This is such very good news. I don’t support anything which has a chilling effect on journalism, but the despicable and deplorable Breitbart is simply an ideological barnburner. Not an ounce of legitimate journalism in the man!

AT FOX, HONESTY
IS NOT OUR POLICY.

Two words for ya to look up, Shirl: “Damages” and “Discovery”.

This will be a hoot.

“THEY CAME FIRST for the Communists,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist.

THEN THEY CAME for the trade unionists,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist.

THEN THEY CAME for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew.

THEN THEY CAME for me
and by that time no one was left to speak up.”

*Pastor Martin Niemoller

It’s her right to do that. She’s clearly a bigot though…and well…that’s her right as an individual.

One more word, Shirl: “Countersuit”

You go, Girl!

“I don’t support anything which has a chilling effect on journalism,”

This would really put a chill on Olbermann, he is always quoting people out of context based on garbage he got from Media Matters.

Let the fun begin!

The question is, did she pick a lawyer that is “her kind”.

Poor ignorant Sherrod, you have a snowballs chance in hell of winning that lawsuit. Take it from someone that has been sued 4 times and has NEVER lost. I have sued 3 times and have never lost. I have been dealing with left-wing nuts for 50 years.

HA, HA , yold you so, can’t wait to see the discovery of how the geezer channel fox was involved, maybe rupert can lose his pants too.
Britefart=EPIC FAIL!

The truth will come out as to how she is truly a bigot as well as some personal facts about her and her husband she might not want to come out. Hopefully she is paying her own legal bills.

Iris said:
can’t wait to see the discovery of how the geezer channel fox was involved, maybe rupert can lose his pants too.
Britefart=EPIC FAIL!

Iris has “that thrill” running up her leg again!

I would have thought all you radical rightists would have enjoyed this. After having heard for a year how President Obama and Rahm Emanuel were going to be torn apart on the witness stand during the Blago trial, only to be so disappointed, I’d think you’d won’t a nice juicy trial.

AT FOX, HONESTY
IS NOT OUR POLICY.

gordonbloyershow said:
Poor ignorant Sherrod, you have a snowballs chance in hell of winning that lawsuit. Take it from someone that has been sued 4 times and has NEVER lost. I have sued 3 times and have never lost. I have been dealing with left-wing nuts for 50 years.

Yes, Marceaux, I mean Blower, but you’re just a harmless loony, not a despicable and deplorable liar like Breitbart.

AT FOX, HONESTY
IS NOT OUR POLICY.

Iris said:
HA, HA , yold you so, can’t wait to see the discovery of how the geezer channel fox was involved, maybe rupert can lose his pants too.Britefart=EPIC FAIL!

We’ll know how much FOX News Knew when Murdoch forces Breitbart to settle. Remember Makris v. O’ Reilly. Settle and Seal!

AT FOX, HONESTY
IS NOT OUR POLICY.

Iris said:
HA, HA , yold you so, can’t wait to see the discovery of how the geezer channel fox was involved, maybe rupert can lose his pants too.
Britefart=EPIC FAIL!

Uh, they read it on Drudge?

The Real Royal King said:
I would have thought all you radical rightists would have enjoyed this.

Reading is fundamental, dingbat. You should try it.

Hey right wing geezers and hatemongers fox already admitted there was a “breakdown” on foxnews .com so you could do a BRITEFART AND RUPERT LEGAL DEFENSE FUND HA, HA,!

gordonbloyershow said:
Poor ignorant Sherrod, you have a snowballs chance in hell of winning that lawsuit. Take it from someone that has been sued 4 times and has NEVER lost. I have sued 3 times and have never lost. I have been dealing with left-wing nuts for 50 years.

You’ve lost in life Gordon…..so much worse than 7 court cases.

So much for this from the esteemed Cornel West on Sunday’s ‘Face The Nation’….

“And this is what is so magnificent about Shirley Sherrod. She is
democratic nobility and black royalty. She’s an American hero. She’s a Christian soldier for
justice. Why? Because in the face of terror, in the face of trauma, in the face of being
stigmatized what does she do? Like Martin King, like Fannie Lou Hamer, I will love my way
through this darkness by promoting justice not revenge.”

Nobility? Royalty? Hero? Really?

http://pajamasmedia.com/zombie/2010/07/27/pigford-v-glickman-86000-claims-from-39697-total-farmers/?singlepage=true

Hmmmm. She already sued the USDA and got $300K for her and her hubbie plus $50K each for the rest of the plaintiffs plus a job at the same awful agency she sued. Hmmmmm.

But the best part is the number of plaintiffs….what started at 400 and was later estimated to be ‘no more than 2000′ grew quickly to 16,000 and now stands at 70,000. So… that’s (at least) double the number of black farmers that even EXIST NATIONWIDE who were ALL discriminated against by the USDA. WOW!

$50k X 70,000…… you do the math. ‘Reparations’ anyone? Just say you ‘intended to farm’ and get your cash money! Of course you must meet the stringent requirements which reall boil down to one thing…..

Does anyone here know how to ‘transcend’ race? There is only one way. You ‘transcend’ it….THAT’S how you do it. Period.

Reparations and Equality are mutually exclusive. Get it?

The Real Royal King said:
We’ll know how much FOX News Knew when Murdoch forces Breitbart to settle. Remember Makris v. O’ Reilly. Settle and Seal! AT FOX, HONESTYIS NOT OUR POLICY.

