That would put someone like Alex Jones out of business.
Or you can get raw with these strings. Either way, the violin is sweet yet lethal.
Do it!
Posted on 09/22/2011 5:25:30 AM PDT by libstripper
The awful launch week for the over-hyped, expected bestseller The Rogue: Searching for the Real Sarah Palin, by controversial author Joe McGinniss, just got worse. Much worse.
After a week of universally scathing pans from the reflexively anti-Palin establishment media, McGinniss now faces the fight of his literary life: the accusation that he seems to have knowingly submitted a book to his publisher, Crown/Random House, that was filled with unproved “tawdry gossip” and rumors that lacked “factual evidence.”
(Excerpt) Read more at biggovernment.com ...
It's why you never see ordinary citizens being quoted in ways that might embarrass them - in newspapers or the press. Even police quotes - from those below the 'officer' level will (if they might make the police officer look bad) not be covered...
Same with government officials - the young office clerk with no knowledge of how the press works - will NOT be quoted because the paper can be sued. Her life and comments won't be covered in a book either - not if they make her look bad. Below a certain level you're allowed some privacy... put yourself up as a public person and that's gone...
Above that level and it's 'gotcha' and 'fair game'... Sarah's held herself out to the public - - that decreases her chances of winning - and a case would open her life up to things we really don't need to know about her... Court cases are usually part of the public record...
Book stores will put Rush and Coulter in the fiction section, but here we have a real work of fiction.
bump
That excerpt I posted explains the differences.
If she sued she would be interrogated under oath over her entire personal life with everyone in the world watching and it's very unlikely that she wants to go through that.
Rush talking about this now, finally. Only a little over 5 minutes left in the show, and he’s not back until Monday.
Maybe one of the things that this sort of crap should open for some VERY careful review is the entire concept of so-called “Public” figures.
Is that determination made by a court, or just something that the lawyers or the media types being called to account get to assert?
What’s to keep those same individuals or groups from simply deeming anybody they defame as a Public figure?
Sounds to me like the only people the Law is defending in a case like this is the lawyers, and that only so they can get some more Billables.
...kind of like she's doing to the RINO establishment RIGHT NOW!
BWA-HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
That would put someone like Alex Jones out of business.
Or you can get raw with these strings. Either way, the violin is sweet yet lethal.
Do it!
Only a liberal gay man who loves to wallow in filth would want to go through something like the above... Liberals have no standards beyond 'Am I being a hypocrite'.
It's why Castro, Stalin and Charles Manson aren't condemned, but Sarah Palin is.
As far as Palin's concerned I would not vote for the twenty year old Palin who most likely made her full share of 'bad judgements' (Like all of us - except the most timid) It might be one of the reasons the constitution doesn't allow 20 and 30 year olds to be President.
Sadly, good judgment often comes from bad judgment - it's how we learn...
From what I can see, Palin would make a great President. And McGinniss is a piece of liberal sh*t.
But even McGinniss is a hypocrite - not that he has the wit to see it... I'll bet he and his fellow liberals would NEVER accept a person saying 'I smoke and I'm proud of it - so shut the ____ up.' Or " I love greasy french fries and love being 20 pounds overweight" therefore I can't be criticized... not a 'hypocrite'.
There is nothing I can find admirable about liberals. They live to make the rest of us cringe... and provide 'low' entertainment.
Is that determination made by a court, or just something that the lawyers or the media types being called to account get to assert?
What’s to keep those same individuals or groups from simply deeming anybody they defame as a Public figure?
Being a public figure is kind of a function of name recognition (aka pervasive involvement in public issues, events, etc.). There is case law that provides some guidance, but the finder of fact, either a judge or a jury, will make the determination on that and all other relevant facts based on hearing both sides make their arguments. In other words, determining public figure status is not a hard science, but it's not arbitrary either. Palin will be a public figure by any measure. At the moment, I would not be. That part of the law ends up being pretty fair, IMHO.
Well, maybe Todd is a “limited person public figure” or something. But it really shouldn’t matter, because if publishing something defamatory as a fact (and not in a parody) when you know that there is no evidence of its truthfulness isn’t “actual malice,” I don’t know what is. If I remember NYT v. Sullivan correctly, the plaintiff doesn’t need to prove that the author *knew* that what he published was false, he or she needs to show that the author had reckless disregard for whether or not it was true.
“limited person public figure” = “limited purpose public figure”
My thoughts, as well. I think Breitbart got punked.
Don’t know where Andrew got the email but I heard Jesse Moron Griffen is basicly confirming it without meaning to. He is saying “I didn’t leak it”. It’s being investigated etc. HaHa
Don’t know where Andrew got the email but I heard Jesse Moron Griffen is basicly confirming it without meaning to. He is saying “I didn’t leak it”. It’s being investigated etc. HaHa
I really hope the Palins do sue. I can fully understand that, especially if she’s going to run, Sarah would want to appear “above the fray”.
However, this steaming pile of unsubstantiated fecal matter that the alleged “author” McGinnis put out is just beyond the pale. It always seems that conservative stalwarts are “fair game” not just for mild gossip, but completely over the top, fabricated out of thin air, scurrilous (nay, libelous) assaults that are intentionally done not as investigative truth-finding, but (in McG’s own words) “hit pieces”. The old pervert has a history of this and has had to pay in the past. It’s about time that these types of slime merchants (throw Kitty Kelly into the mix) really get socked and financially ruined, and that their publishing whorehouses similarly suffer serious financial harm. Then, and only then, will they collectively think twice about pursuing intentionally malicious efforts that are driven by political agendas and hatreds so deep that the truth is but a mere fleeting, easily dismissed concern.
sarc Buy the first edition! Once the lawyers have the book redacted, it'll be a collector's item! More valuable than McGovern-Eagleton buttons! /sarc
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.