WAS racist. And that is the difference. This is defamation. Just having expressing an opinion isn't.
Click to expand...

Has there been any clear evidence that Breitbart did in fact manipulate the video as alleged?

NOTE: You and I have a huge disagreement here, but you know what? I like you, and it's because you don't flame, call names, or engage in games. You debate honestly, and because of that, I have a lot of respect for you. I do honestly believe you are wrong, though.
Click to expand...

I appreciate your comments here, and I have mutual respect for you, however I am never wrong. :wink: (I might be though, I have not really followed this case at all and just tried to jump in because it was interesting)
 
Last edited:
MrVicchio said:
How was it "Distorted" it was as full unedited CLIP of a speech she made. Do realize how liable say... Mediamatters would be if your logic were applicable to this?
Click to expand...

Her speech was over 40 minutes. On the link you provide, there is 3 minutes. That is hardly unedited.
 
NolaMan said:
Has there been any clear evidence that Breitbart did in fact manipulate the video as alleged?



I appreciate your comments here, and I have mutual respect for you, however I am never wrong. :wink: (I might be though, I have not really followed this case at all and just tried to jump in because it was interesting)
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter who manipulated the video. Breitbart is the one who put it on the internet, and therefore is the one who bears primary responsibility for her defamation.
 
danarhea said:
Doesn't matter who manipulated the video. Breitbart is the one who put it on the internet, and therefore is the one who bears primary responsibility for her defamation.
Click to expand...

I thought it had to proved though that he willingly knew there was more video out there that contradicted what the video he posted basically said?
 
NolaMan said:
I thought it had to proved though that he willingly knew there was more video out there that contradicted what the video he posted basically said?
Click to expand...

That would only increase damages. Remember when Dan Rather smeared Bush on his service? He didn't know that papers were forged, but still put them into evidence before the American people. He paid for it with his job. Whether he intended to or not, he defamed President Bush.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Be careful, it might end up like "Avatar." :lol:
Click to expand...

It might we'll have to wait and see. But unlike most around here, I'm not afraid to make a call, and I'm not afraid to admit when I'm wrong.
 
danarhea said:
That would only increase damages. Remember when Dan Rather smeared Bush on his service? He didn't know that papers were forged, but still put them into evidence before the American people. He paid for it with his job. Whether he intended to or not, he defamed President Bush.
Click to expand...
:spin::spin::spin:

Rather lost his job NOT for the report, but because it was shady reporting and he refused to back down after it was proven he'd been rolled leading to doubt about his ability to tell fact from fiction. Nice try dan, but :failpail:
 
MrVicchio said:
It might we'll have to wait and see. But unlike most around here, I'm not afraid to make a call, and I'm not afraid to admit when I'm wrong.
Click to expand...

Honestly Vich, I don't know but at the same time, there is enough evidence to at least know that there could be a civil trial.
Dismissing it so quickly like you did is a bit reckless.
 
danarhea said:
That would only increase damages. Remember when Dan Rather smeared Bush on his service? He didn't know that papers were forged, but still put them into evidence before the American people. He paid for it with his job. Whether he intended to or not, he defamed President Bush.
Click to expand...

True, but doesn't Breitbart own the company he works with? I don't see him losing his job over it all. Ultimately, what is the point of a lawsuit if you don't think you can collect damages?

I don't really think those who support Breitbart will stop over this, and those who hate him already hate him anyway. She has to think she can collect damages, but I think it will be an uphill battle for her to collect damages.
 
MrVicchio said:
:spin::spin::spin:

Rather lost his job NOT for the report, but because it was shady reporting and he refused to back down after it was proven he'd been rolled leading to doubt about his ability to tell fact from fiction. Nice try dan, but :failpail:
Click to expand...
I'm still waiting Vicch for you to post those vicious lies that the media said about Palin and/or a clip of a speech she gave that was taken out of context to slur her.....
 
Redress said:
Oh look, an attempt to change the subject....
Click to expand...

It's right on topic as it speaks to whether or not it was believable to BB whether the tape was edited or not.

