Palin attorney threatens to sue over new book (Don't threaten, DO IT!)

cbs ^ | 9/27/2011 | ap

[Bubba Ho-Tep]

It looks as though not too many here remember that Carol Burnett sued successfully

And when it was all over, after the appeals, she got $200,000, which didn't come close to covering her legal fees.

[calex59]

She can only sue as long as she stays out of the presidential race. Once in, she is a public figure again.

Palin is a public figure NOW and has been since she was nominated for VP. She also doesn't have to worry about the public figure thing because she has proof the guy knew he was telling lies since he admitted such in his emails, which her lawyers have, hence the letter to RH putting a hold on any attempted destruction of correspondence between them and Mcnumbnuts. The law doesn't state public servant, it says public figure and she certainly is that. But she has RH by the short hairs and I expect they will want to settle out of court and pull the book off the shelves.

However, if the law did state public servant then she could still run since the lies were told before she started her run for President(if that happens)and laws are not retroactive.

[Sea Parrot]

Wasn't a threat, was a demand letter delivered by lawyer giving RH the option to retract. Said demand letter is a precursor to further legal action,

Threats and warnings have no teeth, a demand letter has very long fangs with intent to use them.

[Sea Parrot]

So, are you implying what McPenis wrote is true?

[redgolum]

If he stated he lied in emails, and Palin has those emails legally (two big ifs) the guy is screwed and tattooed.

[Sea Parrot]

Right, why same accusation never hurt Christine O'Donnell at all./s Good try, are you wishing it was true?

[Sea Parrot]

Has RH released the book in the UK? If so, Palin just may sue there, the libel laws in the UK are no where as screwed up as they are in the US when it comes to public figures being fair game for character assassination.

[Sea Parrot]

Concern trolls overtly indicate the story is true and they are only looking out for her moral standing? /s

[Sea Parrot]

Bragging rights are more often than not outright lies. If and when he is put under oath and asked to show proof, he would wilt like fireweed at first frost.

[DJ MacWoW]

The timeline of events is that Breitbart got an email in which McGinniss stated he had no proof. I don't believe that how Breitbart came to get the email has been stated.

McGinniss confirmed, in public, online, that the email is authentic.

[Sea Parrot]

As for RH and Joe, the burden of proof for your statement lies on you.

[Sea Parrot]

I very much doubt the were in Chicago Boystown, which is a gay/lesbian enclave in the windy city.

[reasonisfaith]

On second thought, why fund the trial lawyers.

[Mr Ramsbotham]

So, are you implying what McPenis wrote is true?

I have absolutely no way of knowing whether it's true or not. But let's just say I wouldn't be bowled over by the revelation if it does turn out to be true. The Palins are obviously a fairly randy bunch.

[miss marmelstein]

Boystown is the gay section of Chicago. Read Hill Buzz and you’ll be surprised.

[DJ MacWoW]

I have absolutely no way of knowing whether it's true or not.

Sure you do. The author said: Thus–as Random House lawyers are already pointing out to me–nothing I can cite other than my own reporting rises above the level of tawdry gossip. The proof is always just around the corner, but that’s a corner nobody has been able to turn.

[Palladin]

What is that website? I don’t understand a word they are saying.

[DJ MacWoW]

It’s some obscure gossip site that I’ve never heard of before. Btw, neither had my daughter. And all they did was quote McGinniss book.

[Mr Ramsbotham]

Sure you do. The author said: Thus–as Random House lawyers are already pointing out to me–nothing I can cite other than my own reporting rises above the level of tawdry gossip. The proof is always just around the corner, but that’s a corner nobody has been able to turn.

That speaks only to the veracity of the author, not the truth of the allegation.

[DJ MacWoW]

That speaks only to the veracity of the author, not the truth of the allegation.

You mean it's the seriousness of the charge and not whether it's true? Dan? Is that you?