Yeah…’Settle and Seal”. That’s what Rangel is fixin’ to do. That’s what Blago just did. A mutual agreement among democrats to NOT assassinate each other and… in the process… subvert justice.

HOORAY!!! WHAT A GREAT DAY FOR LIBERALISM!!

BUFFET OF AWESOME

Iris said:
Hey right wing geezers and hatemongers fox already admitted there was a “breakdown” on foxnews .com so you could do a BRITEFART AND RUPERT LEGAL DEFENSE FUND HA, HA,!

Do you even know how utterly ignorant of things like the law you are, Viris?

Any competent lawyer will rip her to shreds.

Lawyer: “So Ms. Sherrod, you admit you were a racist in your decisions up to that time but repented your racist ways when you decided that the problem wasn’t race but one of class warfare. How is that an improvement?”

Pablo, I have been trying to think of a good name for Iris forever, and you nailed it!! I shall steal it in the future, with your permission, of course!

If she thought her life and actions and comments were scrutinized and publicized before, just wait until she files suit. The defense will dig through every dark little corner in her life and I bet it won’t be pretty. They will sift through every case she handled for USDA….

Bring it on Shirley and pass the popcorn, the fun is just starting.

Honey, all they have to do is play that part of your speech where you play the race card and the video of your husband talking about the need “to stop the white man and Uncle Toms” and you are toast and a rather prosaic footnote in BHO’s history of blunders.

Shirley said proudly…”I showed that white man who the ‘superior’ one really was!”

And the crowd cheered……

King, I do believe you’re right that rupert will settle and may force britefart to setle too. since so far we’ve got foxnews.com with a breakdown” and Billo apologizing publicly for defaming her so the fragrance of settlement is in the air

MichelleF said:
Pablo, I have been trying to think of a good name for Iris forever, and you nailed it!! I shall steal it in the future, with your permission, of course!

But, of course!

SUE SHIRLEY SUE!! (Tea Hee)

Iris said:
King, I do believe you’re right that rupert will settle and may force britefart to setle too.

Settle what?

FearMonger said:
’Settle and Seal”. That’s what Rangel is fixin’ to do.

That’s shameful, to be sure. I gather the Republicans are going to go along with it. They all protect their own in the end.

FearMonger said:
That’s what Blago just did

Actually, no, he had a full blown trial.

AT FOX, HONESTY
IS NOT OUR POLICY.

Shirley:
You have no case!!

No case against Andrew Breitbart, especially after the racist comments you made AFTERWARD.
No case against DOA (Dept. Agr) who apologized and enabled you to get a BETTER job.
No case against the President, although I’d love to see you sue the White House.
No case against any media, especially Fox, who catapulted you into folk hero status.

If you have half a brain, you’ll figure out how to maximize your advantage from your fortunate situation.
But it’s not in court.

Arkansas Steve said:
You have no case!!

And no damages, even if she did have a case.

Shirley sue the “Pants” off their scheming lying racist loser (remember 2008) a$$e$. Where’s Mamma Grizzley when they need her??

The Real Royal King said:
We’ll know how much FOX News Knew when Murdoch forces Breitbart to settle. AT FOX, HONESTYIS NOT OUR POLICY.

Iris said:
King, I do believe you’re right that rupert will settle and may force britefart to setle too.

To the Iris-King!
Collectively you display such little knowledge how the US legal system works.

Are you recent High School graduates who could not find a summer job and were hired by the DNC to write stuff like this? I sure hope so … Summer is about over!

I would encourage this dumb bint to sue Breitbart, since a court case would certainly exonerate him of any wrongdoing or racism, and would also illustrate what a bunch of racist pigs they all are, from little ol’ Shirley to the naacp to Obama.

This whole deal sounds suspiciously like the President has sent his SHAKEDOWN Czar and his staff down to consult with Shirley!

If they can just get everybody to settle out of court…that is still some big bucks $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$!

lanquihue said:
I would encourage this dumb bint to sue Breitbart, since a court case would certainly exonerate him of any wrongdoing or racism, and would also illustrate what a bunch of racist pigs they all are, from little ol’ Shirley to the naacp to Obama.

I don’t think the cause of action will be racism. Geez! I rather imagine we’re heading for defamation.

AT FOX NEWS, HONESTY
IS NOT OUR POLICY.

Shirley litigious ? Who would have guessed that ? Sue King Obama , who fired you .

Hey Yweston, do you have anymore rigged Gallup polls you want to post, showing the dem’s are up in a generic ballot?

Royal Race-Baiter, the def. of defamation is:

Generally speaking, defamation is the issuance of a false statement about another person, which causes that person to suffer harm.

Since her OWN words were used, I fail to see how she has a case there. Nice try though!

Ianquihue said

“I would encourage this dumb bint to sue Breitbart, since a court case would certainly exonerate him of any wrongdoing or racism, and would also illustrate what a bunch of racist pigs they all are, from little ol’ Shirley to the naacp to Obama.”
________________________________________________________________________________________

It’s hilarious to see how Fox News “hypnotized” the ignorant Right to deflect that racism charge. It’s going to be even funnier when the “white farmer” gets on the stand and tells ALL AMERICANS about how Shirley helped save his farm.

