Mark Levin Threatens to Sue Anyone Tying Him to Tucson Shooting
For going on six days, dishonest media members have blamed prominent conservatives for inciting last Saturday's tragedy in Tucson.
On Wednesday, radio host and attorney Mark Levin threatened to sue anyone - including MSNBC's Chris Matthews, Ed Schultz, Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, and Joe Scarborough - that tried to tie him to that event (YouTube audio follows with transcript and commentary):
MARK LEVIN: Now I’m going to tell you something. Maybe I shouldn’t, but I will. I’m waiting for an allegation that is very specific against me because I’m going to sue. I don’t care if they’re bloggers, I don’t care if they’re television hosts, I don’t care if they’re radio hosts. I’m going to drag your ass into federal court. Oh, you’ll have due process. It’ll all be nice and legal. I’m going to personally depose you. I’m going to drag you in front of a jury, and I’m going to get your assets.
Somebody has to stand up to this. Somebody has to draw the line. Chris Matthews, Ed Schultz, Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, Joe Scarborough – test me. Test me. David Frum, you little weasel, test me. All of you.
I believe in the law. I believe in free speech. I believe in responsible speech. Now, you want people to tone it down? Okay, good. Anybody who accuses me of inciting mass murder in Tucscon, Arizona, is going to be sued. Period. I don’t mean, “Oh his rhetoric is incendiary.” I don’t. Anybody who tries to tie me to that monstrous event.
I’m going to tell you why. When you get behind this microphone every day, and you speak from the heart, and millions of people are listening, and family and friends, they’re listening, too. They’re affected by all these things. Now I’m a public figure. I’m a big boy. I can handle this. The question is whether these other boys can handle it. You think I’m kidding? Try me, because I’m not kidding. The laws of libel are actually older than the first amendment.
According to the American Spectator, Levin moments before this issued a challenge to Matthews:
"I challenge Chris Matthews, I'll put $100,000 on the table, to find any example where Sarah Palin has promoted the murder of anybody," said Levin -- specifically excluding terrorists and the Taliban.
Levin went on: "A hundred thousand on the table if Chris Matthews can find anywhere Mark Levin has urged the murder of people who have different political viewpoints. That's the murder of politicians …where I said go out there and kill X,Y,Z…go out there and kill A,B,C. I challenge him right now. Sarah Palin. Me. Go ahead."
Levin, as usual, was 100 percent right.
What we've witnessed in the past six days has been a national disgrace.
Within minutes of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) getting shot, media members began accusing conservative politicians and pundits of inciting the shooter. This was before anyone knew anything about him.
We have since learned that whatever politics Jared Lee Loughner had, they were certainly not right-wing, and that he apparently didn't watch television or listen to talk radio.
But this didn't stop the folks responsible for disseminating the news via the airwaves, cable and print to continually and dishonestly misrepresent to their viewers, listeners, and readers that folks like Palin, Levin, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, and members of the Tea Party all had a hand in this incident.
This nonsense has to stop, for what these shameful accusers in the media don't understand is that it's they that are exacerbating the heated rhetoric and ideological divisions in this nation.
Every time they jump to malevolent conclusions and disseminate their evil assumptions, their viewers, listeners, and readers feel greater antipathy and hatred for fellow Americans.
Ed Schultz less than 72 hours before Giffords was shot told his viewers, "This is an ideological war. I say it on camera tonight here on MSNBC - I will fight these [Republican] bastards every night at 6 o’clock."
In reality, Schultz was speaking for almost all liberal media members who deep in their hearts agree that this is their charge as so-called journalists: to fight Republican "bastards" while advancing the agenda of the Democrat Party.
Part of this battle includes demonizing conservatives and whenever possible depicting them as being responsible for all that ails the country.
Within minutes of an act of extreme violence being committed in this country, these folks immediately begin telling their viewers, listeners, and readers the assailant must have been impacted by the words and statements of prominent right-wing figures.
If these people now calling for civility actually want the rhetoric to be toned down, they should begin doing so in their own TV studios, radio booths, and pressrooms.
Failing that, they should stop pointing their hypocritical fingers at anyone else or be sued for libel.
Bravo, Mark. Bravo!
(H/T Breitbart)
- Noel Sheppard's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Hold Them to Account for their Rhetoric
Submitted by scottyusmc on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 11:02am.
Way to go Mark!!!! It would be a great thing if they were made to be held accountable (in a specific way) for the crap they spew out.
See how
Submitted by StarAZ on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 11:49am.
See how Comcast likes this costing them money.
Poof
Submitted by Dave. on Sun, 01/16/2011 - 1:24am.
Vote for the American in November
there is one reason
Submitted by Hoosier Conservative on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 11:03am.
liberals are angry at Palin's campaign methods last summer: she helped deliver the biggest Republican victory in 50 years. As far I am concerned liberals started up the climate of hate by calling conservatives; racist, unhinged, extreme. They didn't think conservative leaders would punch back hard enough to overcome the smears. THAT'S why the political climate was so tense.
Actually it is only the women
Submitted by ricklail on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 11:09am.
Actually it is only the women that are punching back like Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman, Ann Coulter, Megan Kelly, and Laura Ingrahm just to name a few. The men like Boehner and his ilk are hunkered down scared to death to say anything.
yeah
Submitted by Hoosier Conservative on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 11:10am.
But boy they will want your vote in 2012.
Unfortunately, GOP ad men in general
Submitted by American.Patriot on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 11:51am.
Have to be extremely careful in today's highly charged environment. Where I work, anytime I try to hold an African American employes accountable for proper behavior, or accountable for business results, the first reply I get is, you're doing this because I'm black... Attribute this phenomena to the man- child in the white house. He has been very effective at demonstrating how to play the race card in any conceivable situationI am already tired of...
Submitted by peteydee on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 3:07pm.
That whining and crying John Boehner.I am about to ship off a king sized sheet and tell him to use it as a handkerchief.We are in big trouble
It would be nice if the
Submitted by ricklail on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 11:07am.
It would be nice if the others besides the Great One would go after the whole lineup on MESSNBC. Once this went to court and the Great One won Al Sharpton would have to shut up too.
goMarkgo
Submitted by MidAmerica on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 11:05am.
He's right (as usual). It's time to stand up against the unscrupulous media and make them accountable. Those media outlets are not even hiding their advocacy anymore. It's a full on battle of the airwaves.
It seems they have decided this is their battle to the death. If the Conservatives are as successful in the next two years as the last year then the remaining control of the Liberals in congress and the Whitehouse will be gone. So they have drawn a line in the sand. For them, it's a battle for survival.
I would like to see Levin, Limbaugh, Hannity, Boortz...
Submitted by Dave. on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 11:20am.
...and all the rest pool their not inconsiderable resources and go after them all at once, and include their employers in the litigation.
