Darkwolf is absolutely right on this issue.
Posted on 06/11/2009 3:52:31 AM PDT by An.American.Expatriate
In recent days, David Letterman has repeatedly made comments about a juvenile private citizen (Willow Palin) on his nationally broadcast television show.
These comments were made with the full knowledge that Miss Palin herself, as well as her freinds and schoolmates, would hear them and were calculated to cause the utmost in emotional distress on the part of Miss Palin.
By using the public airwaves to broadcast these comments, David Letterman has violated Title 18, Part I, Chapter 110A, §2261A Stalking:
Whoever—
(1) travels in interstate or foreign commerce or within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States, or enters or leaves Indian country, with the intent to kill, injure, harass, or place under surveillance with intent to kill, injure, harass, or intimidate another person, and in the course of, or as a result of, such travel places that person in reasonable fear of the death of, or serious bodily injury to, or causes substantial emotional distress to that person, a member of the immediate family (as defined in section 115) of that person, or the spouse or intimate partner of that person; or
(2) with the intent—
(A) to kill, injure, harass, or place under surveillance with intent to kill, injure, harass, or intimidate, or cause substantial emotional distress to a person in another State or tribal jurisdiction or within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States; or
(B) to place a person in another State or tribal jurisdiction, or within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States, in reasonable fear of the death of, or serious bodily injury to—
(i) that person;
(ii) a member of the immediate family (as defined in section 115 [1] of that person; or
(iii) a spouse or intimate partner of that person;
uses the mail, any interactive computer service, or any facility of interstate or foreign commerce to engage in a course of conduct that causes substantial emotional distress to that person or places that person in reasonable fear of the death of, or serious bodily injury to, any of the persons described in clauses (i) through (iii) of subparagraph (B);[2]
shall be punished as provided in section 2261 (b) of this title.
Furthermore, the unstated but inherit implication of further smears and attacks against the minor daughter of the Govenor of the State of Alaska amounts to Extortion - and in a much as these threats are communicated via the public airwaves are a violation of US Code Title 18, Part 1 Chapter 41 § 875 Interstate communications:
(a) Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any demand or request for a ransom or reward for the release of any kidnapped person, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
(b) Whoever, with intent to extort from any person, firm, association, or corporation, any money or other thing of value, transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any threat to kidnap any person or any threat to injure the person of another, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
(c) Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any threat to kidnap any person or any threat to injure the person of another, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.
(d) Whoever, with intent to extort from any person, firm, association, or corporation, any money or other thing of value, transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any threat to injure the property or reputation of the addressee or of another or the reputation of a deceased person or any threat to accuse the addressee or any other person of a crime, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.
shall be punished as provided in section 2261 (b) of this title.
[1] So in original. Probably should be followed by a closing parenthesis.
[2] So in original. Provision probably should be set flush with par. (2).
“If enough of us continue to pouind the issue, the US Attorny / FBI & media will not be able to ignore it.”
Sounds like the words of a true believer in DEMOCRACY.
Even considering the points you make - if Letterman had chosen even a grown up Chelsea for these comments - the left would have gone ballistic 2 days ago.
NOW - and the Hillary folks would have demanded time on all the talking head shows until Letterman was gone.
I deleted CBS from the list of stations my TV receives and notified CBS. Not only will I no longer watch Letterman, but I will no longer watch anything on CBS. This pair of seuxal “jokes” about a 14 y/o girl was way too far over the line, and Letterman and CBS have made it clear that their response will not satisfy basic human decency. [Posting on multiple threads in the hopes of reaching as many Freepers as possible and encouraging them to delete CBS too.]
The attack was against Palin.
Why would Letterman even bother to mention her or her daughter? The subject of the monologue was Palin not her daughter. The comment about her daughter was merely to reinforce the image of Palin as a member of a low rent clan.
Notice he didn’t even mention the daughter’s name.
You can’t seriously be suggesting that Letterman routinely makes jokes about daughters of anonymous people?
If so, you’re incorrect because even Letterman admitted the joke was directed at Palin not her daughter. Even when he tried to hacktrack he said his comment was aimed at the older one not the younger.
As far as your assertion that you and people like you are not insulted when a politician you support is insulted - well that explains why Republican politicians are routinely derided with impunity while attacks against Democrats are usually condemned.
Tell me when someone insults your choice for president, senator et al is it that you’re reluctant to defend your choice? Or is it that - in this instance - you’re not really a big fan of Palin and therefore comments about her don’t affect you all that much?
I'm more than old enough to be her father and I'm a dad, not a mom, but I just can't stand the thought of how much suffering that poor 14 year old girl - or her sister, for that matter - are going through.
