Reply With Quote
Hopefully one of those targets have to pay up tbh
Nick Sandmann’s Lawyers Preparing Libel Suit Against Media Figures at CNN, MSNBC, NPR and Others
Covington Catholic student Nick Sandmann‘s lawyers are preparing for a massive libel suit against major media personalities and organizations
He also sent preservation letters to over 50 high profile members of the media, Hollywood, news outlets, and even religious authorities,
The list of recipients is broad.
From the news world, it includes
CNN,
The Washington Post,
The New York Times,
CBS,
NBC,
MSNBC,
HBO
NPR and TMZ.
It includes such prominent reporters as
Anna Cabrera,
Aaron Burnett,
S.E. Cupp,
Maggie Haberman,
David Brooks,
Andrea Mitc ,
Savannah Guthrie,
Joy Reid,
Chuck Todd, and many more.
From the world of film and Hollywood,
Bill Marr,
Kathy Griffin,
Alyssa Milano and
Jim Carrey.
It also includes the dioceses of Covington, Lexington, Louisville and Baltimore.
https://www.mediaite.com/uncategoriz...pr-and-others/
Who is paying for these lawyers?
Hopefully one of those targets have to pay up tbh
Free speech, but not if you diss Trump's supporters.
snowflakes
Winetroll posting and complaining about libel.
Who got libelled and by whom?
Proving that these defendants lied maliciously is gonna be a heavy burden of proof
Like I said, hurt feelings.
But the legal costs are real enough, and maybe that's the whole point.
Lol freedom-minded superpatriots frivolously using the legal system to cow critics.
The legal costs are gonna be high on both sides...with no guarantee that they will see any back...a judge could rule for the defendant and make the kids pay their legal costs...
Look at homeboy run
Kids gonna get some college money out of this one.
FWIWThe growth in the rich and upper middle class and the declining proportion of the population in the middle and lower classes indicate widespread economic growth between 1979 and 2014, but that growth was notdistributed equally. On average, incomes grew 53 percent over the period. If the growth had been equally distributed (figure 3), then the shift upward would have been much greater.At the extremes, the proportion of the poor and near-poor population wouldhave dropped to 12.8 percent, and the proportion that is rich would have barely increased (to only 0.5 percent of the population) because the growth among the near-rich with even growth would have been much less than what happened with uneven growth. Witheven growth,the size of the middle class would have declined slightly (1.7 percentage points), but the growth in the upper middle class would have added another 6 percentage points and reached over a third (35.2 percent) of the nondependent adult population.
Per par, the situation was more complex than either side portrayed it, with the left too quick to jump in for one, and the right too quick to jump in for the other.
I don't think after reading accounts for the whole thing that either the kids or Mr. Phillips deserve what is happening to them.
"On average, incomes grew 53 percent over the period"
... example of why "average" is useless measure.
"repeated attacks on Jews in decidedly not “right-wing” locales"
meaning the Jew-beaters live right among Jews in Jewish locales? evidence?
Maybe Jew-beaters from "Jew-beater locales" travel to Jewish locales to go beat up Jews?
Perhaps you can tell me what kind of "retribution" should be visited on late night comedians who hurt the Dear Leaders fee fees?
Do tell.
How about you? What kind of retribution would you support?
Beheading? Prison? Torture?
I know, we could jail journalists like Egypt does under "libel laws".
https://www.hrw.org/news/2006/07/10/...nder-press-law
All that mainstream media would really be taught a lesson if they were in jail.
That's what you want, right?
Justice Clarence Thomas calls for reconsideration of landmark libel case
Looks like the "conservative" judiciary are perfectly happy activist-ing libel definitions to make the Dear Leader happy.Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas on Tuesday called for reconsideration of a landmark First Amendment precedent, criticizing the 1964 decision that the Cons ution creates a higher barrier for public figures to claim libel.
Thomas wrote alongside a court decision not to take up the case of a woman who accused Bill Cosby of sexual misconduct in 2014. He suggested that the seminal case New York Times v. Sullivan, holding that public figures have a higher burden to prove libel, was wrongly decided.
"New York Times and the Court's decisions extending it were policy-driven decisions masquerading as cons utional law," Thomas wrote.
I don't know what your ing problem is RG, but you consistently attack me and claim I support positions that aren't even close to being true.
I'm just curious how far this guy has to go before people like you actually quit making excuses, and speak up.
The plank in thine own eye and all that.
I have made it explicitly clear that I didn't vote for Trump, think he is a bombastic blowhard, and an embarrassment to real conservatives.
So off
FWIW:
You are an enabler. "I didn't vote for him".
Either you can call him out on his , or keep silent.
You choose the latter, simply mindlessly parroting Fox News talking point of the day. I lost respect for you a while back. I'm sure that is mutual. (shrugs)
So when are you going to start voting for Democrats?
That is the only feedback for Republicans that matters, and will be the only thing that would change things.
Until then, you simply provide another useful idiot vote for the people shielding him and carrying his water.
Part and parcel of a broken system. Democracy works through negative feedback on ty policy. Dems provide that feedback, and you dutifully shield.
Sad.
You can't sue the comments section and social media reposts: the Washington Post isn't responsible for what anyone else says about its articles.
He's writing a book?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