Legally they will be fighting a very steep uphill battle, as cases such as these are very difficult to win, but at the very least they can financially bankrupt the bastards.
Keithie might even have to sell his bathtub.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
Yeah, Boortz
Submitted by StarAZ on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 11:53am.
An inlaw of my brother had a terrible accident and Boortz mocked her death as meaning she was so stupid she belonged in Darwin's waiting room. What a guy!
A friend of my cousin's nephew
Submitted by IgnatzJFahrquar on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 2:18pm.
would like to see a link or some other backup info.
StarAZ,
Submitted by Dave. on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 11:18pm.
You have mentioned that to me before, and I am truly sorry.
Look, all I have ever said is I like his show.
I have never said he could not be a first-rate a-hole.
He has been many times, and has gotten my BP into the danger level on more than a few occasions.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
Dave, I never could
Submitted by Chris Norman on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 11:53pm.
Dave,
I never could understand why Boortz, a sharp and intelligent man, would undercut his opinions by frequently being such a mean-spirited SOB. He could maintain his "Church of the Painful Truth" image and still tone down his sheer personal nastiness. Also, even though I am a non-practicing Catholic, I believe in the concept of karma (or the less exotic concept of "what goes around, comes around") and I can't undertand how a guy who can be so verbally cruel to people could achieve the success he has had. That said, I occasionally listen to his show until he starts getting nasty.
Chris,
Submitted by Dave. on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 1:31am.
It just might be that his claim of having a "personality disorder' is for real.
I'm not educated enough in that area (psychology) to know for sure, but like all talk radio show hosts, I try to separate the good from the bad, as I never, EVER agree with them all the time.
They all make good points, but not all of the time.
That is why I get most of my news from the net, so I can bounce stories off each other.
After a while, it's pretty easy to seperate the wheat from the chaff.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
Dave, I didn't know he had
Submitted by Chris Norman on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 1:42am.
Dave,
I didn't know he had claimed to have a personality disorder. That's sort of - er - weird. I guess if an attorney has to have a personality disorder, compulsive nastiness would be the least harmful to his career. :)
Anyway, I don't make it a habit to listen to any of the radio talk shows. Mainly, it's because I'm either at work or when I listen to them in my truck, it's only a short drive and I mostly hear what seems to be the ninety percent of their shows that consist of commercials for General Steel, Life Lock, or Vermont Teddy Bears
That said, I like Rush and Laura Ingraham. The rest, I can either take or leave.
Chris, Neal's claim was somewhat tongue-in-cheek
Submitted by Dave. on Sun, 01/16/2011 - 1:28am.
This isnt.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
Mark Levin
Submitted by RightRealDeal on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 11:18am.
Mark is a great American and I urge him to bring it and them on, all of them. It is about time someone made an issue out of the leftist poison.
Mark, keep doing what you do!
The lame stream media are
Submitted by Thoreau on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 11:20am.
The lame stream media are reprehensible. Oblivious to the facts. Following that murdering hookers communist manifesto to a T. Never waste a trajedy. Blame the victims. Profit.
What is so incredibly absurd about all this foaming at the mouth
Submitted by virginia republican on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 11:21am.
by the MSM and especially the lunatics at MSPMS, is that civil (or uncivil) political discourse has absolutely NOTHING to do with the Tucson tragedy. They just make themselves look even more out of touch with reality, which helps send their ratings even further down the crapper. They might as well blame Loughner's criminal actions on global warming. Wait, maybe I shouldn't give them any new ideas. Maybe they'll re-visit the Va Tech shootings and blame talk radio and Palin for that as well.
As I posted already
Submitted by Iron Tigers Vet on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 11:35am.
on Breitbart.com...
It's about time, and what more of a perfect person than Mark Levin to take them to task.
Call 'em like they are Mark.... A-HOLES!!
I Love Mark Levin! Always Have,....
Submitted by BBallleaper on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 11:34am.
Go Mark Go! Win it for all of us who love our country! And remember people, EVERY TIME A RINO WINS,...THE DEMONRATS WIN ANOTHER ELECTION!
Somebody has to scare the MSM into honesty.
Submitted by Red Jeep on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 11:40am.
Hope Mark Levin can, but...
The polls on this are on our side
Submitted by Tomorama on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 11:41am.
The FUNNY thing................................... maybe not so funny thing is that WE CAN PRODUCE EXACTLY what Mark is talking about here with the only difference being liberals hoping and wishing and praying for the DEATHS of Conservatives.
Actually this whole gutless charade by the LSM is very Alinsky of them, accuse your opposition of doing exactly what you are doing.
By the way, the memo of the last few days hammering Palin is even more disgusting, the same assholes that brought her into the story, then bitched about her silence are now upset she defended herself.
Then the fraud in chief get's to swoop in and come off as the hero for bringing civilty into the discourse.
So his words over the years don't count anymoe?
Chicago style journalism at its best
Submitted by Kenyon Schraeder on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 11:47am.
MSNBC is simply living up to the Chicago style reputation for thuggery, er, "doing business". They have no journalistic standing and so they have happily relegated themselves to being nothing more than a junkyard dog for the left. Ergo, MSNBC exists solely to do the left's "on air" dirty work.
They know that the White House has their back in all of this and so they're entirely comfortable with launching unfounded, shamelessly vitriolic attacks upon the right, stopping at nothing, any shred of decency or integrity be darned. Remember that they fear nothing from the FCC because "it's in the bag". However, if Mark Levin is very sure as a lawyer that he can actually prove his case in a court of law, I suspect that the volume at MSNBC will go down and the anti-right fire will be reduced to a pilot light for the duration, but only because the Whire House has instructed them to do so.
I hope that Mark Levin can put the fear of the stockholders into the executives at MSNBC. Money still talks and lawsuits can be extremely expensive and damaging.
Tingles
Submitted by Texndoc on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 11:50am.
You know what I like about what Tingles said? That he said he had to research Mark Levins radio show numbers, and he was "shocked". Rush, Hannity, and Levin: 1, 2 and 3.Good for him. In reality,
Submitted by jdawg2009 on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 11:59am.
Good for him. In reality, all conservative speech is under assault, and the left will do whatever it takes.
http://www.examiner.com/conservative-in-spokane/conservative-speech-the-real-target-of-liberal-attacks
Do it
Submitted by griv on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 12:01pm.
Way to go Mark. Sue them all. They are so vile and full of hatred, but anytime something happens they point to the right. Obama SAID TO BRING A GUN.
OBEY THE PRESIDENT AND BRING A GUN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thank you
Submitted by grammajane on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 12:03pm.
Go for it Mr. Levin. There are millions who are behind you to put an end to these lunitics. Wish we could all be in court with you. Thank you for your show and always speaking the truth.
Like others here
Submitted by The_Pumpcrop on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 12:06pm.
