Good luck with that Shirley. And thanks for the link to the BigGovernment article Jon, hadn’t heard about that investigation’s progress.

Notice the inconsistent reaction to this story and the week long MSM claim that Rush Limbaugh had supported slavery, only to admit they have no idea where they got the quote. Of course, when the MSM smears people on the right with “edited video”, we’re supposed to just forget about it.

This is great. I hoe she wins a big enough judgement to put him out of business. His actions were despicable!

How embarrassing for the White House that we’re being reminded that Andrew Breitbart said “Jump” and they said “How high?”

Was the video edited, Jon? How about that, it was edited. As opposed to all the unedited videos out there. Such a precise choice of adjective is itself evidence of careful editing.

Last July, Shirley Sherrod promised that she would sue Andrew Breitbart over the video that led to her losing her job at the USDA. This weekend, she proved that those comments were accurate and not, you know, selectively edited lies.

The real proving part comes well after the serving part. It also comes well after sweet, sweet discovery.

This should be a lot of fun.

armwood said:
This is great. I hoe she wins a big enough judgement to put him out of business. His actions were despicable!

What are her damages, armwood? She really doesn’t have any. And she can’t prove malice. She’s not going to win much if she wins anything at all, which is unlikely.

Shirely, you can’t be serious.

Calvin said:
Shirely, you can’t be serious.

Crap. I meant “Shirley”

armwood and Dave Noland seem to be coming into this completely unencumbered by facts.

You guys do yourselves a favor and google this. Read about the actions of Sherrod and her hubby before throwing the racist label around. How was Breitbart racist? Show me an example and I’ll agree with you. Until then, you’re just falling back on what used to be the left’s high ground.

Sherrod may have sued (she’s good at that) but this will be a defamation suit, which means extensive discovery. She doesn’t want that.

My prediction….she’ll try to settle before discovery and when Breitbart won’t settle (which he won’t) she’ll back out, crying racism. Her history and her involvement in the massive fraud of Pigford is something she’ll want swept under the rug.

Don’t call me Shirley.

armwood said:
This is great. I hoe she wins a big enough judgement to put him out of business. His actions were despicable!

Dave Noland said:
Sue that racist fat bastard. It’s about time

Whoa ! It ‘s a twin spin ! Double dopes !

Psst . , Noland . You may not want to use the ” fat ” word .

Calvin said:
Shirley, you can’t be serious.

She is serious- and dont call her Shirley.

Pablo brings up a crucial point….what were her damages?

The government offered her job back after they jumped the gun on this without investigation – and she refused. She’s a gamester, not a victim.

Pablo said:

“It also comes well after sweet, sweet discovery”.

And, like the man said, therein will lie the rub.

Kick some Trial-Lawyer, Race-Baiting a-s Mr. Breitbart.

I saw the whole tape on your site, and this is what the Race-Baiters live on – intimidation.

Countersue, just like Brewer is doing.

Time to fight back hard against the Intolerant Left, and their favorite go-to Smear….The RACE CARD!

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/no-happy-clappy-democracies-msnbcs-mika-shocked-because-pictures-from-egypt-seem-so-nice-while-harvards-niall-ferguson-schools-her-on-muslim-brotherhood-and-caliphate/

Why hasn’t Mediaite covered this yet? That is a fantastic clip.

Calvin said:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/no-happy-clappy-democracies-msnbcs-mika-shocked-because-pictures-from-egypt-seem-so-nice-while-harvards-niall-ferguson-schools-her-on-muslim-brotherhood-and-caliphate/ Why hasn’t Mediaite covered this yet? That is a fantastic clip.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/harvard-professor-niall-ferguson-schools-morning-joe-on-obamas-failed-foreign-policy/

It appears I spoke too soon. Thanks, Mediaite.

Calvin said:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/no-happy-clappy-democracies-msnbcs-mika-shocked-because-pictures-from-egypt-seem-so-nice-while-harvards-niall-ferguson-schools-her-on-muslim-brotherhood-and-caliphate/ Why hasn’t Mediaite covered this yet? That is a fantastic clip.

Wow, once again there’s demonstrable proof how the Mainstream Media has become a veritable House Organ of the Democratic Party. They slant perspectives, conjure approving narratives, and selectively shill news stories on behalf of Democratics.

Here’s another one:
NBC & ABC didn’t even cover the explosive Planned Parenthood SCANDAL at all – even though we all saw what was on those tapes, and the fact that the issue is being debated in Congress.

Continue to ‘share’/e-mail everyone you know to disregard stories from the MSM, especially with the 2012 elections coming.

No one is trying to silence you. In fact, they want you to rave yourself into prison. Brietbart is a useless piece of trash blowing in the wind. When will this fart brain grow some and take his medicine. He and his allies will be prosecuted for their crimes against Shirley Sherrod. Brietbart isn’t even a good liar. He is just a plain old fashioned Good Ole Boy who wouldn’t know the truth if they embalmed him with it.

Pablo said:
The real proving part comes well after the serving part. It also comes well after sweet, sweet discovery.

