This is to provide notice...those who republish the defamation, such as Huffington Post, MSNBC, The New York Times and The Washington Post, that the Palins will not allow them to propagate defamatory material without answering to this in a court of law.
As reported by Politico moments ago:
Ratcheting up her offensive against the news media, Gov. Sarah Palin’s attorney threatened on Saturday to sue mainstream news organizations if they publish “defamatory” stories relating to whether Palin is under federal investigation.
In an extraordinary four-page letter, Alaska-based attorney Thomas Van Flein warns of severe consequences should speculation that until now has largely been confined to blogs — about whether Palin embezzled funds in the construction of a Wasilla, Alaska, sports arena — find its way into print.
"This is to provide notice to Ms. Moore, and those who republish the defamation, such as Huffington Post, MSNBC, The New York Times and The Washington Post, that the Palins will not allow them to propagate defamatory material without answering to this in a court of law," Van Flein warned, citing Alaska liberal blogger Shannyn Moore. [...]
“Just as power abhors a vacuum, modern journalism apparently abhors any type of due diligence and fact checking before scurrilous allegations are repeated as fact,” the Anchorage attorney wrote.
Neither the Times or the Post made any mention of the embezzlement rumors in their Saturday editions, but sources close to Palin consider the letter a warning shot to stay away from the topic.
In the letter, Van Flein writes: "'The Alaska Constitution protects the right of free speech, while simultaneously holding those "responsible for the abuse of that right.'… These falsehoods abuse the right to free speech; continuing to publish these falsehoods of criminal activity is reckless, done without any regard for the truth, and is actionable."
Those interested can read the entire letter here.
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters. Follow him at Facebook and Twitter.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Get em Sarah!! Hit them
July 5, 2009 - 19:42 ET by USA4freedomGet em Sarah!!
Hit them where it hurts, in their dam wallets.
Good for you!!!!!!!!
They took you to court non stop..
What is good for the goose..
Ronald Reagan, 1962: I did not leave the Democratic party, the party left me.
Insert: your name, 2008, and the Republican party.
Then the strategy is to put
July 5, 2009 - 19:46 ET by PewahThen the strategy is to put oneself into suspended animation, no longer a public official, and viciously guard your reputation until it's the right time to roll out a campaign just ahead of 2012. Nice.
Sarah Palin: New RNC CHair
July 6, 2009 - 08:31 ET by Joe C.If I was a Palin-hater from the Media and McCain campaign, I’d be worried. This sounds more like a Charles Bronson “Deathwish” move than skulking into anonymity. Now she can do some damage of her own, and take over a weakened RNC. I think she’s going after Michael Steele’s job.
She righted the State of Alaska in only a couple of years, and turned it over to her hand-picked successor. The Palin camp is now freed from the bonds of political office and its required niceties to go on a truth telling spree, which will gain her cash and conservative cred. with options for the future. Target #1 should be John McCain — the candidate she saved from historic embarassment by signing on to his dysfunctional pathology of a campaign, only to have him turn on her.
Palin knows the truth: She brought this politically-decrepit gadfly to within weeks of a double-digit win, only to have him and his Keystone Kops of a campaign staff blow it with classically gutless “GOP moderate” aplomb, then try and hang it on her.
The Media already hates her, so that’s a wash; and making enemies of the GOP has-beens can only be a plus with Independents and Conservatives. It is about time that there is a Republican that is willing to play the “bloodsport” without conscience as the leftists do. It’s ironic that it may be a Conservative woman in the Thatcher mold that will revive the party of Lincoln and Reagan.
I can see your bank
July 5, 2009 - 19:49 ET by USA4freedomI can see your bank account.. from my house...
So mainstream media, just keep lying..
Signed: Sarah Palin.... And her lawyers....
Ronald Reagan, 1962: I did not leave the Democratic party, the party left me.
Insert: your name, 2008, and the Republican party.
Right of Center...
July 6, 2009 - 09:54 ET by adamsmithA beautiful lesson for Republicans and everyone right of center. Do this with every bit of garbage and lies out there. Sue the Huffington Post ten times a day. MSNBC twenty times a day. Keep the bastards in court to where they can't do their jobs(propaganda) either....Two can play that game. I'd still like to see an hourly show on FoxNews that does what this website does, they'd never run out of material.....
Re ROC
July 6, 2009 - 10:33 ET by slickwillie2001And better yet, drag them into a courtroom in Alaska, which will double the costs they incur.
Excellent!
July 5, 2009 - 19:45 ET by FuzzlenutterGo get them fact-challenged scumbags, Sarah!!