I agree that there should me more going after the spinners, liars and loons on MSNBC and other stations/papers. I wished more would constantly hit them every single time they do this. EVERYONE!!! I'd also like to see everyone who is not a libboe refuse to go on any of their programs. Spittin' Chris won't let them talk anyway.
PALIN WOULD DO BETTER
Submitted by baseballdoc on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 12:12pm.
.....If Conservative pundits like Krauthamer would stop putting her down ...Kraut doesn't attack her on substance but on style.
.....What is it with these elites? Do they think that beauty negates brains? Hedy Lamarr held a patent on Spread Spectrum Technology which is the foundation for wireless communication.
.....If Palin were President I know that she would never do anything to harm this Country. I can't say that about the present ocupant of the White House.
Krauthammer
Submitted by NotFondOfLibs on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 1:28pm.
I am also fed with Krauthammer's as well as the so called Fox All Stars gushing praise of Obama's speech wednesday night. It was very disappointing to hear these people heap praise upon a guy who has violated his own demands for civil discourse. Obama is the one who suggested people bring a gun. He also threatened Sean Hannity by saying his friend/aide would tear Sean Hannity up. Obama is a hypocritical fraud who cares only about his own agenda and not getting the country back to work.
On a personal note
Submitted by Beukeboom on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 2:16pm.
On a personal note, whether it be Republican or Democrat, conservative or liberal, I find political speeches incredibly boring and tend to avoid them whenever possible.
DO IT Mark please do it.
Submitted by Utherpend on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 12:19pm.
DO IT Mark please do it.
Levin would have about the
Submitted by Jer on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 12:36pm.
Levin would have about the same chance of prevailing as Feinstein and Boxer would against Michael Savage after the latter claimed those two senators were responsible and had "blood on their hands" for the shooting and death of the police officers in Oakland last year. In other words, zero.
Jer
Mark Levin's chances
Submitted by NotFondOfLibs on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 1:32pm.
How would you know, jer? Are you just spouting the typical liberal b.s.? Go pound some sand, jer with a little j. What proof does mathews have that Mark Levin had anything to do with the Tucson Massacre? Come on jer, tell us. Or do you have to wait for an answer from the Daily Kos, Huffington Post, or Media Matters. Shut up jer.
Do you want to know, or do
Submitted by Jer on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 1:40pm.
Do you want to know, or do you want me to shut up? I'm confused.
Jer
BOTH.......use sign language,
Submitted by Barack_must_go..... on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 7:51pm.
BOTH.......use sign language, you're giving me a head ache.
Barack_Must_Go.....
NotFondOfLibs
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 1:48am.
Quit being and asshole. Jer is right. He IS a lawyer, and probably knows better than you the odds.
Are you a moron, obtuse, or just not paying attention?
And another thing. You are an even bigger asshole for making me defend a liberal. (No offense, Jer).
Kool Aid Much, Jer?
Submitted by AgentAmerican on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 1:35pm.
Our favorite rabid left-wing ideologue is back. How's the weather under that rock you crawled out from under? Is it the same rock that Markos came from.
Pervert.
Outstanding, AgentAm...
Submitted by Jer on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 1:47pm.
Let's see, DFTT's post is self-contradictory and nonsensical. Yours is simply imbecilic and gutter-dwelling.
Very impressive, guys.
Something tells me your fellow conservatives aren't exactly bursting with pride after reading such tripe.
Jer
What post?
Submitted by DontFeedTheTrolls on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 2:33pm.
What post?
DontFeedTheTrolls...
Submitted by Jer on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 3:59pm.
I'm very sorry. I meant NotFondofLibs post..
Jer
Caught profiling again, huh Packingham?
Submitted by SickofLibs on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 5:06pm.
Pay attention, will ya? This is serious business here.
I agree, SoL...
Submitted by Jer on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 5:58pm.
The blunder was not quite in the "abiding" category of abject shame inducing, but still pretty embarrassing. I strive to do better every day. Sometimes I fail. This is one of those times.
Jer
And, please!!! [getting out of chair, now on knees at keyboard] I'll do anything for you--even send you the new MrShy album he's supposed to mail me--just don't call me "Packingham". I don't think I can take it. Maybe once a week. But that's it. ;-)
You know what, people?
Submitted by Blonde on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 5:09pm.
(And I'm responding to Jer, here, because I don't want anyone to feel picked on).
Jer is usually very respectful, knowing that he's posting here, as a liberal, on a conservative site. And has been for quite a while.
Jer is not a troll, and doesn't deserve to be treated like one.
We can disagree with Jer all we'd like on ideas, principles, etc., but would you kindly refrain from the silly personal attacks?
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
B:
Submitted by SickofLibs on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 5:57pm.
Jer and I are respectful pals and PM frequently.
SoL...
Submitted by Jer on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 6:07pm.
You have carte blanche to say anything you want to about me. [Well, except for the Packingham thing.]
Jer
Thanks, Blanche
Submitted by SickofLibs on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 7:52pm.
Thanks, Blanche.
You're packing ham? Is that
Submitted by Beukeboom on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 9:45pm.
You're packing ham? Is that like packing heat? :-)
Not exactly, Beuke...
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 9:48pm.
I'd say more like packing meat. :-)
Jer
Blonde
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 1:59am.
"...because I don't want anyone to feel picked on"
Hmm, should have thought about that before I posted. Then again, I don't care if they feel picked on.
However, if you have some extra tact, I could apparently use some. :)
Something tells me your
Submitted by AgentAmerican on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 4:50pm.
Something tells me your fellow conservatives aren't exactly bursting with pride after reading such tripe.
Slow day at McDonalds?
Speaking of Mickey D's
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 2:25am.
Here. Hopefully it will keep you busy until you find a clue.
Jer,
Submitted by Dave. on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 7:05pm.
And I don't have to tell you that the very first subpoena out the door by whoever he goes after will be for the tapes of everything Mark has ever said on the radio.
He'd better hope he hasn't said something the other side can blow all out of proportion.
I worked for six years preparing materials for expert testimony and spent more than a few hours sitting in on jury trials.
I have seen opposing attorneys turn an anthill into Mt. Shasta in a matter of moments, and on more than a few occasions. All it takes for that to work is a jury full of Peggy Bundys.
And more than likely, that is what they will wind up with.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
This ' Throwing Down of the
Submitted by Barack_must_go..... on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 8:09pm.
This ' Throwing Down of the Gauntlet ' was more to prove just what a bunch of dirty little cockroaches make up today's lame street media.
Not one dared to come out from their hiding place under the fridge or cowering under the bed to respond to Marks rebuke of their kind.
He was merely making a point, one that seemingly has gone right over some peoples head.
Barack_Must_Go.....
Bmg, I am fully aware of what Levin is up to
Submitted by Dave. on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 9:54pm.
I wasn't aiming my responses at Levin so much as at some of the posters on this thread.