This should be a lot of fun.

Wow, so in the course of one day pablo learns what discovery is??? If Terry Lakin was allowed the process of discovery, his case would have never went to trial, as the piece of evidence, ie., 0bama’s long form, would have been allowed as evidence. Proving, a) that Dr. Lakin needs to deploy, or b) that Dr. Lakin is compelled to take no orders from an illegal CIC, and c) the trial would have been dismissed prior to Lakin’s date of deployment. Hence no court martial. I wonder why that court denied the discovery process to Dr. Lakin. Pablo? Why was Dr. Lakin denied his due process rights?

Harry Flashman said:
The government offered her job back after they jumped the gun on this without investigation – and she refused. She’s a gamester, not a victim.

Note that Breitbart notes that she dropped this right after he did the big Pigford reveal. Lee Stranahan, nobody’s right winger, and that all too rare honest liberal has done some outstanding work on that story. Breitbart’s stumble at the front of this may turn out to be like when Jeb was out shooting up some food and he missed. Shirley is all up in the middle of it, which is how she came to work at the USDA.

This is a big story. Billions of big. They really want Breitbart to shut up, but this suit just proves they’re stupid.

She has as much chance of winning as finding Amelia Earhart or Obama’s birth certificate.

The liberal press “corpse” will be left on the ash heap of history

ndanielson said:
Wow, so in the course of one day pablo learns what discovery is??? If Terry Lakin was allowed the process of discovery, his case would have never went to trial, as the piece of evidence, ie., 0bama’s long form, would have been allowed as evidence. Proving, a) that Dr. Lakin needs to deploy, or b) that Dr. Lakin is compelled to take no orders from an illegal CIC, and c) the trial would have been dismissed prior to Lakin’s date of deployment. Hence no court martial. I wonder why that court denied the discovery process to Dr. Lakin. Pablo? Why was Dr. Lakin denied his due process rights?

Ferchrissakes, let me try this one more time. THERE IS NOW A CASE. Did you get that? A complaint has been filed and it will be adjudicated unless settled. NOW discovery will happen.

Suggesting that discovery would have prevented Lakin going to trial is just plain wrong. He’d already been charged and Obama’s long form has absolutely nothing with what he was charged for: Refusing to obey orders. Which he was guilty of and so pled.

Dude, I can’t tell you how tired I am of the birther nonsense. How many cases do you people have to lose before you figure it out? It’s a dead horse and you look silly beating it. Why don’t you do something possibly productive with your time and go read up on Pigford? Then, you might be able to tell people something useful to the cause..

In American law, discovery is the pre-trial phase in a lawsuit in which each party, through the law of civil procedure, can obtain evidence from the opposing party by means of discovery devices including requests for answers to interrogatories, requests for production of documents, requests for admissions and depositions. Discovery can be obtained from non-parties using subpoenas. When discovery requests are objected to, the requesting party may seek the assistance of the court by filing a motion to compel discovery.

Pablo said:
The real proving part comes well after the serving part. It also comes well after sweet, sweet discovery.

This should be a lot of fun.

Wait, Pablo, is there a thing called pre-trial discovery???? Oh, my, why yes there is!!! In fact, the discovery process can prevent a case from going to trial at all. Imagine that, Pablo. No trial, no court martial, and the blue falcon, 0bama, would be hiding his document no more.

BTW, let’s clarify that Lakin wasn’t denied discovery. He was denied the POTUS’ personal records in discovery, which, duh! Of course, he was.

Pablo said:

“They really want Breitbart to shut up, but this suit just proves they’re stupid”.

It not only proves they’re stupid, it proves they’re arrogant AND stupid. This won’t end well for them.

ndanielson said:

“If Terry Lakin was allowed the process of discovery, his case would have never went to trial,”

Was he denied discovery or was what he brought up in discovery ruled inadmissable. There is a difference.

One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight.
Sclemeel, schlemazel, hasenfeffer incorporated.
We’re gonna do it!

Give us any chance, we’ll take it.
Give us any rule, we’ll break it.
We’re gonna make our dreams come true……doin it our way….

Oh wait….wrong Shirley…..never mind.

ndanielson said:
Wait, Pablo, is there a thing called pre-trial discovery???? Oh, my, why yes there is!!!

Yes, it’s part of trial preparation. That’s why they put it before the trial.

In fact, the discovery process can prevent a case from going to trial at all. Imagine that, Pablo.

That is a very rare occurrence, and it requires finding something that would cause the judge to throw the case out. Obama’s birth certificate, if it shows he was born in Kenya to Malcolm X and Angela Davis and his religion is listed as Extra Really Crazy Muslim, would not change the fact that Lakin refused to obey lawful orders. That’s why he’s not entitled to it. The end.

Harry Flashman said:
It not only proves they’re stupid, it proves they’re arrogant AND stupid. This won’t end well for them.

No, it won’t. If I’m Breitbart, I’ve been dreaming of this day for months.

I would assume she has run through the Pigford payoff handout already?