BWU HA HA HA HA HA
July 5, 2009 - 19:47 ET by Free StinkerBWU HA HA HA HA HA !
Remember, Justice is a Lady, but Payback?
Payback is a . . . . .
Payback is a .....
July 5, 2009 - 21:43 ET by legacyrepublicanHOCKEY MOM!!!!!!
Go get'em Sarah!
Cook their fois gras and roast their petty beefs!
And . . . .
July 5, 2009 - 19:50 ET by DoktorFrankenI
Am
Lovin' IT!!!!
I'm afraid that the MSM (D)
July 5, 2009 - 19:56 ET by JerryI'm afraid that the MSM (D) is just going to run stories 24/7 about Palin hiring an attorney to stop speculation about her embezelling funds, thus leaving the aroma of scandal wafting through the air.
"Our top story tonight... Sarah Palin hires an attorney to silence the media on her embezellment scandal.."
When asked if he went to war with Iraq to derail the impeachment vote: “I don’t think any serious person would believe that any President would do such a thing." - President Clinton (Dec 1998).
I saw this in the Politico
July 5, 2009 - 20:04 ET by bigtimerI saw this in the Politico early this morning, there were over 800 comments or such then...maybe they re-did it by Martin, don't know.
All I know is I don't blame people for fighting back against the despicable msm...and I suppose bloggers they don't like, then again, what if the situation were reversed?
Plus....can the msm of all venues just use the words "this is speculation" or "it has been rumored" to get around this anyway or the good ol "some people say"?
I think this would never make it regarding the 1st Amendment myself.
Others who have legal experience will post more...just my thoughts.
I just feel this is a very slippery-slope if the shoe were on the other foot.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
Ok, the difference here is simple.
July 5, 2009 - 20:09 ET by cjbreischThe difference is simple. This rumor is categorically false and made up out of thin air. Two minutes on the phone by someone with real press credentials would establish that immediately. So, for the NYT, MSNBC, etc. to publish it would amount to defamation of character.
Now, for a blogger, that's a different story. Most of us just repeat what we read elsewhere and add our own thoughts about it.
But somewhere there's an original source on this, and it's likely a blogger, and it's likely Shannyn Moore. If you're a blogger and you make up something defamatory and post it on your blog, then you're guilty of defamation. Period.
If you read it on Shannyn's blog and you link to it, and speculate on it's truth and what it means, you shouldn't have anything to worry about.
→ Rumor must be true
July 5, 2009 - 20:14 ET by Cool ArrowI have it on the authority of Cacciato that Sarah Palin is going to jail.
He says NewsBusters needs to face reality.
If this is true, why did it
July 6, 2009 - 00:57 ET by MrSnugglesIf this is true, why did it not come out during the election instead of when Palin resigned?
cjb... Still doesn't
July 5, 2009 - 20:17 ET by bigtimercjb...
Still doesn't answer my question about if any of the msm we are talking about here used/prefaced the story with the words 'this is just speculation' etc....how would that ever wash in any court of law?
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
→ About the same
July 5, 2009 - 20:23 ET by Cool ArrowAbout the same as Larry and Barry sitting in a limo, snorting coke off each other's bellies.
Come on Cool... I know
July 5, 2009 - 20:28 ET by bigtimerCome on Cool...
I know all about that....nothing is ever going to happen when it comes to the filthy left...and all O has got by with....nada.
I am serious here...this could be reversed to the right if stuff like this ever happened when it comes to free speech.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
→ Don't think so
July 5, 2009 - 20:34 ET by Cool ArrowI don't think there's much Palin can do but surround herself with a bunch of pro-bono litigators hoping turnabout-fair play can inflict some of the same financial distress she has endured.
If they are specific in their warning, to individual enterprises, such as NYT, maybe there's some legal standing. I'd be interested in whether stalking statutes might apply.
And while we're on the subject, how about that Democrat Marion Barry arrested for stalking a woman he works with?
Well...
July 5, 2009 - 20:25 ET by cjbreisch...yes, they could probably slip that one by.
And further damage their credibility as a reliable source of information. (can you go less than zero?) For, as I said, the story is categorically false, and two minutes on the phone with the FBI would enable you to figure it out.
Even the LA Times managed to figure it out.
"Hello, I'm Joe Liberal from the Palin Shredding department of the New York Times. Is there any truth to these rumors that you're investigating her about this SBS stuff? No? None at all? No one there is investigating anything about that? Are you absolutely sure? Ok, thanks. Bye."
< to editor >
"The FBI says that they're not doing anything and we can quote 'em. Should we run the story anyway? Yeah, we can put in some weasel words to protect us from a lawsuit. Got it."
cbj... I'm not talking
July 5, 2009 - 20:36 ET by bigtimercbj...