Faux is trying to crucify Shirley but they can Go to H—!! SUE SHIRLEY SUE. I love it. And. she will get PAID. \

Breitbart is putting on a brave front, but he’s sweating in his “stinkin’ dirty drawers

Why Commencing A Defamation Action Is Not Aways A Good Idea
While people who are targeted by lies may well be angry enough to file a lawsuit, there are some very good reasons why actions for defamation may not be a good idea.

The publicity that results from a defamation lawsuit can create a greater audience for the false statements than they previously enjoyed. For example, if a newspaper or news show picks up the story of the lawsuit, false accusations that were previously known to only a small number of people may suddenly become known to the entire community, nation, or even to the world. As the media is much more apt to cover a lawsuit than to cover its ultimate resolution, the net effect may be that large numbers of people hear the false allegations, but never learn how the litigation was resolved.

Another big issue is that defamation cases tend to be difficult to win, and damage awards tend to be small. As a result, it is unusual for attorneys to be willing to take defamation cases on a contingent fee basis, and the fees expended in litigating even a successful defamation action can exceed the total recovery.

Another significant concern is that, even where the statements made by the defendant are entirely false, it may not be possible for a plaintiff to prove all of the elements of defamation. Most people will respond to news that a plaintiff lost a defamation lawsuit by concluding that the allegations were true.

In other words, the plaintiff in a defamation action may be required to expend a considerable amount of money to bring the action, may experience significant negative publicity which repeats the false accusations, and if unsuccessful in the litigation may cement into the public consciousness the belief that the defamatory accusations were true. While many plaintiffs will be able to successfully prosecute defamation actions, the possible downside should be considered when deciding whether or not such litigation should be attempted.

http://www.expertlaw.com/library/personal_injury/defamation.html#3

FOX better pay Breit ‘farts’ legal fees if they want to continue getting those EDITED tapes.

All one has to do is check her history. This is not her first time suing someone, it part of her character. So, this is really not news. I’m sure Breibart is shaking in his shoes right now.

Hey MichelleF. Get a job!! Stop living off the GOOBMENT “teat”.

Hey MICHELLEF “THE WELFARE QUEEN”

BTW here’s some more news for you to include with the Gallup Poll. Nate Silver of fivethirtyeight who gave the most accurate election news said
The Rethugs have almost NO CHANCE of taking back the House in 2010. Following up on Anne Coulters comments that close isn’t good enough.

Hey Y, I have a job. Maybe you should get back to yours.

yweston said:
FOX better pay Breit ‘farts’ legal fees if they want to continue getting those EDITED tapes.

The tape was not edited Einstein.

yweston said:
Hey MichelleF. Get a job!! Stop living off the GOOBMENT “teat”.

Some wanting to get on that” teat “would have to knock you out of the way first !

yweston
Member Since March 2009
Comments (7825) | Friends (189)

Hey Y, do you know the difference between the words “edited” and “excerpted”?

Try dictionary.com, they might be able to help you with that.

yweston said:
Hey MICHELLEF “THE WELFARE QUEEN” BTW here’s some more news for you to include with the Gallup Poll. Nate Silver of fivethirtyeight who gave the most accurate election news saidThe Rethugs have almost NO CHANCE of taking back the House in 2010. Following up on Anne Coulters comments that close isn’t good enough.

Why do you say that? Is Michelle black? Are you being raaaaacist??

Shirley “loves her 15 minutes”!

I told you last week you are not going to hear the end of this stupid woman! She is going to keep coming and coming and coming, the Obama Administration is going to keep ducking and ducking and ducking!
Praying she will just vanish!

Shirley is hoping for some sort of settlement!

But she has no grounds. SUE THE AG DEPART!!

WORDS MATTER, Shirl! GET YOUR FAT ASS LOST!!!!

yweston said:
Nate Silver of fivethirtyeight who gave the most accurate election news said
The Rethugs have almost NO CHANCE of taking back the House in 2010.

I wish I could be so delusional. It must be fun. Here’s the fact of the matter.

The following list ranks the 23 organizations by the accuracy of their final, national preelection
polls (as reported on pollster.com).
1. Rasmussen (11/1-3)**
1. Pew (10/29-11/1)**
2. YouGov/Polimetrix (10/18-11/1)
3. Harris Interactive (10/20-27)
4. GWU (Lake/Tarrance) (11/2-3)*
5. Diageo/Hotline (10/31-11/2)*
5. ARG (10/25-27)*
6. CNN (10/30-11/1)
6. Ipsos/McClatchy (10/30-11/1)
7. DailyKos.com (D)/Research 2000 (11/1-3)
8. AP/Yahoo/KN (10/17-27)
9. Democracy Corps (D) (10/30-11/2)
10. FOX (11/1-2)
11. Economist/YouGov (10/25-27)
12. IBD/TIPP (11/1-3)
13. NBC/WSJ (11/1-2)
14. ABC/Post (10/30-11/2)
15. Marist College (11/3)
16. CBS (10/31-11/2)
17. Gallup (10/31-11/2)
18. Reuters/ C-SPAN/ Zogby (10/31-11/3)
19. CBS/Times (10/25-29)
20. Newsweek (10/22-23)

The Real Royal King said:
That’s shameful, to be sure. I gather the Republicans are going to go along with it. They all protect their own in the end. Actually, no, he had a full blown trial. AT FOX, HONESTYIS NOT OUR POLICY.

Wow. It was a short post … I wonder why you didn’t just quote the whole thing. Could it be because I had already handled your predictable response? Good grief, I thought we learned that ‘context matters’. Guess not.

