Posted on 08/29/2017 12:12:47 PM PDT by GIdget2004
A federal judge dismissed Sarah Palin’s defamation lawsuit against The New York Times on Tuesday, according to multiple media reports.
Palin sued The Times for defamation after an editorial in the newspaper on mass shootings tied an ad run by the former vice presidential nominee to the 2011 shooting of former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (R-Az.).
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
The story omits the judge's name.
So the judge does this while the country’s attention is focused on Hurricane Harvey. IMPEACH HIM!
What judge? A Clinton or Obama appointee working in collusion? I assume she can appeal this.
On October 11, 1995, Rakoff was nominated by President Bill Clinton[4] to fill a seat on the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York vacated by David N. Edelstein. He was confirmed by the Senate on December 29, 1995, received his commission on January 4, 1996, and entered on duty on March 1, 1996. On December 31, 2010, he assumed senior status, although he continues to take the full load of cases.[5]
Time to amend the Constitution, removing lifetime appointments for Federal judges, and this ridiculous “actual malice” standard for a biased, editorializing “press” that has no responsibility for accurate reporting and character assassination
Oh, and a movement needs to begin to remove so called “activist” judges
Let me guess, the public wasn’t interested enough in the case? Was there no prosecutor willing to take the case?
Our justice system is starting to look like a joke.
That’s because the Hill, a liberal hack site does not want us to know
the Judges name.
I would not be surprised if the Judge was bribed or a hard core Leftist.
Boom!
There you go.
Gaydar pegged.
This is what rules America today.
I hope she appeals it. Stretch the suffering out much, much longer. Sarah has suffered unfairly. Now it’s their turn, but this time with good reason. Maybe she should consult the Attorneys that helped Hulk Hogan sue Gawker.
That also took a long time.
STARTING?!?!?!
Not a surprise. The Supreme Court has given the media nearly insurmountable First Amendment protections from defamation suits.
Well look at that sphincter pucker ...
Rofl, yeah.... thought about that right after hitting post.
Ridiculous that someone can sue McDonalds for spilling coffee on themselves and win.... while this doesn’t even make it to court. There is a long list of idiotic cases like it, that predate my existence.
Looks like conservatives are going to have to cease relying on the Rule of Law, and move to the Rule of Lucille, instead...
That's doubly true if the offended party is a public figure subject to "fair comment and criticism." I find the NYT's report unfair and disagree with the decision but had no realistic hope Pailin would prevail.
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.