I'm not talking about just this story or the Palins either now...I'm talking about if this was reversed to the right side of the aisle regarding free speech and shutting that down too via law-suits etc.. Fairness Doctrine is bad enough to worry about.
As far as the FBI or Justice Dept., IRS saying one thing and doing another....come on...who knows.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
That's why I said...
July 5, 2009 - 20:45 ET by cjbreischThat's why I said in my other comment, that these threats are fairly common. The lawsuits themselves are much less common.
They're hard to win. You have to prove that the person a) knew that the information they published was false, and b) they did it with malicious intent.
I don't see it likely that politicos are going to come down on amateur bloggers on this. Professional bloggers? Maybe, but are they all that different from journalists? It is still very unlikely. What's more likely are the types of things that Obama has done to shut down criticism of himself, such as having his army call in to radio shows and try to shut down radio programs that had criticism, or threatening the radio stations themselves with DoJ investigations.
cjb.... Bingo! Great
July 5, 2009 - 21:07 ET by bigtimercjb....
Bingo!
Great links by the way...thank you.
So many places I'd love to have time with....so little time.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
You're welcome, BT
July 6, 2009 - 08:13 ET by cjbreischFrom my own amateur blog. :)
Palin Keeps 'em Guessin'
July 7, 2009 - 12:32 ET by webmonkeydcLatest blog post: Palin Keeps 'em Guessin' http://tinyurl.com/l...
Bigtimer
July 5, 2009 - 20:11 ET by DoktorFrankenI can understand what you're saying and my belief in Freedom of Speech is very strong. However, there are libel and slander laws. And there are reasons for them.
Plus, anything that has been said about her children is reason enough to take those hate-filled folks ''out back'' and give 'em some down-home learnin'.
JMHO, you understand.
Dok... I more than agree
July 5, 2009 - 20:23 ET by bigtimerDok...
I more than agree about the kids....period....it has been despicable with the msm...nevertheless, libel and slander is hard to prove if you have put all out there your own self from the beginning....Sarah isn't a novice when it comes to the msm by now.
Do you see where I am coming from...at all?
I HATE the msm...I despise the leftist blogs...I just feel this will never go anywhere...let alone being a huge slippery slope the left would love to use against us with time.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
To be honest...
July 5, 2009 - 20:35 ET by cjbreisch...I don't expect the Palins to ever file a lawsuit.
Generally the threat of doing so is sufficient to get people to tread more carefully.
Libel/Slander/Defamation of Character cases are extremely difficult to win, and I'm certain the lawyers for the Palins have told them that.
One could argue that I just committed such an offense against Ms. Moore, as I have little proof that she's the source of the rumors. My belief is based upon knowledge of her history and tracking back all the links I could find on this subject. There were two different originating sites that I could find. Hers was one.
You're correct about the slippery slope aspect of this, but the Palins are hardly the first to threaten suits in matters like this, and will certainly not be the last on either side of the aisle. Will the threats happen more in the internet age? Probably. Will the actual lawsuits occur more in the internet age? I doubt it.
I did some tracking too
July 5, 2009 - 20:39 ET by bigtimerI did some tracking too yesterday cbj. ;-)
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
She already can prove
July 5, 2009 - 22:07 ET by robert108She already can prove damages: half a million in fees fighting nonsense ethics violations. It's not a violation of free speech to defend yourself against those who are out to injure you. Self-defense is a basic human right.
If you haven't read the letter
July 5, 2009 - 20:05 ET by cjbreischIf you haven't read the whole letter from her legal counsel, please do so. It's worth the read.
Lawyers are supposed to be vigorous for their clients, but this is some
of the most direct language I’ve ever seen from a lawyer. It basically
amounts to “This is ****. Everyone knows it’s ****. Everyone has known
it’s **** for some time. And if you want to publish this ****, we will
come after you with both barrels.
Howdy cjb... I've read
July 5, 2009 - 20:08 ET by bigtimerHowdy cjb...
I've read the four pages long ago time wise now...and I still ask the same questions I posted right above you.
Hope someone has anwers.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
It's a tough question,
July 5, 2009 - 20:31 ET by bdshepherdIt's a tough question, because there are issues of both freedom of speech and of the press. However, if you publish something that is demonstrably false, that you knew was false, it doesn't really matter how you dress it up ("my cousin's girlfriend's brother's dog heard someone say . . ."). About all they can do to push the rumors out is say, "These rumors are floating around, but here's why they are wrong."
It's a bit more complicated because Palin is in the public eye; that means that she doesn't just have to show that the statements are false, but also that there was malicious intent in making them. Given the MSM's history with her, though, it wouldn't take a legal genius to connect up the dots for a jury.