You took my quotes out of context Mr. King to make it appear that I said something that I didn’t say. I don’t think I could have been any clearer when I followed my “That’s what Blago just did.” comment with this…

” A mutual agreement among democrats to NOT assassinate each other and… in the process… subvert justice.”

Anyone can scroll up and read what I wrote and see exactly what I meant so….why your comment would be “Actually, no, he had a full blown trial” Is beyond me.

Really? Love to state the obvious, huh? That’s your idea of ‘political discourse’ that you so love to preach about? Copy most of my post (but chop it up) instead of just quoting it and then snark away with “Actually, no, blah blah blah.”

Wow. The St. Shirly Saga didn’t teach you anything.

Michelle says she has a job, She thinks sitting on her ass in front of a computer being a hatemonger 24/7 colecting government checks is a job. The weird thing is its so obvious she doesn’t have a job, she is on this doorstep every waking hour and she thinks people don’t notice she never leaves here. HA,HA,HA

Iris said:
Michelle says she has a job, She thinks sitting on her ass in front of a computer being a hatemonger 24/7 colecting government checks is a job. The weird thing is its so obvious she doesn’t have a job, she is on this doorstep every waking hour and she thinks people don’t notice she never leaves here. HA,HA,HA

Are you stalking her? I s that how you seem to know so much about her?

I don’t really see what grounds she stands on, to sue Breitbart.

If she is suing because he posted an excerpt of a speech she gave, and called her a racist, Media Matters, MSNBC and most likely any other news source and liberal blog could be sued as well. How often has MM taken video out of context and used it to smear someone on the Right, most often FOX, as racist? How often as someone on the Left posted pics of tea partiers and called them racist? They aren’t public figures, but their reputations have been smeared.

If she is suing because Breitbart posted the video, which resulted in her firing, I still don’t see how he is to blame for the *damages* she suffered. He didn’t fire her and is not responsible for her employers acting so rashly and stupidly.

She also has called Breitbart and (FOX) racist and said Breitbart wants to reinstate slavery. Sounds like a counter-suit, if anything.

And as I said, Media Matters does this daily – post edited video to smear someone as a liar, or racist, or whatever. The only reason no one (that I know of) has lost their job because of it, is because no one with half a brain takes their race baiting seriously. MSNBC calls Tea Partiers racist all the time, showing them on TV. Perhaps they should sue MSNBC….

The only thing that gave the Breitbart video *credibility* and launched the story into the MSM was her firing, and the statements made by the NAACP.

Had she not been fired, her video would have been just another in a long line of videos posted online, calling someone a racist (but usually posted by the Left).

Also, the video Breitbart posted included her *redemption* comments….He didn’t edit her tape or splice together statements misquoting her. He posted an excerpt of what she said. I just don’t see how that is *sue* worthy.

If she should sue anyone, it would be her employers, for firing her without cause. I’m not a lawyer, but I don’t see her suit going anywhere.

Iris said:
Michelle says she has a job, She thinks sitting on her ass in front of a computer being a hatemonger 24/7 colecting government checks is a job. The weird thing is its so obvious she doesn’t have a job, she is on this doorstep every waking hour and she thinks people don’t notice she never leaves here. HA,HA,HA

What a hateful nasty thing to say. I don’t know if she works or not, she said she does, and I believe her. But how nasty and evil of you to mock people who may have lost their jobs, and people who need to collect govt. assistance.

When it comes to hate mongering, you might want to look in the mirror.

Typical of the victimization culture.

weston says:
July 29, 2010 at 2:23 pm (Quote)
Hey MichelleF. Get a job!! Stop living off the GOOBMENT “teat”.

yweston says:
July 29, 2010 at 2:26 pm (Quote)
Hey MICHELLEF “THE WELFARE QUEEN”

God, you people are nasty.

sarainitaly said:
weston says:
July 29, 2010 at 2:23 pm (Quote)
Hey MichelleF. Get a job!! Stop living off the GOOBMENT “teat”.

yweston says:
July 29, 2010 at 2:26 pm (Quote)
Hey MICHELLEF “THE WELFARE QUEEN”

God, you people are nasty.

True..and it appears that you are no different.

Pablo said:
Two words for ya to look up, Shirl: “Damages” and “Discovery”. This will be a hoot.

You totally nailed it, Pablo. Exactly. Though perhaps not for the reason you think. Sherrod has nothing to worry about, discovery-wise, but Breitbart certainly does. He will seek to settle before his first deposition. Hopefully Sherrod will hold out for truth.

‘You people”??

Joking sara….

btw…didn’t you get the memo? Libs can’t be ‘nasty’! It’s a one-way street just like everything else. Libs can’t be nasty, racist, hateful, stoopid, fearmongers, warmongers, hatemongers, or any other kind of monger…. as long as we are talking about ‘bad’ mongering.

Now, if we’re talking about peacemongering and lovemongering and MotherEarthmongering it’s the other way around….

Alger Hiss sued Whittaker Chambers for calling him a “secret Russian spy” during the ’50s; the worst thing you could say about a government official.

Hiss sued Chambers for defamation and not only lost his case, but was sentenced to 5 years in prison for lying to a federal grand jury in the prior December about Chambers.

Thomas J – Libertarian said:
True..and it appears that you are no different.

