DNC letter to FreeRepublic: Stop Lying about Howard Dean, and Gov Sebelius...OR ELSE!

Sandler, Reiff & Young, P.C. ^ | May 11, 2007 | Sandler, Reif & Young, P.C. for the DNC

[rface]

SANDLE, REIFF and YOUNG, P.C.
50 E Street, S.E., Suite 300
Washington DC 20003

Telephone: 202.479.XXXX FAX: 202.479.XXXX

May 10, 2007

VIA E-Mail

Mr. James C Robinson FreeRepublic.com PO Box 9771 Fresno, CA 93794

Re: Statement re Democratic National Committee

Dear Mr Robinson:

We are writing on behalf of our client, the Democratic National Committee (DNC).

A post by “coffee260” on FreeRepublic.com today states that this morning, on the Quinn & Rose show on XM, co-host Quin stated that the DNC chairman, Gov. Howard Dean had called Gov Kathleen Sebelius (D-Kans) “around 5:00am on morning after a tornado destroyed the town of Greensburg, Kansas and discussed with here what to say about the tornado and how to blame the war in Iraq and the Bush administration on a slow response to the aftermath.”

The statement was made by Mr Quinn, repeated on FreeRepublic, is demonstrably, unequivocally and absolutely false. Gov Dean had no such conversation with Gov Sebelius, ever.

No effort was made by FreeRepublic to contact anyone at the DNC for comment or to check the accuracy of these statements before they were published. FreeRepublic not only repeated this statement, but further stressed that Quinn’s “source” was extremely reliable and in a position that would give him direct knowledge of these revelations.

The statements quoted above are false and defamatory, are libelous and slanderous and clearly threaten to interfere with the DNC’s operations and ability to solicit support and raise funds by predjuding the organization in the eyes of the Democratic Party supporters and the public. For these reasons, we demand that FreeRepublic immediately cease and desist from Further dissemination of the above quoted statements or any statements similar in substance and immediately post a retraction of these statements in a location on its web pages at least as prominent as that on which the original story appeared.

Please let us know by noon, May 11, 2007, whether you intend to comply with these requests.

Thanks for your time and immediate attention to this important matter.

Sincerely yours,
(Signature)
Joseph E Sandler

[tutstar]

ping a ling

[Enchante]

Everyone on the left has “stability issues” — the DUmpster’s website is simply mirroring the psyches of its users. Maybe that’s what the lingo “mirrored sites” is really supposed to mean! :^)

[weegee]

OK. So the story is still could be true. Remember, Quinn said a person TOLD him this story. It is quite possible that a person DID tell him this story.

I think he’s allowed to repeat any story he hears, so long as he doesn’t say he knows it to be a true story.

That standard works for the Lefties at Snopes (who left this lie as "undetermined" until 2006 and still refuse to call Hillary a fibber)

Hillary vs. Hillary

We opined back in 2003 that Hillary Clinton's claim about being Edmund Hillary's namesake might not have been completely false since she didn't say she was actually named for the mountain climber, but rather that her mother told her she was named for him — a minor but important distinction given how often parents make up harmless little fibs to amuse their children or misremember past events. Indeed, in October 2006 this was the excuse a spokesperson for her campaign provided in officially discounting the story:

For more than a decade, one piece of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton's informal biography has been that she was named for Sir Edmund Hillary, the conqueror of Mount Everest. The story was even recounted in Bill Clinton's autobiography.

But yesterday, Mrs. Clinton's campaign said she was not named for Sir Edmund after all.

"It was a sweet family story her mother shared to inspire greatness in her daughter, to great results I might add," said Jennifer Hanley, a spokeswoman for the campaign.

We still find this explanation rather incredible. In order to accept it, one has to believe that only after Hillary Clinton was nearly 60 years old, and only after she had been pilloried in the press for more than ten years for claiming she had been named after someone who was virtually unknown in the U.S. at the time of her birth, and only after her husband had unknowingly presented the fictitious story as true in his own autobiography, did her mother finally confess that the "sweet family story" she told her daughter wasn't the truth. (Hillary Clinton doesn't have the excuse that other people were spreading a falsehood about her, as she herself was the one who initiated the claim back in 1995.)