Also -- just had a thought
July 5, 2009 - 20:36 ET by bdshepherdAlso -- just had a thought -- the fact that her attorney is putting the MSM on notice now would make malicious intent a lot easier to prove if they go ahead with a slanted story.
Which might be why the
July 5, 2009 - 20:50 ET by Lord ElicaniWhich might be why the lawyer did it.
"So this is how liberty dies... with thunderous applause."
Padmé Amidala, Revenge of the Sith
Perhaps A Discrimination Strategy May Work
July 5, 2009 - 21:00 ET by Junk Science SkepticIt wouldn't be too tough to prove that reporting on Palin was subject to less fact-checking than other public figures, thereby proving intent.
Stop Funding Leftist Propaganda - Boycott GE & Disney
Hey BT
July 6, 2009 - 00:22 ET by sic721I saw a clip Friday of Andrea Mitchell reporting on the embezzlement charges comung down, but can't find anything on it now. Schuster had Shannyn Moore on also and they were going back and forth about it. Closest I could find is this:
"The new twist is that the resignation came just before a Sarah Palin federal indictment on embezzlement charges.
Can it be true? The Huffington Post, Daily Kos, Max Blumenthal at The Daily Beast, and Andrea Mitchell at MSNBC have all come out with the same story at approximately the same time. One would almost think it had been sent out in a memo to the Obama media to disperse as truth for it to have been so well coordinated. I guess the ’she can’t take the heat’ argument wasn’t damning enough."
link
On another note, when I first read the attorney's statement, I got the impression Alaskan laws on speech and defamation were different and maybe a tad bit harsher than the 'lower 48'. I could be wrong and it still would not be easy,
"His letter cites the freedom of speech clause in the Alaska Constitution, and its statement that "every person may freely speak, write, and publish on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that right."
link
Anyway, we'll see what happens. She has our whole family's support whatever she does.
"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within."-Cicero
sic... ...but see my
July 6, 2009 - 00:37 ET by bigtimersic...
...but see my thinking on this...even if it is different in AK. which obviously of course it is...even if the Palins won...would this not be taken all the way to the USSC?
..and does this not make us stop and think if the situation were reversed what would happen to the right side of the aisle regarding the msm, including bloggers, once they have their claws in the internet...we are so screwed...although like I know they are going to get here one way or the other..congress has been breathlessly panting to do so for years...I just think this is a very slippery slope to use...just my thoughts.
Btw...I've read all you are talking about with links and HuffnPuff etc...time will tell with all that....that is for sure.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
BT, While I agree with you
July 6, 2009 - 03:36 ET by USA4freedomBT,
While I agree with you on the “be careful for what you wish for”. but...
For years and years we have been fighting with the marques of Queensbury rules, while the other side has been the crips and the bloods with drive by-shootings, smears, lies, threats intimidation, ACORN, Black Panthers, voter fraud, NOTHING IS BELOW THEM.
While I know that we lower the quality of our own debate I see the country in deep peril. I’m sure you read about people wanting to pickup and fight this steamroller of a government, personally. So how we need to somehow kick the built in advantage of having NO MOALS, or conscious, no values, back to a level playing field.
Look at how the perky one treated and edited Palin; this so called free press is nothing but Obama’s own Pravda now.
If fact that Pravda is doing a better job then the entire American Media, (with the exception of Fox)
http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/09-01-2009/106914-Obama_Swindler_Liar-0
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/?pageId=82647
How many times have you been looking at blogs and the IDOTS that are slamming Palin have used this line: Well.. At least I’m smart enough not to say “I can see Russia from my house” This is the IQ of these morons. It makes my head want to explode.
Look at the census is the perfect example. The Constitution and laws be dammed, its keep power; expand power to every part of American lives.
While I know I am preaching to the choir who here does not know of how our Constitution is just being trampled on a daily basis. Here is another example:
http://www.jbs.org/news-center/birchtube/60-Obama+Pushes+AntiGun+Treaty?userid=64
The pace that our lives are being destroyed by our government, and the legacy we are leaving to our children is nothing but shocking.. No insane.
I think that mostly every one is in favor because, we want someone to fight back, anyone for God sake act... like... you... have... a... set... other then Hannity, Rush, Laura, Andrew Wilcow etc.
"Obama
is a domestic tyrant and a foreign policy mouse"
Ronald Reagan, 1962: I did not leave the Democratic party, the party left me.
Insert: your name, 2008, and the Republican party.