You haven’t spent much time here have you? You won’t find Sarah being nasty…

Iris said:
Michelle says she has a job, She thinks sitting on her ass in front of a computer being a hatemonger 24/7 colecting government checks is a job. The weird thing is its so obvious she doesn’t have a job, she is on this doorstep every waking hour and she thinks people don’t notice she never leaves here. HA,HA,HA

Worst case of projection I have seen from you, Virus.

timzank said:
You haven’t spent much time here have you? You won’t find Sarah being nasty…

:O)

Thomas J – Libertarian said:
True..and it appears that you are no different.

Sorry TJL, but I found the comments from Iris and yweston that were insulting and mocking people who may be unemployed and who find themselves relying on govt. subsidies, disgusting and nasty. Call me nasty if you want, but I felt it needed addressing. There very well could be people on here who have lost their jobs, millions have, and those comments were disgusting.

Pablo said:
And no damages, even if she did have a case.

Given what happened to her, losing her job, world-wide condemnation, etc., damages are certain. Only how much will be at issue.

valkyrie101 said:
You totally nailed it, Pablo. Exactly. Though perhaps not for the reason you think. Sherrod has nothing to worry about, discovery-wise, but Breitbart certainly does. He will seek to settle before his first deposition. Hopefully Sherrod will hold out for truth.

Hey Perry Mason, how could discovery hurt Breitbart at all? He received a video, he then posted the video. He then (like all bloggers) blogged a few of his personal comments (like Colby/Steve/Rachel etc) about the video….

Ain’t much to discover. If he’s culpable, every frickin blog on the web is too.

Why is it liberals have no common sense?

sarainitaly said:
God, you people are nasty.

Who are you calling people?

It’s supposed to be “your kind.”, dear!

Pablo said:
One more word, Shirl: “Countersuit” You go, Girl!

Yes, Breitbart should sue her for intentional infliction of truth.

If anyone has a case here, she most certainly does. I say make him sweat and go bankrupt defending his sorry ass.

valkyrie101 said:
Given what happened to her, losing her job, world-wide condemnation, etc., damages are certain. Only how much will be at issue.

Lost her job for a few hours, and got world wide praise…book deal, movie rights, yeah, she’s a lock for damages….Jesus you must blind.

Breitbart worked many years for Reverend Moon, the guy who was crowned King and who wants to remove the separation of church and state so he can take over the world. I wonder if some of those details will come out? Is Breitbart’s agenda related to that? How much did Reverend Moon pay him to be a facilitator of his plans for world conquest?

AngelPeters said:
If anyone has a case here, she most certainly does. I say make him sweat and go bankrupt defending his sorry ass.

against the guy that fired her.

timzank said:
Lost her job for a few hours, and got world wide praise…book deal, movie rights, yeah, she’s a lock for damages….Jesus you must blind.

Not how it works, timzank. Just those few hours of trauma could be worth millions.

Hey, if you can sue a news provider for not putting video clips in their full context, then the hosts at MSNBC can be sued every night of the week.

AngelPeters said:
If anyone has a case here, she most certainly does. I say make him sweat and go bankrupt defending his sorry ass.

That’s what she’s doing to Uncle Sam so…why not?

Trauma? Jesus…

felixw said:
Hey, if you can sue a news provider for not putting video clips in their full context, then the hosts at MSNBC can be sued every night of the week.

Indeed. How about the SLANDER that they continue to repeat to this very day about the ‘N’ word being shouted 15 times at the Capitol Tea Party?

Breitbart’s $100K is still on the table…anybody got proof? No?

THEN THAT’S SLANDER.

This bottom feeding old bag, with a chip on her black shoulder against whitey, is exactly why the government has ineffectual and corrupt agencies and also why this country’s lawyers are always busy…

What a crock of shit.

felixw said:
Hey, if you can sue a news provider for not putting video clips in their full context, then the hosts at MSNBC can be sued every night of the week.

Breitbart did more than just put the video on his website, he also made a number of accusations based on the video which he claimed to have had in his possession for weeks before putting it out. Breitbart claimed that he got the edited tape from a third party and that he did not know it was edited. If it is true that he had no idea the video was edited to make Sherrod look like a racist, then he will likely have no liability. I tend to doubt he will be found liable. But it will be fun to depose Breitbart anyway.

“Cable news’ most important story last week will continue – Shirley Sherrod says she “will sue” Andrew Breitbart, the conservative site owner who first published her out-of-context video clip, according to the AP.”

Interesting phrasing…I assume her damages are against Breitbart for not posting the video in its entirety.

What did he do wrong? I’m not saying how he posted the clip was the greatest and a few people definitely have suffered because of that style or tactic…but Breitbart published and promoted a snippet of a video clip to the public.

The domino after effect was self created. Is it the message or is it the method?

Where is the outrage over WikiLeaks?

What a hateful nasty thing to say. I don’t know if she works or not, she said she does, and I believe her. But how nasty and evil of you to mock people who may have lost their jobs, and people who need to collect govt. assistance.

When it comes to hate mongering, you might want to look in the mirror.

Thanks Sara, but Virus knows very well that I have a job. I just happen to work on the computer at home ALL day, so I do post throughout the day. I probably do more work before her liberal heads leaves the pillow than she does all day long. But for some reason, it makes her feel better to picture me sitting at home collecting a welfare check, eating cheetos and drinking big gulps. I think she’s projecting a bit.

timzank said:
This bottom feeding old bag, with a chip on her black shoulder against whitey, is exactly why the government has ineffectual and corrupt agencies and also why this country’s lawyers are always busy… What a crock of shit.