Levin is an attorney, and a pretty sharp one at that, and knows full well what he will be in for should he persue litigation against anyone attempting to accuse him of being responsible for what happened last Saturday.
My only point is that cases such as these are very difficult to win, because public figures leave information trails, and those trails can be very long - depending on the length of time they have spent in the public eye, as well as what they were writing or saying long before they even became public figures.
Many of those things can be distorted by even moderately skilled trial lawyers, and effectively used against the other party.
Some seem to think it's just a matter of deciding to just "sue the bastards" and all will be right with the world.
Believe me, I understand the thought processes behind that, and in many areas I even agree, but there are the cold, hard realities of our legal system that many do not seem to be cognizant of.
It's not the judge that matters, but what the attorneys can convince the jury of.
And often times it doesn't matter what the laws actually say.
I've seen it happen too many times.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
AA
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 1:49am.
See my reply to sickoflibs, (small s).
Why do I get a small "s"?
Submitted by SickofLibs on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 9:53am.
?
Oops
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 1:28pm.
I meant notafanoflibs. Sorry I got y'all mixed up. With a small n.Oops
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 1:26pm.
I meant notafanoflibs. Sorry I got y'all mixed up. With a small n.Jer,
Submitted by Dave. on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 5:06pm.
I suspect you are correct.
"Public figures" rarely ever fare well in these things - especially against other public figures, which is what this would be.
Once in a blue moon a big named hollywood type might win against some stoopid super market tabloid for publishing something about them that is soooooo out there that it is really over the line, but that doesn't happen very often.
Still, this would be interesting to watch just the same.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
Dave...
Submitted by Jer on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 8:16pm.
In response to this and your previous post, you're right. The discovery stage can be incredibly onerous, and be used to literally wear down an opponent mentally,, emotionally and financially [although legal fees shouldn't be a problem for Levin]. And the standards of proof regarding defamation would make it very difficult for Levin to succeed in this country. Elsewhere he might have a pretty good shot at it. But not here. At least that's my opinion.
Jer
Actualy Jer
Submitted by Boudin on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 12:05am.
Levin's chance of success is very great. If it went to court, but more likely the issue is resolved with a "heart felt" public retraction. Witch Mark will humiliate them with.
If xy or z accuses Levin falsely, and refuses to back up. Mark Levin has every right to force him to prove it in a civil suit. They will fail. Jer this aint name calling, this is an accusation of mass murder. This is an offense to Marks personal liberty and safety. He wins big here.
Boudin...
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 12:11am.
In the court of public opinion? Maybe so.
Jer
Yea ok
Submitted by Boudin on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 9:53am.
But I bet none of these cowards dare test him.
Also considering Marks legal foundation takes on some of the most difficult cases and wins, I am pretty sure he knows what he is doing.
Thrown down the gauntlet
Submitted by misterbee241 on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 12:41pm.
Mark has "flang the gauntlet" as we say. Will the left pick it up? It will be interesting to watch. Sometimes, Mark's rants put me off. Having said that, he is right more often than he is wrong. And he's right about this. Two hundered and 34 years ago or thereabouts, Patrick Henry said "give me liberty or give me death." Henry's words would be hate speech and inciting violence today. I think Mark is carrying on in the tradition and spirit of Patrick Henry. Good on ya, Mark, and keep it up.
I would like to see how this
Submitted by Beukeboom on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 12:43pm.
I would like to see how this plays out if Levin does file a suit against one or more of the parties mentioned. I believe Jer mentioned his opinion that it would be laughed out of court (paraphrasing? Correct me if I am incorrect.) but let's wait and see what happens IF such a suit is filed.
Beukeboom...
Submitted by Jer on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 1:16pm.
Your characterization of my opinion is correct. I just don't think these types of defamation actions--involving the media and public figures (which Mark would clearly be considered)--would get very far. Maybe if it got to a jury, Levin might get a verdict, but I think it would be reversed on appeal under current libel law.
Jer
Again, that is something we
Submitted by Beukeboom on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 2:23pm.
Again, that is something we would have to witness as it unfolds (IF it ever happens). As with economists, legal analysts can't agree on much of anything so prevailing legal opinions are all over the place. In many instances, flipping a coin would have a better chance of predicting legal outcomes IMHO.
As I mentioned elsewhere and also touched upon earlier in this post, thus far all we have is Levin's words. As far as I can determine, there haven't been anything actually done to begin filing such a lawsuit. Of course filing a suit is easy after all in this day and age one can easily file a lawsuit against a ham sandwich but beyond that anything could happen given the right judges and possible jury.
On a related note, I am certain that word of this promise by Levin has been presented to those Levin mentioned. I wonder if any of them will take this and use it to attack Levin even more daring him either explicitly or implicitly to sue. Of those on the list I think Schultz and Olbermann would be the two top candidates to do so.
Short answer, no
Submitted by Boudin on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 10:00am.
I wonder if any of them will take this and use it to attack Levin
The media would rather pretend Mark doesnt exists. Mark has written many best selling books, but is never invited on any of these shows. They fear his words, because they are of liberty, and those who steal it!
Yeah, but I was referring
Submitted by Beukeboom on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 9:53pm.
Yeah, but I was referring specifically to Schultz and Olbermann who cannot logically, reasonably, nor rationally be called "media" in the journalistic sense. :-)
Since neither of them are logical, reasonable, nor rational I figured they'd be the most likely to pick up Levin's "gauntlet."
We can only hope...
Submitted by retrocon on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 12:48pm.
we can only hope that one of the MSM boneheads is dumb enough to do it.
What a great week on countTV that would be ;-)
Mark, would you be so kind?
Submitted by Willis_Leon_Johnson on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 12:59pm.
Set up an account where the People can donate to the lawsuits?
For starters I'll donate the first $100, and it doesn't even have to be tax deductible!
Then a list of all the advertisers on each network to write letters and emails to explaining why I refuse to purchase any of their products as long as they continue to give their money to Anti American companies.
End 'gun violence in America' - Require training and MANDATORY "Shall Carry" by every Citizen.
If harry reid is the best person to lead the senate, what does that say about the other 99 senators?
This isn't about beliefs or assumptions
Submitted by Cappmann1962 on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 1:09pm.
This is about a calculated strategy to discredit conservatism as a philosophy. These people, Schultz, Olberman, Krugman, et al, all KNOW what they spew is BS. They count on those who rely on spoon-fed information (the Democrat base) to buy into their diatribes. They have no legitimate counter-argument and they know it.