More than that
July 5, 2009 - 21:44 ET by SilentWatcherI read the entire letter, and the lawyer lays out the malfeasance of the MSM jackals. Palin's strategy wrt the MSM is this: Fulfill your constitutional duty with factual reporting. If you don't, I won't just see your wallet, I'll take it into my backyard.
She cannot be challenged as stifling debate and free speech because it is clear that her guns are locked and loaded on defamation by a MSM that ignores the facts.
It's high time that a Republican fought back vigorously against the MSM instead of assiduously courting them.
Thank you Governro Palin
July 5, 2009 - 20:48 ET by BufordFinally we have a conservative that is not afraid to speak their mind and fight back. Drill Baby Drill!
I'll keep my freedom my money and my guns, you can keep the "CHANGE".
Why is that the governor of
July 5, 2009 - 20:59 ET by Radical1979Why is that the governor of Alaska possibly being investigated for this supposed embezzelment is drawing so much attention, when the financial dealings of Pelosi and her husband, and Charlie Rangel are being bypassed by the MSM?
I don't think Palin will get anywhere with a lawsuit, but she's probably sick of not fighting back.
Rad..it has been past
July 5, 2009 - 21:10 ET by bigtimerRad..it has been past despicable of the non-reporting of A LOT of dems scandals...period.
I gave up long ago now of that ever happening...thank goodness for the internet.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
Bigtimer, I wish there was
July 5, 2009 - 21:16 ET by Radical1979Bigtimer, I wish there was a way some of these people could charged from outside of Congress because it certainly isn't going to happen from within. And with Obama changing the methodology of the 2010 census I'm sure jerrymandering (sp?) will occur that will make it difficult to vote any incumbent out of office, but especially the dems. Sigh. What kind of country are we passing to the next generation?
Rad.... A very messed up
July 5, 2009 - 21:24 ET by bigtimerRad....
A very messed up one...
...unless some miracle happens...plus grit and determination by real conservatives.
Hope Springs Eternal.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
Lawsuits are very expensive for the defendents.
July 5, 2009 - 21:29 ET by sevenPeople really don't like to defend themselves against people against people they hate. As soon as Huff puff gets a lawyer, their lawyer will order them to shut up. HuffPuff will also have to fork out fore example a 100 grand retainer. Then board members and investors start getting nervous.
→ And the discovery
July 5, 2009 - 21:34 ET by Cool ArrowDiscovery refusal, though probably protected under Freedom of Press, can be tantamount to admission of guilt to a public who might care what the real truth is.
Alinsky
July 5, 2009 - 21:28 ET by slickwillie2001This may be a sign that Palin is going Alinsky on the liberals, -'learn your enemy's rule book and beat them over the head with it.' This is what we conservatives have to do, learn to be a little more ruthless and unforgiving. Too many times we accept a token apology and move on; the liberals don't quit until their enemies are bankrupt, unemployed, and under indictment, real or bogus.
Re malice, yes it need to be proven in the case of a public figure, but if you can get to the discovery stage, a whole world of information is opened up. It's a wonderful thing in the age of email.
Re malice, yes it need to
July 5, 2009 - 21:34 ET by bigtimerRe malice, yes it need to be proven in the case of a public figure, but
if you can get to the discovery stage, a whole world of information is
opened up. It's a wonderful thing in the age of email.
That's correct sw....and that does work both ways.
Be careful what you wish for comes to mind.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
That is why Lee Atwater and
July 5, 2009 - 21:54 ET by doug1950That is why Lee Atwater and Tom Delay were so good at what they did. They knew how to play hardball and where all the soft spots on the Democrats heads were. Lee past away and the Dems scuttled Delay with the help of the crotchless Republicans who would not stand with him when he needed them too. I said earlier this week end she was done playing their game and that its now Game ON with her rule book.
Lead, follow or get the hell out of the way!
Doug... I miss Delay...we
July 5, 2009 - 21:57 ET by bigtimerDoug...
I miss Delay...we started losing big time when he left.
I will never forgive Hastert and others who kicked him to the curb...and dems do not have to do the same on the other side of the aisle...it was past maddening.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
BT
July 5, 2009 - 22:01 ET by doug1950Me too. He was one of the few up there that had any huevos and the smarts to back it up. I can 't use the word here I have for most of the people who populate our Congress and Senate.
Lead, follow or get the hell out of the way!
Doug.... Oh, I agree with
July 5, 2009 - 22:11 ET by bigtimerDoug....
Oh, I agree with the word you can't use....trust me. ;-)
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
A nation of laws
July 5, 2009 - 21:34 ET by ThisnThatWe are a nation of laws. Some of us actually recognize that little fact, including the Palins. It's about time the MSM -- which, by the way is protected by our Constitution -- learn to obey the law. If this lawsuit is the only way to do so, I'm all for it. But like so many others, I believe the threat of legal action to protect an individual from libel is usually sufficient. MSM -- you are on notice. Stop with the lies.