You are living proof of Sherrod’s claim for damages.

lazzzlo said:
“Cable news’ most important story last week will continue – Shirley Sherrod says she “will sue” Andrew Breitbart, the conservative site owner who first published her out-of-context video clip, according to the AP.” Interesting phrasing…I assume her damages are against Breitbart for not posting the video in its entirety. What did he do wrong? I’m not saying how he posted the clip was the greatest and a few people definitely have suffered because of that style or tactic…but Breitbart published and promoted a snippet of a video clip to the public. The domino after effect was self created. Is it the message or is it the method? Where is the outrage over WikiLeaks?

Its about intent. If Breitbart knew it was a scam and did it anyway, he may be found liable. He claims to be a journalist. At the very least, the suit should reveal the details of what Breitbart did or did not do in a journalistic sense. He claims he was fooled by a third party. Was he, or did he make that up. Likely that third party will also be deposed.

sarainitaly said:
weston says:July 29, 2010 at 2:23 pm (Quote)Hey MichelleF. Get a job!! Stop living off the GOOBMENT “teat”. yweston says:July 29, 2010 at 2:26 pm (Quote)Hey MICHELLEF “THE WELFARE QUEEN” God, you people are nasty.

In fairness, Sara N. Italy, many of us knew Miserable Michelle in Utah before she was a virgin.

AT FOX NEWS, HONESTY
IS NOT OUR POLICY.

valkyrie101 said:
Its about intent.

Indeed, it is, and we have an expression of that intent by the deplorable and despicable Breitbart from the deplorable and despicable Breitbart himself. He was angry over the question of reparations to African American farmers, and he found a living target. Whether you think reparations a good think or not, he had formed malicious intent.
A
T FOX NEWS, HONESTY
IS NOT OUR POLICY.

He was angry over the question of reparations to African American farmers, and he found a living target. Whether you think reparations a good think or not, he had formed malicious intent.

I’m sure you meant to post proof of that ridiculous statement, Royal Race-Baiter.

Duh, your Prophet, Breitbart, said it himself, Miserable Michelle. You go find it.

AT FOX NEWS, HONESTY
IS NOT OUR POLICY.

MichelleF said:
He was angry over the question of reparations to African American farmers, and he found a living target. Whether you think reparations a good think or not, he had formed malicious intent. I’m sure you meant to post proof of that ridiculous statement, Royal Race-Baiter.

Here’s a clue, Miserable Michelle. Your despicable, deplorable prophet sent an e-mail to, of all addresses, TPMMuckraker outlining his anger with the Reparations act working through the Senate and the NAACP for (correctly) categorizing the NAACP as racist. Surely, with all of that, you can find it. Hint: It;s not on DailyCaller.

AT FOX NEWS, HONESTY
IS NOT OUR POLICY.

Michelle , reality check , nobody can sit there like you do every single hour of every single day and post comments every five minutes and thats not counting all the emails you send to this site telling them what to do and have a job, who is stupid enough to believe that. Well, you are apparently.

Nice try Race-Baiter, I’m waiting for the post of AB stating he went after a black person, because he hates reparations. Alot of people are against reparations, but I’m wondering about the actual quote, AND context of course, of him saying that’s the reason he went after a black person. Bring it, royal race-batiing LIAR!!

Oh no Iris the Virus doesn’t believe me. You don’t REALLY think I care, do you?

NObody believes you Michelle and yes you do care because you keep trying to explain that you somehow have a job when it is OBVIOUS to everyone that you don’t. It s also obvious that you have no life , NO one would be here 24/7 the way you are if they did Too bad, too sad

So what is the intent? An edited video clip is posted. How do you sue for the emotional reaction?

You pre–suppose a reaction? That is intent and it may be valid. It’s not like anyone else has ever done it.

Actually, Dan Abrams could weigh in on this.

Lazz, just use the google for “false light/invasion of privacy” , that easy, no kiddin

lazzzlo said:
Actually, Dan Abrams could weigh in on this.

You are right on that.

Pablo said:
Two words for ya to look up, Shirl: “Damages” and “Discovery”. This will be a hoot.

Pablo said:
One more word, Shirl: “Countersuit” You go, Girl!

I think you’re right – damages and discovery are going to be a hoot – punitives are a real hoot and discovery into the Andrew Not So Breitbart operation is going to be a hoot, too. But how about you tell us, Pablow, about ‘countersuit?’ What will Not So Breitbart pull out of his ass besides Matt Drudge’s pecker?

zombietimeshare said:
Any competent lawyer will rip her to shreds. Lawyer: “So Ms. Sherrod, you admit you were a racist in your decisions up to that time but repented your racist ways when you decided that the problem wasn’t race but one of class warfare. How is that an improvement?”

Well, you’ve proven one thing – you’re no competent lawyer. Hell, you’d likely be an incompetent dishwasher.

The left are all dancing and doing high fives like Breitbart not playing all of the tape proves that the NAACP isn’t racist. All it proves is that Breitbart didn’t play all of the tape. The NAACP is one of the most racist organizations on earth, and one look at who they invite as guest speakers says it all.

writer said:
The left are all dancing and doing high fives like Breitbart not playing all of the tape proves that the NAACP isn’t racist. All it proves is that Breitbart didn’t play all of the tape. The NAACP is one of the most racist organizations on earth, and one look at who they invite as guest speakers says it all.