They have been caught, on numerous occasions, discussing and planning amongst themselves, how they were going to report or present issues involving conservatives to spotlight them in the worst possible way. Even if they had to lie to spin it to their benefit. This is nothing new. The major difference is that conservatives are FINALLY punching back. There is no "high road" to take when dealing with such hypocritical, lying, morally bankrupt hacks. Another difference is that, as has recently been their wont, they go too far. And people are starting to catch on. This really began during the 2000 presidential election, when their shoe-in (Gore) lost. Then they sucessfully took it to the extreme during the 2006 midterms. The culmination was the 2008 election of Obama and the super-majorities in congress. They seem to have figured that after such successes, they could get away with virtually anything. They haven't yet figured out their losses during the last election. All they know is that their tried and true methods failed. Their childish reaction - vitriolic anger. Hence the current climate of hyper-partisanship. This will continue until they are held accountable by such actions as Mr. Levin is threatening, and by being subjected to the pain of judgements against them and loss of public prominence. Way to go Mark Levin!!!
He'll get as many takers as
Submitted by Barack_must_go..... on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 1:20pm.
He'll get as many takers as the Bro's of Congress lying to the American people about being called the N word's ' hundred grand ' offer generated.....
Barack_Must_Go.....
Get on it
Submitted by grammajane on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 1:26pm.
Get on it, Mr.Levin. That lunitic Schultz is already blabbing
Stiffle!
Submitted by okiehawk44 on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 1:31pm.
Leftists are shaping the discourse mostly using their propaganda arm the media but it is not too late for Republican leaders to stop being meek -- listening up Boehner? -- and moving on the promises to Americans they made to get themselves elected in the massive tidal wave of Nov. 2.
Sure the left wants those of us who view them as truly -- although often unintentionally -- wrong about America it's past and we hope its future to stop and change our projected path. Most of us cannot in good faith do that anymore. We have to be able to dissent. We have to be able to petition our government. We have to be able to join with others who want this country to survive and who do not see it as all bad all the time. The left wants to prevent all those things and to force us back into silence. I have met many folks over the past 2+ years who have never before spoken out and who for the most part trusted that things would improve whoever was pulling the levers of power in DC. Not anymore. Having been called losers, homophobes, stupid, racists, bigots, cowards, etc by the left for having the temerity to defend America as a pretty damn good country and to dissagree with a president's policies even as they have been called names -- some for the first time in their lives -- this group overwhelmingly stayed the course and made it to the polls in November to vote against the left and against the policies of the left including those of Obama.
Speaker Boehner and Minority Leader McConnell do not let us down. Do not pull any of your punches with the left. We got you back one part of Congress -- the people's part -- with a very simple message -- STOP SPENDING. If you truly do not believe you can do that or you have been convinced that leftists "care" too and you don't want to hurt a colleague's feelings -- step out of the way.
The left is very adept at strategy. The left has a deep bench and they have a large segment of the media assisting them. But you have a huge number of voters behind you too and you folks in DC have to start working. You are not in DC to make new friends or to try to work with leftists -- you are there to stop spending and to derail this totally berserk administration. You should probably send your families back home and sleep in your offices. You should dedicate yourselves for the next 24 months -- and the clock is ticking -- to the overwhelming task before you. If you don't think you have the fortitude to do that then you should resign. Pure and simple but from my heart because these are not normal times any longer. Fight or get out of the way because America is at stake. My future is at stake. My grandchildren's future is at stake. Get busy and God Bless -- you have my support in this and the support of millions of Americans.
Invitations to Mark Levin
Submitted by NotFondOfLibs on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 1:40pm.
It is interesting that people like Mathews, Schultz, Olbermann, Maddow and the rest of the liberal rats never invite Mark Levin on their shows. These clowns know that Mark Levin would destroy them in any debate/discussion and make them look like the fools they are. If Mark Levin decides to sue these stooges, I will be supporting him 100%.
Levinitze them
Submitted by AgentAmerican on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 1:44pm.
Keithamphetimine
Markos the Worm
Schultzophrenia
Chrissy Pervert
Stephy
Harry The Hack Smith
Levinitize them with a class action.
Don't agree here
Submitted by MissMinPhx on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 1:45pm.
"This nonsense has to stop, for what these shameful accusers in the media don't understand is that it's they that are exacerbating the heated rhetoric and ideological divisions in this nation."
Perhaps Mr. Sheppard is just being kind and giving the leftie talkers the benefit of the doubt, but I truly believe they understand fully what they are doing and know that their hateful rhetoric exacerbates the situation. In their mind, however, I think they see it as a necessary evil for the good of their cause. They want their listeners angry at conservatives. They are itching for disobedience, for the poor to rise up and revolt against the evil rich and those who stand in the way of socialism. What they don't understand is that compared to most other countries, the poor have it good in America. They have a welfare program, food stamps, housing, etc., that provides them with money for flat screened tvs, cell phones, video games and all the cheetos they can eat. It's not conservatives standing in the way of the leftist revolution, it's the welfare system that lulls the poor into complacity.
right
Submitted by amyshulk on Tue, 01/18/2011 - 9:57pm.
So they set up the right as the evil ones taking away their freebies - there's your gasoline on a fire!!!
Ronald Reagan
Well, the 'press' and broadcast media has long instigated
Submitted by Willis_Leon_Johnson on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 1:56pm.
riots because riots increase revenue.
They were the driving force in LA that caused the rodney king riots and were never held responsible for their part in the death and destruction directly caused by their 'hate inciting'"reporting" of only a portion of the facts that were known and should have been reported.
What we need is an attorney general, backed by an administration that will file the criminal complaints when they do crap like that.
In the 50's, when TV was in its infancy, the 'news' was presented as a "Public Service" as well as a condition of their broadcast license.
When the 'news' divisions were allowed to sell advertising and became a profit generating aspect of the business, then political discord and civil unrest became HIGHLY profitable.
Their licenses should be rolled back to providing the 'news' as a public service and let them present opinion shows under the banner of 'political opinion' and let the advertisers choose whether or not they support the views of the hosts.
End 'gun violence in America' - Require training and MANDATORY "Shall Carry" by every Citizen.
If harry reid is the best person to lead the senate, what does that say about the other 99 senators?
Mark. If you want a few bucks
Submitted by danbo on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 2:19pm.
Mark. If you want a few bucks contributed to your worthy cause. Let us know. So we can feel we helped a little in the just crusade. (Am I allowed to say crusade? Or will I be put in a speech camp to learn the proper way to think and speak? Or charged with murder?)
"You lie!" Rep. Joe Wilson R-(SC)
Levin is playing into their hands
Submitted by Ashrak on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 2:22pm.
This track is a mistake. It opens him up to be deemed "against free speech" and undermines his Constitutional premise. The answer to dishonest speech is more speech standing up to it, not the forced reduction of the speech in question or government ordered or sanctioned punishment for it.
The left is the body politic that uses courts to accomplish their goals and the Liberty movement has to be above that underhanded method -or it will fail. We cannot lose our way.
The risk of becoming that which you oppose increases exponentially when you dabble in the use of tools employed by those on the "other side". Now, it is fair to say that sometimes one must fight fire with fire, but there it is exactly. Fight speech with speech, not restriction of it!