Congress -- you're next, I hope.
___________________________________
An optimist thinks that the glass is 1/2 full; a pessimist 1/2 empty; a realist thinks the glass is twice a big as it needs to be
I doubt if anything can be
July 5, 2009 - 21:35 ET by Dan The Man 2I doubt if anything can be done within a timely manner. A suit would take time, lots of time and if they take on teh NYT or such then it will also be costly. Then there is the matter of winning a suit and the proof required.
I dont think this is aimed at bloggers but at big venues designed for the sheeples.
I know some criticized her
July 5, 2009 - 21:42 ET by moderncommentaries83I know some criticized her for this move, but I say, "GO SARAH!"
This is exactly what conservatives serious about running for office need to do. They need to stop being "nice" or "bipartisan" or attempt to be "moderate" - because the media doesn't care. The media will smear them, attack them, defame them -- anything to ruin reputations and lives to keep their DNC masters happy and in office.
It's damn time someone said they are going to take these people to court for their flat-out lies and "creative spin", especially since the media has attacked Sarah Palin and her family in a way hitherto unseen in American politics.
Aut viam inveniam aut faciam
I like the idea of Sarah
July 5, 2009 - 21:43 ET by irishguyI like the idea of Sarah going "alinsky" on the whole mess of libs, be they media or politicians. Now the MSM can call her the leader of the Republican party and give Rush some time off. Go Sarah!
you go girl
July 5, 2009 - 21:45 ET by newuglyamericanUnfortunately, due to the new hype and chains obomination dictatorship, all law suits will be deemed as instruments of hostile aggression towards the established government and will be dealt with according to all illegal, unconstitutional, mud slinging, distortions allowed by the New Bastard Corp of the Aggressive Bastard Corp and the Corp of Bastard Stuff network controlled agendas.
good for Sarah
July 5, 2009 - 21:46 ET by candanceI don't think this is a free speech issue at all.
-She isn't using a bully pulpit to pass any laws or fire any state workers to shut them up. As of now she's a private citizen.
-There are a few "common sense" limitations on free speech, such as yelling fire in a crowded theatre, and oh yeah, lying about someone to embarrass them on purpose. Opinions are free game, facts are another.
-It would be hard for them to peddle this based on "allegations" when the only people alleging it are lefty blogs. It isn't based on a serious investigation. It's based on nothing but partisan daydreams.
-If the shoe were on the other foot, I would feel the same way. Like for example, if Rush Limbaugh were to go on air and say that he "just knew" Barack Obama killed puppies, I would say it's unfair. No double standard here.
She's settled nicely into victimhood
July 6, 2009 - 09:12 ET by nwahsPoor poor Palin. The world is so harsh.
Sue me.
http://newsbusters.o...
Nwahs...
July 6, 2009 - 14:15 ET by Jen7Good to see some common sense around here. :)
What she did was bizarre. Her speech was all over the place. Gave no real reason for quitting. Complained about the mean media. She just showed what she can't do: lead. She sounds like a child threatening to tell her mommy on the big bad media if they don't stop reporting her idiocy. Do'h!
As you may presently yourself be fully made aware of, my grammar sucks.
Family Guy
~Oh please
July 6, 2009 - 15:33 ET by choselife3xYou wouldn't know common sense if it told you to sit down and shut up.
Palin's "speech" was what it looks like when someone is speaking from what they really think and feel rather than parroting what someone else wrote. Try it yourself sometime, you might come up with a word other than "bizarre".
That high-pitched scream you hear is the troll under my heel.
Well said! Ronald
July 7, 2009 - 07:56 ET by USA4freedomWell said!
Ronald Reagan, 1962: I did not leave the Democratic party, the party left me.
Insert: your name, 2008, and the Republican party.
Noel, Great Photo of Sarah, heh heh
July 5, 2009 - 22:25 ET by upcountrywaterReagan VS Liberalism
→ UCW
July 5, 2009 - 22:31 ET by Cool ArrowThanks for the heads up.
It's my background screen now.
You Betcha , Good spot for her, blowing kisses...
July 5, 2009 - 22:55 ET by upcountrywaterReagan VS Liberalism
Well
July 5, 2009 - 22:36 ET by well99I never have been much on sueing people.I do hope Sara takes them to the cleaners.Those lying scuts need to be bled of any money they have.Sara has 500k in legal fees and folks wonder why she left.I know I dont have that kind of money to lose.