OK, I will agree with you that there are racists who are or have been involved with the NAACP. Indeed, there are racists involved in virtually every organization from the Cub Scouts to the DAR, and of course the Tea Party, but why would you say that the NAACP is racist, since you object to people who say the Tea Party is racist? The NAACP specifically did not accuse the Tea Party of being racist, rather, they said there were some racists elements involved with the tea party. And of course, the Tea Party Federation agreed, and that is why the Tea Party Express guy was booted. I can understand you saying that there are some racist elements involved in the NAACP, but why would you call it one of the most racist organizations in the world? I suppose, right up there with Klan, and those guys in Africa with the machetes, right?

I love all the jailhouse lawyers shoot off their mouths. Other than me have any of you ever been involved in a lawsuit. In my seven law suits only one led to “discovery”. That case was thrown out after the guy was suing me presented his case. He had no case.
Sherrod has no case. It will never reach court. If there is any “discovery” no one will ever hear about it. You folks have been watching too much t.v.

I love how all the jailhouse lawyers shoot off their mouths. Other than me have any of you ever been involved in a lawsuit? In my seven law suits only one led to “discovery”. That case was thrown out after the guy that was suing me presented his case. He had no case.
Sherrod has no case. It will never reach court. If there is any “discovery” no one will ever hear about it. You folks have been watching too much t.v.

gordonbloyershow said:
I love how all the jailhouse lawyers shoot off their mouths. Other than me have any of you ever been involved in a lawsuit? In my seven law suits only one led to “discovery”. That case was thrown out after the guy that was suing me presented his case. He had no case.Sherrod has no case. It will never reach court. If there is any “discovery” no one will ever hear about it. You folks have been watching too much t.v.

No one will hear about? LOL Even if the parties agree on a big settlement and they sign a non-disclosure agreement word will leak out, and even if it doesn’t, if Breitbart pays out then every half baked rumor that people make up will stick like clue.

Here is reality. Breitbart is a Moonie.

About 16 years ago, I was working for a company that fired me when they found out I was interviewing for other companies in that same line of service they provided. They stopped payment on my last paycheck. At the time I did not make that much money and was living paycheck to paycheck. That stop payment on my check caused other checks that I wrote out to bounce and of course other charges. They did not tell me they were gonna stop payment. I only found out when I received the overdraft notices in the mail and called my bank to find out what the problem was. I was an emotional wreck do to the fact I had no job, no money to pay what the bank said I owed etc etc etc. I called a lawyer who promptly notified said employer that we would sue for emotional and financial damages. That lawyer took me on pro bono, as I said I was dead broke and in the hole. We did end up settling and not for a bizillion dollars. They paid my legal fees, bank fees and paid me my salary until I was able to find employment elsewhere. Not to exceed a year. I believe, although I am no lawyer, that she has a decent case, but only if she includes all the people and agencies involved. Briebart was the catalyst but he did not personally fire her. He did cause defamation of character that started a chain reaction. Look through all of these posts just on this website alone. Look at all the nasty things being said about her from this situation. 3 weeks ago no one here even knew who she was. Now according to most of you she is a racist, money grubbing so and so and I am being kind. None of you know her personally so you really have no grounds for your assumptions. Maybe she is a racist. We all have a bit of racism in us. For most it has been instilled from growing up. Some of us try to recognize it, own it and try to change the way we think and view others. Which is what she ultimately did in her story about the farmer. Any honest person would own up to their own and factor that into their decision if sitting on a jury. This woman did not wish to be put in this spotlight. She was thrown into it. And to the person who said she took a job from the same evil agency that she sued….what better way to oversee the way they conduct business, then to work for them?

MichelleF said:
Pablo, I have been trying to think of a good name for Iris forever, and you nailed it!! I shall steal it in the future, with your permission, of course!

Not surprising in the least. Since you never seem to come up with anything original on your own.
At least this time you asked permission.

Valk, you must not understand English. There will be no settlement. There will be no trial. There will be no nondisclosure agreement. There is NO case.
I can tell from your posts that you are not too bright. What are you smoking?

gordonbloyershow said:
Valk, you must not understand English. There will be no settlement. There will be no trial. There will be no nondisclosure agreement. There is NO case.I can tell from your posts that you are not too bright. What are you smoking?

So Sherrod and her lawyers will just file the case, let it sit around for a while without discovery, then dismiss it down the road? That’s your theory? Why would they bother? Assuming it is filed, which has not happened yet, it will not be dismissed without either a settlement or discovery. And the Sherrod lawyers will really not know how good or bad their case is until after they depose the Moonie Breitbart, and perhaps the person who Breitbart claims gave him the video without telling him it was selectively edited to defame Sherrod. Notwithstanding your vast experience as a personal injury lawyer.

Valk, don’t quit your day job. How long did it take for O.J. to go to court in the civil case. “Discovery” does not start the day after you file a suit. You can find an ambulance chaser to file any suit if you pay them. Any GOOD attorney would not waste time with this suit. There is NO suit.

Poor ignorant valk, in my seven lawsuits only two went to discovery. That happened about three years after the suits were filed.

valkyrie101 said:
Given what happened to her, losing her job, world-wide condemnation, etc., damages are certain. Only how much will be at issue.