Notice how Mark had to come with a qualifer in "except the Terrorists and the Taliban"? He has already lost before he even began when he has to go there. First things first, killing terrorists and barbarians in self-defense is NEVER "murder". Yet, Mark, I am sure in a moment of emotion controlling his mouth, unwittingly and unwillingly conceded a point he shouldn't have and wouldn't have ordinarily. So why did he? Emotion. That is why. And there it is, he became that which he opposed. He used a tool of the opposition and it backfired.
Rethink it Mark. Seriously. Point their own words right back at them. Repeat them, and their actions, over and over and over and do it for all to see relentlessly. This is the way to victory.
Resisit the temptation to stoop to their level. For that is exactly what they want. That is where they find their rationalization and attempt their justification. We are better than that and we will win this war by fighting each battle at a time and place of our choosing. We will not falter and we will not fail unless we forget who we are and stray from the values that makes us who we are. One by one, my friend, one by one. ( W had wise words sometimes, no doubt.)
Hold them accountable, indeed, but do it in the court of public opinion. Resolve will carry us all through so long as we embrace the sword and the shield that is Truth and Honesty. These tools no court of law can ever provide for us, it is only via the relentless weilding of these reightous tools, which exist within us already as a result of our humanity and the free will to use them or not, that this fight ends in our favor.
Please Mark. Remember who you are. Stand tall on YOUR merit, not on their lack of it! Believe it is there. Know it is there. Share it. Remember, time is on our side because history moves forward regardless and the lies will always be exposed and so too will those who tell them. Think it through, Mark. Think It Through.
The MSM enjoys no constitutional protection to libel
Submitted by lsudolemite on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 4:25pm.
whether it's against public figures like Levin, nor against groups such as the Tea Party, among whose members are numerous citizens who are certainly not in the public eye.
Standing on principle alone and turning the other cheek work only up to a point. To use a football analogy, it's playing not to lose against an aggressive opponent who is playing to win. Republicans and conservatives have been playing not to lose for so long that they haven't noticed the other team running up the score, and have forgotten how to play the political game aggressively. That entails using every legal means at your disposal to defeat your enemy. And make no mistake, that's exactly what liberals in positions of power are. (And certainly how they see us.)
Wars are won by drumming the enemy into submission and eliminating their will and capability to continue fighting. That is, until liberals introduced useless U.N. diplomacy, "conflict resolution", and strongly worded multilateral resolutions that are worthless. And worse, managed to convince conservatives that theirs is the proper, desirable course of action. Is it a coincidence that the Democrats all suddenly want an end to vicious partisanship and vitriol at precisely the same time that they are weakest? Remember all those pleas by Obama, Pelosi and the Dems to compromise with Republicans for the good of the country? Me neither.
When your opponent's on the ropes, you don't hang back and hope the judges give you the win on points. You go for the knockout blow.
Your wrong if you think Mark
Submitted by Boudin on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 9:37am.
Hasnt thought this through. He didnt just spout this in a moment of high blood pressure. In-fact he tells you as much, if you listen. Also the "qualifier" is concerning the 100k reward, not the suit. And one more thing, you do not have "free speech rights" to make any old accusation you want about anyone you want. Now I know Jer and the media will try to make you beleive it so, it's not!
Nobody can stop another from
Submitted by Ashrak on Sun, 01/16/2011 - 1:59am.
Nobody can stop another from speaking. Just like nobody can stop another from defending themselves. Nobody can stop another from having their faith or writing a peace. Sure, make it "illegal" and "punish" someone for it, but stopping it from being done is only accomplished at the individual level by means of Individual free will.
You can say this, but you can't say that. Pretty soon, you can;t say this or that. but you can say the other. Not long after, this, that and the other are all illegal and punishable and then it is wondered how a right to speak freely can be so restricted and regulated. This is a slope even the most experienced skier is best to avoid.
Exposing the lies being told is the important aspect here. A judge is to determine what can be said and what cannot? So, a judiciary is empowered where a legislture is specifically barred?
I regard the use of the court system to make a political point as be something the left likes to do. Could Mark make endroads here? Maybe. He could possibly say "I won". But then, Obama did that too, didn't he? What does it serve? What good does it do?
Maybe you should rethink it
Submitted by ckc1227 on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 4:23pm.
"This track is a mistake. It opens him up to be deemed "against free speech" and undermines his Constitutional premise."
Slander/libel is no more Constitutionally protected free speech than human sacrifice is a Constitutionally protected practice of religion. If anyone is playing into their hands, it's you.
ckc, That he could be
Submitted by Ashrak on Sun, 01/16/2011 - 1:46am.
ckc,
That he could be deemed as such, doesn't mean he actually is that way. As I used "deemed", please think about Nancy Pelosi. Deem it so -and it is so. Deem and Pass. Do you catch it now?
What is the most basic premise of this thread? Lies, right? False pretense and false premise, right?
You misunderstand what I said, and meant, and make it seem as if I said something I did not. Perception is what it is all about with these folks. As already demonstrated, they couldn't care less what the facts actually are, they just make their predetermined claims over and over again. And then again. And then still.
Mark sets himself up for more of the same going forward with this line of engagement. It is like offering ammunition.
Look to Sarah Palin to see the same thing. She wasn't saying anything and the storyline was made all about her and blamed on her. As soon as she spoke up, the story was about what she said and that she did. Heck, she even injected herself, some said. They couldn't say she was trying to stifle anyone, could they? See how it works? Her decision, to speak back, made them jump the shark yet again. Therein is where real success is found.
Mark will be painted as trying to stifle free speech and it will be said he is a hypocrite. He has this microphone and he uses it and the evil profits he makes to try and stifle the speech of others. Again, this is not what I think, this is how he will be frozen, deeeeeeemed and presented. Think Saul.
The way to beat these folks is to play their own game better than they do. And the most powerful are undeniably victorious when they are able to leave the most devestating weapon in reserve (not unlike the way we fight military war without nuclear weapon use) and still stand tall, with resolve, to do battle. The court of public opinion is where this war of words has to play out. That is where a victory bears actual fruit. Sorry if you disagree, but it is your right to do so and I respect that.
Let's say Mark won. A huge award comes to pass and Mark donates every penny to a worthy charity. He even kicks in some more himself to top it off. Guess what. These media lefties aren't going to report its happening. It will be buried and ignored while they got the propaganda material they wanted in the first place. Why let them take the trick? Denying it to them is the way to bump them. Sarah drives them crazy doing this again and again. Mark should too, imho.
As an aside - Survival of Liberty isnt protected by limiting it, it is protected by relentless free exercise. I offer that Mark would do best to further the discussion in a different way than proposed here. Name the names and quote the quotes. Again and again, over and over, lIke is done here at NewsBusters! The more the lefties talk, the further over the line of truth they go and the worse it gets for them in the long run. This is something to encourage - as it hastens their implosion.
Do you think that is playing into their hands?
Calling Markos Moulitsas and Media Matters
Submitted by Serr8d on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 9:34pm.
OK, let's see if either of these two of Obama's foot soldiers have anything hanging. It's easy enough, Markos, to lure young girls to wish death on Sarah Palin; let's see if you've the balls to challenge Mark Levin.
All we'll hear from these wussies will be the sounds of crickets.
There are some on this site that could learn some manners
Submitted by Dave. on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 10:18pm.
And quite frankly, I am not a little disgusted with some of the posts I have read - not just on this thread, but many others.
I don't have the time to comb the threads here that I once did, as I am dealing with a host of family issues that are occupying a great deal of my time, and are not a little distracting, nor are they not a little sad.
Jer has been here for over three years, and the fact that he has the stones to come in here day after day and weather some of the BS thrown his way is one of the reasons many of us here - and particularly us old timers at NB, have built up a fair amount of respect for him.
The man has more courage than most all repubs I know, and even some conservatives.
Jer happens to be among those here I consider to be on my top tier friend list. It doesn't mean we always agree on things, but I respect the man's intelligence, along with his tenacity, and they way he is treated by some here makes me ill.
I know Jer to be a truly decent human being - far more so than me, if you really want to know the truth, and I consider him to be an asset to this site.
I think it's great to have a contrarian around who puts up some very interesting ponts. Besides, this place would be boring as Hell if everybody agreed with everybody else.
If I wanted that, I'd go get a lobotomy and join the Dreary Kos turds.
Let's save our vitriol for those who truly deserve it - real trolls.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
Dave Buddy
Submitted by shawn. on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 10:23pm.
I second that.
Sorry, shawn. I'm a little off my game tonight (See below)
Submitted by Dave. on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 11:15pm.
LOL - The damn snow won't friggin' melt, and I'm getting really tired of it.
I had to get the rubber mallet out just to grill tonight, because I just couldn't take another indoor cooked meal.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
Dave Buddy
Submitted by shawn. on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 11:54pm.
No Need to apologize. Thx to people like you and J. Only a few people try to flame me now and look pretty silly doing it. I will always appreciate it I seconded what you said because some of the comments to jer are just brutal and the folks saying them should be ashamed.shawn,
Submitted by Dave. on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 12:25am.
It's like I told Jer.
A-holes come in all colors, shapes, and sizes.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
Dave: blizzard of 2011
Submitted by Jer on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 11:51pm.
Today was the first day we've been able to leave our house since Sunday. It's been like the frozen tundra above the Arctic Circle all week. My wife started and finished a thousand piece jigsaw puzzle. But she cleared the ice and snow off the driveway this afternoon. I was very generous with my praise.
Jer
Jer,
Submitted by Dave. on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 12:08am.
I miss the snows we used to have here.
We'd get enough covering to play for a couple of days, then the sun would come out, the temp would hit the high 60s, and the stuff would be gone the next day.
I had to laugh when Kirk Mellish on the morning after the storm, pegged the "Mellish Meter" at a 2 for the weather if you're an adult, but called it a 10 if you're a kid.
LOL -The kid in me appreciated that.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
Dave...
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 12:09am.
The kid in my son has enjoyed it, too. [Mostly...his class was scheduled to tour the landmarks of Atlanta this week. Scratch that. Now, it's going to be straight back to the homework grind.]
Jer
Jer,
Submitted by Dave. on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 12:27am.
Yeah, I am less than three months shy of my 47th year on this rock, and even though my childhood memories are becoming a little clouded, I can still remember times when being a kid sort of sucked.
LOL - And homework was among those times.
Hopefully they can re-schedule the field trip to Atlanta, as there are some really cool things here to see.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
And what I posted above relating to Jer applies to shawn as well
Submitted by Dave. on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 11:11pm.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
Damn right!
Submitted by Rukus on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 12:08am.
I'm with ya buddy!
I'll third that
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 1:36am.
But it bothers me more that I'm agreeing with shawn.
I wholeheartedly agree
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 1:41am.
I'll tweek Jer every now and then, and him me, but we've had respectful discourse, and I would expect that to continue.
God knows we seldom agree, but in the end, each of has his say, and is heard.
(Same with Shawn.)
I have never been too
Submitted by mostlymoderate on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 10:55pm.
I have never been too familiar with Levin and have never heard his show but from this alone, I know I am going to like this guy. Bravo. Public figure or not, you can't maliciously make up stories like the mainstream media has been doing all week, KNOWING of their falsity.
mm, They just started
Submitted by Chris Norman on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 1:28am.
mm,
They just started carrying Levin's show in Albuquerque. He's an intelligent man and makes some good points, I just find his voice grating and his aggressive style can be somewhat childish at times. He's like Rush Limbaugh without the smooth charm... :)
Well, I don't have much of an opinion on this one
Submitted by bkeyser on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 12:40am.
I'm no lawyer and I'm not a big fan of tort, but I like Levin and hope he's able to beat back the false criticism without involving the courts.
More importantly, however, I see that jer is receiving a lot of love on this thread. I'm not sure why; he's always seemed one k short of being a jerk, but that's just me. Oh well, I guess every dirty lib has his day.
;-p
On the contrary, bk...
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 1:11am.
It appears you have a very definite opinon on the subject. I'm sorry--and shocked--you feel that way. I guess I'll need to rethink my former very high opinion of you..such as alluded to here in a comment to another poster:
Submitted by Jer
on Fri, 12/03/2010 - 9:54pm.
Unless it were ruled a constitutional right--in which case the issue would become moot--I don't see why the policy couldn't be instituted on a conditional or trial basis and subsequently revoked if shown to be an objective detriment.
(As an aside, you sometimes--certainly not always--have an unappealing tendency to quickly convert dialogue into derision. Why not take a page out of the BKeyser or theduck6 handbook?
Would you mind telliing me why you consider me a "dirty lib almost jerk"?
Jer
I apologize for the red font..I don't know why it does that when I copy and paste a post.
edit. Well, now I notice the little wink symbol at the bottom of your post which I HOPE means you were joking.
Jer
Submitted by bkeyser on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 10:26am.
Of course I'm joking jer. But hopefully some of that venting helped get rid of whatever rage was building from the earlier posters. (I admit, I've been known to pop off on occasion, so maybe a more obvious symbol might have saved you some more, huh?)
That'll be $125. I'll see you back here in a week; but if you need to see someone before then, call my service or dial 911. Don't forget, take your lithium and at least once a day, relax with some aromatherapy. ;-b ← [sarcasm face]
Frum's response
Submitted by yutsnark on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 12:58am.
http://www.frumforum.com/mark-levins-lawsuit-threat
The only thing funnier
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 2:03am.
Than you thinking we care about what you say, is you thinking we care what frum has to say.
If you don't care what I have to say...
Submitted by yutsnark on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 2:19am.