I don't think she has a case against BB...she could possibly go after his source.
 
MrVicchio said:
No, to add "Context" to the issue.

SHE HAS NO CASE. And she and her hubby aren't the post-racial saints you people want to believe they are.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter what she is. What matters is that the context of her speech was destroyed to make it look as if she said something she was not saying and it led to her dismissal from her job. She has the right to sue and if she can put together a good case, perhaps she can win. Time will tell.
 
MrVicchio said:
It might we'll have to wait and see. But unlike most around here, I'm not afraid to make a call, and I'm not afraid to admit when I'm wrong.
Click to expand...

I'm still waiting for you to post those "vicious lies" about Palin and/or a link to a video in which a portion of Palin's speech was taken out of context to slur her....
 
Ikari said:
It doesn't matter what she is. What matters is that the context of her speech was destroyed to make it look as if she said something she was not saying and it led to her dismissal from her job. She has the right to sue and if she can put together a good case, perhaps she can win. Time will tell.
Click to expand...


The problem for her is going to reside in 1) the White House's well-publicized war with the "right-wing media," so the WH's reliance on it would be highly dubious, and 2) the NAACP having been in possession of the unedited tape the whole time.

Don't know what her claim is going to be, but as for being fired being the damage -- the train of liability on that looks to be pretty easily derailed.
 
disneydude said:
I'm still waiting Vicch for you to post those vicious lies that the media said about Palin and/or a clip of a speech she gave that was taken out of context to slur her.....
Click to expand...

You accept all the claims about Palin as truth, so why would I bother wasting anyone's time by posting:

Members of the lefty blogosphere haven't stopped perpetuating the rumor Sarah Palin "faked" her last pregnancy and are now humiliating her daughter Bristol on the blatantly incorrect suspicion she is the real mother of baby Trig.

"Sarah Palin is NOT the Mother" is the title of this DailyKos blog that accuses Bristol, a completely fit-looking adolescent teen, of having a "baby bump" in a photo they allege was taken March 9th of this year.

"Sarah, I'm calling you a liar" wrote blogger ArcXIX. "And not even a good one. Trig Paxson Van Palin is not your son. He is your grandson. The sooner you come forward with this revelation to the public, the better. " Photos of Bristol with detailed commentary about her abdomen are contained in the post.

Not only is the DailyKos disgustingly inspecting Bristol's midriff with all the fervor of LA paparazzi examining J-Lo's or Jennifer Aniston's washboard stomachs for evidence of a "bump," the DailyKos is wrong on when the photo was taken. It was taken, and published, by the Anchorage Daily News in 2006. Baby Trig, a child with Down's Syndrome, was born on April 18, 2008. That's a long time for a teen girl to be carrying a "bump" which looks nothing more than the curve of a tight sweater.

Shortly after Palin was announced as McCain's VP, bloggers at the Kos started ginning up the rumor Palin faked her pregnancy, allegedly to cover for an illegitimate grandchild, because she looked so fit and trim in photos taken a few months before giving birth.
Click to expand...
Townhall.com Blog : Amanda Carpenter : Lefty Bloggers Go After Palin's Daughter


Watch everyone, DD will either IGNORE this post, or he'll run away and never post in this thead again, cause he just got PWNED.
 
disneydude said:
– Ousted Agriculture Department employee Shirley Sherrod said Thursday she will sue a conservative blogger who posted a video edited in a way that made her appear racist.


Ousted USDA employee Sherrod plans to sue blogger - Yahoo! News


Good for her. These right-wing nutjobs have gotten away with their propoganda for too long. Its time that irresponsible journalism on either side of the aisle does not go unchecked. Breitbart has lost all crediility...its time that he lose a little of his (not) hard earned cash.
Click to expand...

This will open the door for many-a-Libbo to get his/her ass sued off.

At the end of the day, I believe Sherrod will be exposed as the oppurtunist whore that she really is.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Says you, I beg to differ.

The information posted was only partial and the person who put it up, did not do their due diligence before reporting it.
Click to expand...

I agree. Sooner or later someone has to be accountable for these misrepresentations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom