Posted on 09/27/2011 6:48:47 PM PDT by Bigtigermike
However, the seriousness of Tiemessen's letter and the potential legal vulnerability of Random House have been mocked and derided by those suffering from PDS. For more than three years, Palin's enemies have become accustomed to seeing bloggers and tabloids spread libelous assertions and obscene speculation about the former Alaska governor with no apparent repercussions and thus included such nonsense as David Magee's column today:
But here's the problem with suing McGinnis and the publisher: Palin would have to prove that the allegations in the book are all lies if she proceeded with a lawsuit. She's a public figure -- and it's hard to prove libel when you are in the public eye in the first place. . . .She would have to clear her name completely.
This is absurd. If the Palins do sue, their suit will specify defamatory statements in McGinniss's book that they believe they can prove false. They do not have to prove every allegation false, nor would Sarah "have to clear her name completely." Only evidence and testimony relevant to those disputed allegations will be admissible, and so there is no basis for Magee's assertion that Palin would have to address every lurid claim in the McGinniss book.
Thanks to McGinniss's e-mail to Griffin, the Palins have Random House in a bad situation, and the only question is whether the Palins will stop short of a court trial against the publisher.
-- McGinniss stated:
Bottom line: not only my editor, but Random House attorneys verified every source, in some cases speaking directly to the sources themselves. ....
Air travel to Alaska isn't cheap. And exactly how Random House's attorneys "made an independent judgment about the trustworthiness" of sources they had never even met would certainly make for lively court proceedings, if such a case ever went to trial.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
I’m not a lawyer, and I don’t play one on TV; but this sounds like malice of forethought to me. Go get ‘em Sarah.
And then, she said nothing about it.
Did not suprise me, just confirmed litigation is underway. She could not talk about it and likely informed Greta to that effect.
Just look for the Union Libel.
Garde la Foi, mes amis! Nous nous sommes les sauveurs de la République! Maintenant et Toujours!
(Keep the Faith, my friends! We are the saviors of the Republic! Now and Forever!)
LonePalm, le Républicain du verre cassé (The Broken Glass Republican)
And this relevant to this thread because...?
RON PAUL, RON PAUL, RON PAUL, RON P...... oh wait... wrong thread....
Was I even addressing you in my post? Is your nic Parley Baer? Get over yourself. If you need attention badly enough to post to yourself, have a wonderful time... and get some Brylcream for those palms. A little dab’ll do ya.
I did NOT hear them talking about this!!!
Read more, Dan. It wasn’t brought up.,,likely for legal reasons.
Palin is not going to sue. She will leave a sleeping dog lie.
Except this dog ain’t sleeping and he is still lying...and has the audacity to cast himself as the victim. I say hang him. High,
Malice aforethought. The disclaimer was unnecessary.
“She is gonna be on Greta to talk about this in about 15 minutes...”
She has been on Hannity and Greta since the book was released and not a word in either interview.....Smart move on her part......Kind of obvious questions about the book seemed to be off limits....
“She did bash Fox for being dishonest about her poll numbers being “low” though. Came straight out and said it was bogus.....”
Saw that!!....We thought, she doesn’t care if it’s her own network, she puts the truth out there.....A+ for Governor Palin....
Tru dat, mon!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.