World wide condemnation? What fucking world do you live on? As for losing her job, her complaint is with the people who fired her, not Breitbart.

gordonbloyershow said:
Valk, don’t quit your day job. How long did it take for O.J. to go to court in the civil case. “Discovery” does not start the day after you file a suit. You can find an ambulance chaser to file any suit if you pay them. Any GOOD attorney would not waste time with this suit. There is NO suit.

Well, sure, nobody said it would not take time to get to the meat and potatoes of this case. But my point is that if it is filed, there would be no reason to just dismiss it before settlement or discovery, unless it is thrown out as a matter of law pursuant to a motion to dismiss. As for the merit of the case, I am doubting that you have too much perspective on that, or whether an attorney might wish to invest some time on it. And just because you have a lot of experience being sued, does not make you an expert.

Pablo said:
World wide condemnation? What fucking world do you live on? As for losing her job, her complaint is with the people who fired her, not Breitbart.

She lost her job and was publically humiliated in front of hundreds of millions of people, which was caused, in fact, by the Breitbart video and reporting. Were Breitbart’s actions also the “proximate cause” of her firing, or the massive public outcry against her that followed immediately after the story was posted? Well, that depends on the facts, which have not been fully revealed. Did Breitbart know the video was selectively edited and should he have therefore reasonably expected the damage to Sherrod that transpired? In any event, as Gordon mentioned, it takes time to resolve these disputes so it may be quite some time until we find out how this turns out and whether the Moonie, Breitbart, is held accountable for his actions. If it does not go too well, perhaps Reverend Moon will provide some of his illicit funds to bail him out.

valk, the NAACP, as an organization, has invited speakers such as Rev. Wright and Louis Farrakhan, and applauded their racist rhetoric. If the tea party as an organization ever invites David Duke as a speaker and hundreds show up to applaud his every word, then the NAACP and the tea party would have parity.

The tea party federation just ejected a man, who was a national spokeperson for the tea party express which was featured on FOX many times, and who said things equally as racist as Wright. So your argument falls apart.

And there are racists signs galore at tea party events… So by your way of thinking, the tea party itself is racist.

There is no such thing as a national spokesman for the Tea Party. These groups have sprung up all over and are headed by many people. The guy you are refering to tried to make himself a spokesman and has been rejected. I know the person that has organized the Tea Party Express. We were in the YR’s in Monterey California together. He is a long time campaign operative. He knows what he is doing and has organized thousands of people together. There are always some people that will try to take over these groups.

As to damage to Sherrod, that is a joke. She is riding a wave of publicity. The negative stuff lasted only a few hours. She could have had her job back and she could have taken another job. However now, she thinks she is SOMEONE. It has gone to her head. She has no lawsuit, she will never have a lawsuit. She is just doing this to make her 15 minutes last longer.

Again, valk, the tea party express is a different faction of the tea party. And like any gathering with thousands of people, sure, there are going to be some racists in the crowd. But the NAACP has always had more than its share, and demonstrates it by the people they have as guest speakers. Yet we don’t see the media breaking its neck to point it out when the NAACP does it. But let one or two people in a tea party crowd be carrying offensive signs, and it makes the national news. Where was the national news checking into the NAACP’s guest speakers?

gordonbloyershow said:
The guy you are refering to tried to make himself a spokesman and has been rejected. I know the person that has organized the Tea Party Express. We were in the YR’s in Monterey California together. He is a long time campaign operative.

Yes, Gordon, thanks for the inside information on who is behind the Tea Party Express, an organization that has gotten massive FOX publicity for months as a “grass roots organization”. It is a function of a Republican political operative. Your levity is cool, I hope to see more of it.

writer said:
Again, valk, the tea party express is a different faction of the tea party. And like any gathering with thousands of people, sure, there are going to be some racists in the crowd. But the NAACP has always had more than its share, and demonstrates it by the people they have as guest speakers. Yet we don’t see the media breaking its neck to point it out when the NAACP does it. But let one or two people in a tea party crowd be carrying offensive signs, and it makes the national news. Where was the national news checking into the NAACP’s guest speakers?

So far we have an unrighteous Brightbart attack on the NAACP and Sherrod, promoted heavily by FOX, referencing as racist a beautiful story of overcoming by someone who lived through extreme racism against black people during and leading up to the civil rights era but still found love in her heart for her white fellow man, twenty four years ago, pawned off as evidence of an Obama official being currently racist in her job performance, and you use that a springboard to attack the NAACP as racist. OK, whatever.

No I don’t valk. The NAACP was racist before Breitbart came along, and I’m sure they’ll be racist when he’s gone. They were welcoming and applauding people like Farrakhan before anyone ever heard of Breitbart.

writer said:
No I don’t valk. The NAACP was racist before Breitbart came along, and I’m sure they’ll be racist when he’s gone. They were welcoming and applauding people like Farrakhan before anyone ever heard of Breitbart.

Your essential point with all of this, and all the time, is that racism by white people is justified because some black people struggle with racism. The thing is, objectively speaking, what black people experienced for four hundred years in this country, with the whip on their back, and pervasive discrimination long after they were “freed”, with hundreds or even thousands of lynchings and mob violence brought against them, employment discrimination, housing discrimination, even in your lifetime, probably explains their struggles with hostility toward white people far better than that of those white people who continue to propogate racist sentiment toward them, or those who now say, cynically, that it is the black people who are racist without having the courage to say, as is most obvious, that racism towards black people continues to exist.

CNN’s Cooper Apologizes for Not Challenging Sherrod’s Race-Baiting, Delves Into Husband’s Newest Controversy