“….. would not change the fact that Lakin refused to obey lawful orders…..”

Exactly, and that is the nexus of the case. He disobeyed the lawful order of a superior. End of story.

And, you’re right about Breitbart dreaming about this lawsuit. Does anyone out there think this took him by surprise? He had his well paid lawyers cocked and locked well in advance of this.

This “very rare” discovery was just that, a simple piece of paper that woudld have settled the argument: a) did Lakin need to follow the orders of 0bama the impostor, b) or 0bama the CIC. Answer a) no, b) yes.

This discovery process would have had the case thrown out immediately regardless of the veracity of 0bama’s claims that he is legit. Right, Pablo? Personal records are forced into discovery ALL THE TIME.

Here for simple language that you can understand (maybe) The document denied in discovery would have proven that Lakin either needed to follow the orders of a legitimate CIC or not. Period. He cannot be guilty of refusing orders from an illegitimate CIC! They are not lawful orders at that point! Get it?

A few fun points to remember:

1) The masterful edits Breitbart’s website performed was starting the video after she started her story, he cut off the “Here’s how I used to act, but it taught me how to be abetter person: I wasn’t going to help a white farmer as much as I was a black farmer, then I realized it was wrong, and offered him my full assistance and we are great friends now.” Breitbart cut off the “Here’s how I used to act, but it taught me how to be abetter person: ” part – nothing was editied after that, as I recall.

2) Shirley Sherrod was fired without a chance to defend herself by an administration that was all “wee-wee” about her possibly being on Glenn Beck’s TV show (she wasn’t going to be, and by many accounts, Glenn Beck was one of the few personalitites that treated her fairly, waiting until the information was all in before passing judgement on Ms. Sherrod).

3) The President apologized to her and she refused to accept her old job back, and made a big deal out of accepting a position created out of whole cloth to allow the Gov’t to make her feel better with a bigger paycheck/higher pension.

4) This story would have been an interesting diversion except for the fact the administration fired her without chance to defend herself, describe what happened, etc.

Can you really sue a reporter for taking something said out of context? If that’s the case, there may be a large number of lawsuits coming down the line for some reporters (Like Dan (the 1970′s-era typewriter had superscripts) Rather)…

I like how Breitbart is so scared that all he can talk about is his Pigford investigation… I agree with other commenters, she isn’t scaring him, she’s encouraging him to after her.

She may have met her match…

Ken Hansen said:
Can you really sue a reporter for taking something said out of context? If that’s the case, there may be a large number of lawsuits coming down the line for some reporters (Like Dan (the 1970’s-era typewriter had superscripts) Rather)…

A Pandora’s box if they do, news people and politicians love to take people out of context. Its what they do. Could you imagine this up coming election coverage if they couldn’t take things out of context?

Ken Hansen said:
1) The masterful edits Breitbart’s website performed was starting the video after she started her story, he cut off the “Here’s how I used to act, but it taught me how to be abetter person: I wasn’t going to help a white farmer as much as I was a black farmer, then I realized it was wrong, and offered him my full assistance and we are great friends now.” Breitbart cut off the “Here’s how I used to act, but it taught me how to be abetter person: ” part – nothing was editied after that, as I recall.

Point of order: Breitbart says he posted what he had, and that those were not his edits. That’s what was sent to him.

ndanielson said:
The document denied in discovery would have proven that Lakin either needed to follow the orders of a legitimate CIC or not.

No, it wouldn’t. The CinC didn’t sign his orders. Thank you and good night.

It’s just not like Breitbart to cut and paste, spin or lie!

You getm shirley! Its not 1865 anymore! The angry retarded inbred whites who call themselves patriots are just cowards who are scared they hate anybody that doesnt look and think like them. Thank god theres a good amount of good people who can accept others who are not the same color. What a boring world it would be if these crazies had their way

Pablo said:
Yes, it’s part of trial preparation. That’s why they put it before the trial. That is a very rare occurrence, and it requires finding something that would cause the judge to throw the case out. Obama’s birth certificate, if it shows he was born in Kenya to Malcolm X and Angela Davis and his religion is listed as Extra Really Crazy Muslim, would not change the fact that Lakin refused to obey lawful orders. That’s why he’s not entitled to it. The end.

ooh, how impressive, we have a law&order wanna be practicing teabag law. just like a lawyer, slimey at best..

Pablo said:
No, it won’t. If I’m Breitbart, I’ve been dreaming of this day for months.

II think the same. I don’t follow his Pigford fraud postings, but the little I’ve seen is that the number of claimants was far larger than the number of actual black farmers at the time, which was allowed by making the claim of a farmer to be too broad and not auditing claims, which makes it an easy target for fraud. I think Breitbart’s a bit obsessed with trying to expose the alleged Pigford fraud.

By not en ensuring the validity of claims and I assume by not auditing the claims, fraud inevitably happens. With the legal discovery process might allow exposure to many trails. The point is Breitbart has the funding and the desire, and could leverage the legal process to get some documents. Either way, free publicity for his websites.