.. don't read it.
Didn't
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 2:25am.
Dumbsh%t.
Heh
Submitted by yutsnark on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 2:28am.
Read that one too, didn't ya?
Say what?
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 2:39am.
Talking to yourself?
Cool Arrow
Submitted by yutsnark on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 3:45am.
Good one. :)
Jer
Submitted by Michael30 on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 2:47am.
You're the only attorney I've talked to on here, so I guess I'll ask this question to you.
What are the rules of evidence in this sort of lawsuit?
I know that a public figure must prove willful intent to speak or write untruthful information, malice and damages, but could this be a ploy to get to the discovery stage?
Inter-office memos, emails and the like, would they fall under the evidenciary procedure?
If so, could Mr. Levin be threatening a lawsuit becuse of this possibility?
I mean, the guy probably has the money and spare time to throw around in order to bring to light the response to the Tucson shooting and how it could or should be used for a political gain. Libel/slander is almost an unwinnable lawsuit for any public figure, so there has to be a reason why he's suggesting this course of action. Basically, I'm asking if it's a possibility that he's happy to spend a few thousand, or hundred-thousand dollars to incriminate news directors, editors or producers that knowingly advanced a flawed theory for political reasons.
My knowlege of libel/slander is limmited to a course I took in journalism school, so I'm hardly an expert, so I'm asking your opinion.
Thanks,
Mike
Michael30
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 01/16/2011 - 12:04am.
Well, I'm not really an expert either, Michael. I did file one significant business defamation action years ago that made third page headlines in the AJC (probably because the defendant was the Better Business Bureau.). However, while not a frivolous claim, it was by no means a strong case and we voluntarily dismissed it prior to trial.
Additionally, a few hours of libel and slander case study was part of the first year curriculum when I was in law school, and the landmark NYT v. Sullivan Supreme Court decision was just a few years old at the time. As such, it was--and I'm sure still is--the focal point of much of the legal analysis in the defamation field.
A close reading of the blogged article indicates to me that Mark has a pretty good handle on the proof requirements and evidentiary parameters which he would face. He clearly is speaking about not what has already occurred, but rather a hypothetical set of circumstances where he is directly and explicitly charged with being responsible for the Tuscon tragedy. In the latter instance, his chances of recovery would be considerably better than if he were merely mentioned, perhaps along with others, as having engaged in incendiary rhetoric which created a dangerous climate and risk of violence. That would create a near impossible hurdle to leap, since it's essentially the expression of opinion about a public figure (which status Levin indisputably occupies). Statements of opinion as opposed to false allegations of fact are generally protected, and, moreover, public figures must show--as you correctly noted--that the utterances are not only untrue but the product of actual malice or a reckless disregard for the truth. It saddles the public figure/plaintiff with an extraordinarily heavy evidentiary burden.
Wide latitude is given in the discovery process, and absent patently irrelevant material being sought as part of a fishing expedition, the items you mentioned should be produced. The party who is the subject of discovery can file a motion to limit the scope, however. Of course, just because material may be subject to discovery doesn't guarantee it will be allowed into evidence at trial.
Summing up, I don't think Matthews has said anything thus far which is actionable. But if he were stupid enough to make unequivocal, reckless, and false charges specifically targeting and naming Levin, then he better be on the lookout for the process server.
Jer
Jer
Submitted by Michael30 on Sun, 01/16/2011 - 12:42am.
Thank you for that, I'm not really fluent on legal matters in the media when it comes to opinion journalists versus "normal" journalists.
Even in school there seemed to be a lot of it that was theory as opposed to practical advice or instruction. Needless to say, half-way through the semester I was looking like one of those guys from the movie Scanners.
I was just wondering if Mr. Levin was doing this for the opportunity to go through the discovery phase of the lawsuit, but that seemed far fetched to me, but it was still a thought I had.
Either way, thanks for your response.
Mike
Michael30...
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 01/16/2011 - 1:01am.
Here is a source for you regarding the scope of E-Discovery with links to related info. It can be a complicated process.
Jer
Jer
Submitted by Michael30 on Sun, 01/16/2011 - 1:11am.
Thank you sir, I'll give that a look.
How people get through law school and keep all this stuff straight will remain a mystery to me long after I take the dirt nap.
-Mike
Well, Mike...
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 01/16/2011 - 1:19am.
If I had it to do over, I would probably go to journalism school.
Jer
Jer
Submitted by Michael30 on Sun, 01/16/2011 - 1:47am.
No, I wouldn't recommend that course of action.
Well, not unless the prospect of poverty, alcoholism and unemployment are one's goals in life. If that's the case, then I can personally say that a journalism degree is probably the best way to get there if you're in a hurry.
-Mike
Thanks, Mike. I feel better
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 01/16/2011 - 1:58am.
Thanks, Mike. I feel better already.
Jer
I aim to please, Jer.
Submitted by Michael30 on Sun, 01/16/2011 - 2:02am.
Glad you feel better, I'm a people person after all. It's how I makes my livin's.
-Mike
Jer, what happened?
Submitted by Boudin on Tue, 01/18/2011 - 10:04pm.
Now you suddenly agree with me? This is pretty much what I told you the other day. You were not impressed.
Levin is first and foremost a business,
Submitted by SickofLibs on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 10:00am.
and he has every right to protect his interests.
This is different from simply spreading rumors about your neighbor.
For some, maybe.
Submitted by Ashrak on Sun, 01/16/2011 - 1:16am.
Wide latitude in the discovery process, jer? I wonder if Terry Lakin would find that statement agreeable?
;)
Right...brilliant move,
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 01/16/2011 - 1:34am.
Right...brilliant move, Lakin. Throw away an outstanding military career for the sake of beclowning yourself with faux martydom.
Jer
How dare someone ask a
Submitted by Ashrak on Sun, 01/16/2011 - 2:09am.
How dare someone ask a question and actually stand up to consequences threatened awaiting the answer and support for it, eh jer? Isn't that what lawyes do every day (cept without the consequences)?
I guess only those with standing can ask questions and see discovery for answers, right?
This is why I regard courts as I do. Whichever variety it is that has been created, some rules apply sometimes, in some ways, and other times they don't. To some people they do, to others they don't. I believe the judiciary to be the most corrupt branch of government.
I look forward to many a substance filled debate with you jer. Folks speak highly of you and you seem interested in discourse rather than just stirring the pot. I don't aim to hijack here, so I will ask you this much of you, for now, in a yes or no format.
Is the Constitution a binding signed and dated contract?
Just for the record
Submitted by Ashrak on Mon, 01/17/2011 - 6:55pm.
"Ed Schultz Mocks Conservative Lawyer Mark Levin Over Lawsuit Threat"http://www.theblaze.com/stories/ed-schultz-mocks-conservative-lawyer-mar...
Mark accused of being a bypocrite on the First Amendment.....