Rush on Palin
July 5, 2009 - 22:56 ET by slickwillie2001Rush is off all week but he spoke for a few minutes on Palin's resignation c/o Brian Maloney; 'video' with audio only:
http://macsmind.com/wordpress
Cliff's Notes: too early to tell the real reasons; to advance nationally she had to get out of Alaska; this does not preclude a run in 2012 as the beltway elites have concluded.
slick.... Noel has a blog
July 5, 2009 - 23:06 ET by bigtimerslick....
Noel has a blog post with the phone interview here...you must have missed it. ;-)
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
Re Rush
July 5, 2009 - 23:39 ET by slickwillie2001Yup, trying to do four things at the same time...
sw... I know where you're
July 5, 2009 - 23:43 ET by bigtimersw...
I know where you're coming from. ;-)
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
Obviously
July 6, 2009 - 09:09 ET by nwahs"Cliff's Notes: too early to tell the real reasons; to advance
nationally she had to get out of Alaska; this does not preclude a run
in 2012 as the beltway elites have concluded."
Duh
It precludes a successful run in 2012.
http://newsbusters.o...
I think Schuster wants to
July 6, 2009 - 01:11 ET by RR GOPI think Schuster wants to give the Palin's some coin! ;-)
Good! Nail 'em.
One of the 34% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 61% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory (yep...approval for Congress now at 39%...do you believe that!?).
She has no shot in hell of
July 6, 2009 - 03:21 ET by ckc1227She has no shot in hell of winning should she go down this path, but it would be nice to see some weasels on the left have to cough up some big bucks for legal fees. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
ckc
July 6, 2009 - 08:08 ET by Free StinkerYou're probably right about not being able to win a libel case, but I'm thinking that her opponents don't the expense (as you mention) and they don't want to go through discovery/disclosure. They'll be asked questions they probably won't want to answer, as I imagine Palin's lawyers running a very "aggressive" discovery process.
"Gov. Palin has been subjected to one of the most massive and dishonest pile-on smear attacks in the history of liberal media." -- Lowell Ponte
Re winning a libel case
July 6, 2009 - 09:23 ET by slickwillie2001There's a big difference too in the costs here. The annoying bogus ethics charges required legal support that had to be paid for in cash. These possible libel cases can be taken on spec, and even if it's 10/90, Palin doesn't care because she is suing for principle. Let's hope she has legal firms that will take her on even though they will be attacked by the liberals as well.
Also let's note that if Palin was a democratic, the story here in the old media would be -'where are these stories coming from?' Real investigative journalists would be pounding the pavement to find out who started these bogus rumors that made their way to Andrea Mitchell. That person or persons would be tracked down, and harassed until they were shamed into exile or fired from their job, or their day-job. They would be charged with some crime, any crime, even a bogus Ronnie-Earle type case. That's how the democratics play the game.
Since she's a conservative, there's no interest in tracking that information down. Andrea can get away with saying 'some say...'
I know you guys haven't
July 6, 2009 - 03:29 ET by Gary P JacksonI know you guys haven't studied those loons up in Alaska like I have, but man, those left wing bloggers are insane!
Shannyn Moore writes for HuffPo. A complete loon. One of her big "scoops" a few weeks ago was the fact that Sarah gave a speech in a "mini-skirt!" (normal "Sarah length" skirt, BTW) It's a wonder she didn't treat us to some upskirt shots.
These people are crazy. I mean you have Andree McLeod. Now she doesn't blog or write for a major newser, but she is a real pest. She's one of the serial ethics complaints filers. And she LOVES talking to the media, and writing letters to the Anchorage paper, which they gleefully publish. One of her last complaints was because the women in the state offices were showing off too much cleavage!
Word is she has been bugging Sarah for a state job for some time, to no avail. (wonder why?)
Then there is Amanda Coyne, who is a college professor who has a website dedicated to hating Sarah, and she triple dips the hate, because her husband Tony is over at the Anchorage paper, and she also writes for Huff and Puff. Very little of what she writes is grounded in reality.
Of course, there's Linda Kellen Biegel, the loon who just had a "fundraiser" to fund more ethics complaints! We actually had a parody site going to spoof this nut!
Here's where these loons mess up though. They all have blogs and broadcast their plans,and chirp back and forth about them congratulating each other for their craziness! So it's kinda easy to stay ahead of them.
It's truly is like Jr High with these people. Just insane. Petty, vicious, and insane.
I absolutely LOVE what Sarah has done. She just put these people pretty much out of business. There just isn't much they can do to her now. But she can do a whole lot to them. Before, she was the big bad Governor of Alaska using her office to "suppress the media." Now she is just Sarah defending herself from a bunch of lying liberal scumbags.
