Posted on 07/29/2010 12:33:22 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Via Ben Smith at Politico, the utterly predictable next step in the swamp that has become the Sherrod story has taken place:
Ousted Agriculture Department employee Shirley Sherrod said Thursday she will sue a conservative blogger who posted an edited video of her making racially tinged remarks last week.
The edited video posted by Andrew Breitbart led Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack to ask Sherrod to resign, a decision he reconsidered after seeing the entire video of her March speech to a local NAACP group. In the full speech, Sherrod spoke of racial reconciliation and lessons she learned after initially hesitating to help a white farmer save his home.
She said she doesn’t want an apology from Breitbart for posting the video that took her comments out of context, but told a crowd at the National Association of Black Journalists annual convention that she would “definitely sue.”
Sue Breitbart for what, though? Defamation? Sherrod is a public official, which makes that kind of lawsuit darned near impossible. Breitbart used the clip to criticize the NAACP, not Sherrod directly, although she certainly came into the line of fire. People are allowed to criticize public officials in harsh and even unfair terms, especially when they make public remarks.
A court is not likely to look favorably on this for another reason — Sherrod’s public statements about Breitbart. She accused him of being pro-slavery, which is a ridiculous and demagogic attack. Even if a court somehow found that Breitbart acted with malice specifically towards Sherrod to a level that overcomes the right to criticize public officials and that he lied about Sherrod specifically in doing so, under those same terms Breitbart would have a countercase against Sherrod. Otherwise, Breitbart has become enough of a public figure that Sherrod’s statements about him would probably not be actionable, either.
This lawsuit will make a big splash and keep the story alive for a while, but its value is strictly limited to PR. I somehow doubt that the Obama administration will see that as beneficial to its own objectives, either, as they seem as anxious to bury the story as anyone involved.
Suicide by litigation.
Both career and reputation...
“This lawsuit will make a big splash and keep the story alive for a while, but its value is strictly limited to PR.”
In my opinion, this is what this lawsuit is all about. She is trying to stay relevant in an environment no longer falling for the race card. She is probably receiving financial incentives from someone to keep this story going as a distraction to whatever else the administration has up their sleeves. And one can only speculate what kind of internal psyche reward she is receiving from being important to someone for let’s see oh about 48 hrs!
Which would have included asking Ms. Sherrod why she thought it necessary to provide him with a head's up warning via email that this video existed FOUR DAYS before it aired.
I hope he comes out hitting the NAACP aka DNC harder with more videos!
Bring it on.
Countersue her.
She has to prove personal malice; he has to prove her stupidity. There will be other statements/deeds.
40 acres and a mule, my as*!
In the initial excerpt aired by Breitbart, the reaction of the NAACP proves his case, his intent in airing the video in the first place. It had nothing to do with her, but for the fact that what she was saying demonstrated the inherent racism in that crowd. She cannot show Breitbart defaming her, damaging her, nothing to do with her. Her tort, if she had one, is with Vilsack.
She sure goes to a lot of black-only events for someone who "is not a racist." Just sayin'...and of course the "journalists" will get the word out for her. How convenient.
And from what I've heard from her in the past week she's for it again.
Maybe she could get appointed as an adviser to John Kerry?
Go Shirley Go. Do it and prove to the world what a racist you are.
Delicious!
If it was oh-so-innocent and redeeming, a tale of "eyes opened" and enlightenment, why the head's up, Ms. Sherrod?
I started thinking about the slew of lawsuits filed against Sarah Palin, while reading the comments here.
Is this a new tactic of the left? Sue those that threaten their world view, to hit them in the pocketbook?
It seems effective, as many will hunker down to avoid the expense of defending oneself in court. If Sherrod does take Breitbart to court, we Freepers should all pitch him to help him with the costs, and make it known publicly.
Of course, that would be “racist” of us, and probably get Jim R. sued as well. And, as an aside, how long before Charley Rangel’s defenders pull out the “race card”?
Maybe he actually had to spend time around her.
Liberal law firms were probably stalking her begging her to let them pursue the case pro bono just to earn points with the high priests and parishioners of their religion.
I bet you are an excellent Chess player.
In the same speech she called tea partiers racist and later said Fox News wants African Americans to go back to looking down when they walk by whites and have them not get jobs.
She’s a racist through and through. And so is her husband.
You can't bury racism, only racists.
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.