Letterman makes a mockery of half-apologizing. Right this minute, on MSNBC, Arianna Huffington and some lib idiot guy are blaming SARAH for putting her daughter out in public while at the same time defending Letterman saying that clearly he didn't mean the 14 year old (although he mentioned her by name) and that somehow an *18* year old girl is "fair game" including, I guess, jokes that she is a whore for Eliot Spitzer's enjoyment and a slut (like her mom, from a different "joke") having sex with a professional baseball player during a public game.
The level of absolute filth and depravity of the soul this shows about these people and their ideologically-driven apologists is incomprehensible. Even highly flawed narcissists wouldn't stoop so low. But these people do.
We should *not* let up on this and allow it to be railroaded by the old and disingenuous "it's a joke" canard. This stinks to the max. It is a biased and appalling attack on the Palin family and excuses behavior that I do not believe belongs in any society much less the public airwaves.
(Oops, I ranted. Forgive me.)
This is obamaland. If you’d think to use the law, forget it!
I was also "amazed" that any conservative worth his salt would write such a statement. And I don't care if you're impressed or not. Consensual sex is just that: consensual. BOTH parties take part. BOTH parties are responsible. If it isn't consensual, then it is probably rape. Our species may work the way you said it does, but that doesn't mean that males have no free will. Neither men nor women are simply instinctual beings.
No - a believer in the fact that if only one of us “try” we will be ignored - but of all of us try, it will be difficult to do so.
NO they wouldn't but there is nothing to stop the Palins from visiting the offices of the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of NY and swearing out a complaint against Letterman citing this section of Title 18. As Letterman's attacks have been incessant and continuous and progressively more harmful it would put the DoJ in the position of having to investigate the complaint or publicy approve of Letterman's actions.
Governor Palin has now been selected as a target for frequent hits. I believe it is a concerted effort to down conservatives.
a bit of semantics -
The Target of the attack was the Willow.
The Purpose of the attack was to affect the Sarah.
So - in a round about way - Sarah Palin was a target of the attack as the purpose was to have an effect on her. That does NOT preclude that the initial target, Willow, was also DIRECTLY affected.
As far as the “insulted” part - I may have messed up explaining that ...
Traditionally, it has been accepted that satire directed at politicians and other people in the public arena, is allowed- - even to the point of being insulting. Libel and Slander however, were never been accepted. Further, attacks against innocents and others outside of the public arena were not allowed - i.e. no exceptions were made to laws prohibiting such behavior.
So, when President Ford was repeatedly shown with a bandage on his forehead - president Reagan as a Cowboy (in the bad sense - i.e reckless) etc ... MOST people chuckled and continued on.
In the recent past, we have gone FAR beyond that. I guess it was a question of time before we started attacking the innocent as well.
Regardless - it is wrong.
Exactly!!!
—your phony amazement doesn’t impress me. Both are responsible but ultimately its the girls decision to do it or not and to make sure she used birth control. Its the way our species works, males pursue, females select—
That’s actually true. Often, old saws turn out to be common sense. Women are the sexual gatekeepers. Old fashioned, but still a fact.
Governor Palin has now been selected as a target for frequent hits. I believe it is a concerted effort to down conservatives.
I have no problems with normal political satire - whether directed at President Bush, or Govenor Palin, or any other figure in the public arena.
WILLOW Palin does not fit into that catagory.
“No - a believer in the fact that if only one of us “try” we will be ignored - but of all of us try, it will be difficult to do so.”
Still sounds as if you want officials to base their actions on public outcry, is that your wish ... what do you call it.
You also seem to think that anyone that thinks the full weight of government should not come down on Letterman is in agreement with his actions ... That is nonsense.
At the risk of adding a little levity this reminds me of an old Woody Allen routine:
Woody says "I was once involved in an excellent example of oral contraception. I asked a girl to go to bed with me - and she said no."
Darkwolf is absolutely right on this issue.
I was pointing out that these late night “comedians” do, in fact, have an agenda and are part of this dark propaganda effort which we have witnessed for a number of years.
No. Absolutely not.
We can, however, use the good ol' capitalistic system to legally fight our enemies. And if true harm is done we still have the civil courts for redress, no?
Officials tend NOT to act unless they believe it is in thier best interest. So, unless they do so on thier own, yes, public outcry could be a way to cause them to at least investigate.
You also seem to think that anyone that thinks the full weight of government should not come down on Letterman is in agreement with his actions ... That is nonsense.
IIRC, the very first post in this thread was "Any legal eageles here that can provide some insight?"
I was asking for opinions from people who might have some legal insight into such matters.
The ONLY response I posted which in any way could be construed to mean what you claim was mine to Darkwolf377 who seemed to imply that just the thought of legal action was some type of lib crybaby action.
I disagree that we should not respond at all, and I believe honestly that Lettermans actions are a violation of the law. If shown otherwise - I will accept that - I do not however accept the "just ignore the jerk" argument.
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.