The gal has punked 'em really bad!
http://thespeechatimeforchoosing.blogspot.com/2009/07/sarah-palin-declares-her-independence.html#comments
Fighting back
July 6, 2009 - 08:28 ET by Blogger Guy00001Sarah Palin is fighting back. Libs aren't used to Republicans having guts.
Of course, Palin suggested
July 6, 2009 - 09:01 ET by balboaOf course, Palin suggested that Hillary just suck it up and not complain about press treatment.
Things like this make me think that maybe she doesn't know what she's doing.
balboa
July 6, 2009 - 16:14 ET by well99Sure Hillary's daughter was attacted all the time.Oh wait that didnt happen.There is a difference attacking the politician and the family.
The difference is that
July 7, 2009 - 11:05 ET by mattmThe difference is that Hillary deserved to be ramrodded, because she was and is a crook.
Palin has done nothing wrong except not being a liberal.
There is no moral equivalence. Clinton belongs in jail, Palin should never have had to face the baseless attacks and outright lies.
Oh right... :-\
July 8, 2009 - 10:37 ET by balboaOh right... :-\
Yea well good luck with that
July 6, 2009 - 09:05 ET by nwahsIts official, Palin is a whiplash victim.
So sue me :)
http://newsbusters.o...
You guys on the left
July 6, 2009 - 10:33 ET by doug1950May as well go find some place to hang out with each other. I think everyone here is pretty much ignoring you anymore. Besides, you say the same thing over and over. It becomes a more than a little tedious.
Lead, follow or get the hell out of the way!
They can no longer sue
July 7, 2009 - 08:52 ET by general companyHer for ethics violations if she isn't Gov. The state doesn't pay her legal bills even when she wins. No wonder why you liberals dont want the Looser Pays, law. Would kill your whole strategy.
So sue me :)
Spoken just like a liberal. Cant debate so you accuse and name call, how typical.
My Gov. thinks I am dangerous, so be careful
"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg
ABOUT DAMN FRIGGIN' TIME!
July 6, 2009 - 09:40 ET by SgthulkaAnd please start by suing the skirt off that little panty-wearer David Shuster.
This is what the left does with it's enemies
July 6, 2009 - 10:15 ET by hetookuazyIn fact it's a fair statement to say that there are Republicans who are now dancing as she departs. That's interesting, considering she has been the ONLY conservative/libertarian to spark any interest within the partry since Reagan. It makes sense that they would pull out all the stops to destroy her. She's a monumental threat to all of them.
Because she's one of us....
They don't like us but they need to use us to get and maintain power and money for themselves and their partries. She's not one of them, she's one of us and so she isn't useful to them and is in fact a major threat. Of course they would attempt to take her out.
The sad thing is that there aren't any truthful news organizations anymore, just commited leftists and opportunists without any benefit of accountability. There is no other side of the story because they won't allow it. There is no debate, they won't allow it. All there is is constant propaganda and indoctrination 24/7/365 on all the channels except one, who I believe is just a little bit too fair and balanced....
Because she's one of us....
July 6, 2009 - 14:18 ET by Jen7You've just insulted everyone here at Newsbusters. She is NOT one of us. You're really fooling yourself if you think that.
As you may presently yourself be fully made aware of, my grammar sucks.
Family Guy
Jen7, I am really
July 6, 2009 - 17:38 ET by msh1973Jen7,
I am really confused, how is calling Sarah Palin "one of us" insulting? Not sure what point you are trying to make...that Sarah Palin is a fraud?
Jen7
July 6, 2009 - 21:18 ET by well99"You've just insulted everyone here at Newsbusters."
That is a lie.You dont speak for everyone.
"She is NOT one of us."
You need to change that to "She is Not me" .I sure Sara is broken hearted over that.
"You're really fooling yourself if you think that."
Check the mirror to confirm that.
jessieH
July 6, 2009 - 10:15 ET by jessieHjessieH This is how the govt. run media rolls. Try and destroy anyone that poses a threat to their corrupt views. They may have pushed Palin so hard, she may be leaving office for good. WE can't afford to let the media make up stories about anyone, & ALL of the stories are bogus. And yes, the govt. is behind them all. Hear any stories about Pelosi?
In less than a month
July 6, 2009 - 13:41 ET by b4m4wyMy guess is that in less than a month, MSM will have hives from not being able to post a PDS story. Then when they do, I hope she gets millions in damages.
Government's first duty is to protect the people, not run their lives.
Ronald Reagan
Oh yeah!
July 6, 2009 - 17:33 ET by bobwhiteBe scared liberals, be real scared.