As we noted back in 2003, this story was likely a little white lie concocted for a special occasion back in 1995, and even if it really was a "sweet family story" Dorothy Rodham told her daughter Hillary many years ago, the latter has almost certainly known for quite a long time that it was just a story.

[Recovering_Democrat]

Oh, boy--Democrats trying to squash POLITICAL SPEECH!

I'm so surprised. NOT. ;-)

[Spiff]

It's true!

Of COURSE it is. I read it on the Internet. I guess I'm going to get a C&D letter from his moron lawyer as well as the dozen or so sites who were my source.

Heck, I've got photos:

Bring it on, Howie! Send me the Cease and Desist on these images. Looks like you'll have to send the former Bush/Cheney 04 campaign one also because someone pasted their logo on the second image. Maybe everyone who looked at the images should get a C&D because they're now stored in the cache on their hard drive. And their ISPs. Bring it on.

Note for the clueless (lawyers, media, etc): The above images are parodies that appear elsewhere on the internet.

[1957chevy]

I disagree. If the DNC outs the leaker, then it will prove the story to be true. A Special Counsel will be appointed, Dean will resign, and the Governor of Kansas will issue an apology and cling to her office with bleeding fingers. I think this one is going somewhere, this time. Because the other side of that coin is the GOP filing cease and desist orders by the thousands each day to counter the DNC Propaganda machine

[1957chevy]

Will the DNC ask for the right of free speech to be revoked now? Seems they are angry that they have been caught at this one. Lawsuits, threats, lawyers. Sound like the Fascists are gearing up to attack the GOP, via a radio station reporter.

Silence the press, and you conquer the people. Must be Dean’s new action plan

[de meanr]

A taxidermist walks into DNC headquarters to scope out a location for the California Condor they’ve just purchased. He runs into Howard Dean and some minions talking in a hallway. Ever security conscious, they all notice that the taxidermist doesn’t have an ID badge.

Dean approaches him and asks: “what are you doing here”?

The taxidermist replies: “I mount dead animals”.

Dean smiles and says: “It’s OK, he’s one of us”.

[weegee]

“Unnamed sources” are often used by the Left.

[1957chevy]

Just thinking out loud here.

Maybe the reason for the knee jerk reaction from Howard Dean is his panic attack for the truth to come out?

[1957chevy]

Howard Adolf Eichman Dean is allowed to say whatever the Gestapo tells him to say. And his digital brown shirts will defend him until their underground bunker is destroyed.

Just sayin

[MrB]

That’s what we all believe is the case...

[BurbankKarl]

The last folks to take on Free Republic....

[aft_lizard]

I believe they came before this:

[BurbankKarl]

Oh, I just watched Shut Up and Sing the other night...I actually liked the movie...lots of Free Republic mentions, and the band crashed due to Natalie Maines fat mouth. It is clear the other girls didnt support her 100%

[tutstar]

Can you elaborate? I’m just curious what she said versus the facts...not questioning the factuality of your comment? It’s not possible for me to follow every story.

[rod1]

Are you Toto—ly sure.

[Raycpa]

Dean naked on the cover of Rolling Stone? I hope not.

[BurbankKarl]

Based on a May 7 American Forces Press Service article noted by the conservative QandO Blog, Mirengoff asserted that Sebelius’ claim was untrue:

In fact, it’s not true that Kansas was missing 60 percent of its National Guard equipment, or that the National Guard was ill-prepared to deal with the aftermath of the tornado. The Democrats’ claim is pure invention. According to Randal Noller, public affairs officer for the National Guard Bureau, the Kansas National Guard has 88 percent of its forces available, and 60 percent of its Army Guard dual-use equipment on hand, along with more than 85 percent of its Air Guard equipment. If the Kansas National Guard were shorthanded in any way, it could have asked for assistance from other states under a national sharing agreement. It did not do so.

[Teacher317]

So they're asking us to not repeat what was said on a radio report? Are they not violating that rule themselves by mentioning it in their letter, and then again when they mention it in court?

Exactly how are we liable for the words of an unaffiliated radio DJ?