Is she having to pay up out of her own purse or is it covered under some insurance policy. Either way, TFB. Pay up liars.
1 posted on
12/03/2016 11:05:35 AM PST by
rktman
To: rktman
Sue her liberal butt in a civil court and take her to the cleaners.
2 posted on
12/03/2016 11:08:33 AM PST by
Grampa Dave
(Hey, whining losers,Trump will just go ahead & make things better for us without you!!!!")
To: rktman
And I’d like to be able to fly. Suck it up katie. You deserve everything you get. #notsospecial
3 posted on
12/03/2016 11:10:07 AM PST by
connyankee
(#MAGABEGINS)
To: rktman
I'm sure she does.
Too damn bad.
Couric is another "dishonest" highly, over-rated and over-paid journalist .
4 posted on
12/03/2016 11:12:24 AM PST by
onyx
(CELEBRATE PRESIDENT-ELECT TRUMP'S VICTORY DONATE MONTHLY or JOIN CLUB 300!)
To: rktman
And we would like her to QUIT LYIN’- I guess noone is goign to get what they want eh?
6 posted on
12/03/2016 11:14:01 AM PST by
Bob434
To: rktman
It's not "her" lawsuit. It's the Virginia Citizens Defense League's lawsuit.
I would imagine pretty much all defendants would like the judge to dismiss legal actions against them.
7 posted on
12/03/2016 11:15:43 AM PST by
Steely Tom
([VOTE FRAUD] == [CIVIL WAR])
To: rktman
Please update us in the future about the legal troubles Lyin’ Comrade Katie is dealing with for pushing liberal lies by twisting the truth.
9 posted on
12/03/2016 11:31:56 AM PST by
SaveFerris
(Hebrews 13:2 Do not forget to entertain strangers, for ... some have unwittingly entertained angels)
To: rktman
I’m a VCDL member, and we’re also suing the AG of Georgia for not recognizing VA CHP. He says that because VA doesn’t allow CHPs to anyone under 21 and doesn’t recognize Georgia carriers under 21 that Georgia won’t recognize any VA CHPs.
10 posted on
12/03/2016 11:44:12 AM PST by
VanShuyten
("a shadow...draped nobly in the folds of a gorgeous eloquence.")
To: rktman
“You probably recall that bit of anti-gun rights hackery known as Under the Gun”
Yes, but we now call that “fake news”, a term that didn’t exit at the time.
11 posted on
12/03/2016 11:49:42 AM PST by
catnipman
(Cat Nipman: Vote Republican in 2012 and only be called racist one more time!)
To: rktman
Intentionally editing to make something to make people look bad should be considered legally defamatory
What NBC did to Geroge Zimmerman should have been considered defamatory as well. But unfortunately it wasn’t
12 posted on
12/03/2016 11:56:09 AM PST by
Cubs Fan
(Trump and Brexit 2016--The year the good guys won. Remember it.)
To: rktman
Intentionally editing something to make people look bad should be considered legally defamatory
What NBC did to Geroge Zimmerman should have been considered defamatory as well. But unfortunately it wasn’t
13 posted on
12/03/2016 11:56:57 AM PST by
Cubs Fan
(Trump and Brexit 2016--The year the good guys won. Remember it.)
To: rktman
I remember watching a segment years ago about a married couple that ABC News or the like that asked them to stand in front of their abandoned home for an interview. The couple fled because an underground mine fire made the area unlivable, the air toxic, and the ground collapsing into the mine. Hence the abandonment.
That's not how Ted Koppel treated the couple, making it seem that they were still living there, and in closing, admonished them to stay away.
The couple got to harass the ABC rep on camera, throwing pointed barbs at the fair-haired, but absent Ted Koppel
To: rktman
So?
People in Hell want ice water.
15 posted on
12/03/2016 12:02:08 PM PST by
Fido969
To: rktman
Well, I would like Katie Couric dismissed.
16 posted on
12/03/2016 12:03:26 PM PST by
real saxophonist
( YouTube + Twitter + Facebook = YouTwitFace.com)
To: rktman
Millions of Aericans would pay to be on that jury, Katie.
To: rktman
Def’s motion is a standard D motion to dismiss.
It has some legal merit in this case.
Def’s are asking court to declare that an act of editing, so as the final broadcast element does not truly reflect events as they occur, so as to make Plaintiffs appear less favorable, does not rise to the same legal statutory standard level under applicable state law as making an actual statement about them that is defamatory and untrue.
As much as I hate what Katie C did, it is a meritorious motion. Whatever the court decides will be appealed.
Remember, never expect the law to be logical.
21 posted on
12/03/2016 12:46:38 PM PST by
Strac6
(Sig Sauer, Pilatus, Mrs. Strac... all the fun things in my life are Swiss)
To: rktman
Oh, I’m sure she could get a loan from somewhere, then work it off doing table dances or some such labor for the next 50 years.
24 posted on
12/03/2016 3:28:55 PM PST by
RandallFlagg
(Vote for your guns!)
To: rktman
I imagine that she would.
27 posted on
12/03/2016 3:41:27 PM PST by
sport
To: rktman
30 posted on
05/31/2017 4:28:48 PM PDT by
SMGFan
(Sarah Michelle Gellar is on twitter @SarahMGellar)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson