In article , atrueboater1
@hotmail.com says...

On 2/13/11 6:13 PM, Gene wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 15:56:29 -0500, wrote:

In articleTOCdnflXi67X3sXQnZ2dnUVZ_gKdnZ2d@earthlink .com, payer3389
@mypacks.net says...

Lawsuit Over Video

Andrew Breitbart, the owner of several conservative Web sites, was
served at the (CPAC)conference on Saturday with a lawsuit filed by
Shirley Sherrod, the former Agriculture Department employee who lost her
job last year over a video that Mr. Brietbart posted at his site
biggovernment.com.

The video was selectively edited so that it appeared Ms. Sherrod was
confessing she had discriminated against a farmer because he was white.
In the suit, which was filed in Washington on Friday, Ms. Sherrod says
the video has damaged her reputation and prevented her from continuing
her work.

Mr. Breitbart said in a statement that he ?categorically rejects the
transparent effort to chill his constitutionally protected free speech.?

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/13/us...cpac.html?_r=1

Just wait until discovery. It will be very interesting When Ms.
Sherrod?s co-workers, business associates, friends and acquaintances are
all called in to be deposed.

From what I heard immediately after the Breitbart "exposé,"
"co-workers, business associates, friends and acquaintances" were on
her side.

If they stick to their original story, as I heard it, Breitbart will
be convicted of yelling, "Fire!" in a crowded theatre.... and his
right of free speech defense won't hold water....

This really isn't an example of yelling "Fire" but of Libel. If his
editing did change the tone or meaning of her comments he probably will
be found guilty of Libel, and she would be compensated for all of her
damages and pain and suffering.

As you suggested, from what I read at the time, it looks like she has
one hell of a case.

Editorial/journalistic license. The media does this all the time.

Each and every story will now be devoid of video and audio. If any
editing is done then the person who believes they have been caste in a
bad light will sue.

In article , payer3389
@mypacks.net says...

On 2/13/11 6:33 PM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

In om,
says...

In ,
says...


If they stick to their original story, as I heard it, Breitbart will
be convicted of yelling, "Fire!" in a crowded theatre.... and his
right of free speech defense won't hold water....

All you need is someone with a conscious and the rest of them are up on
a threat of a perjury charge. How many of your co-workers are you
willing to become a convicted felon for.


Looks like Krause wss right about you all along.
Wasn't sure until now.

I made no statement for or against anyone. I seek only fairness from all
and fairness for all.


Bull****, with a capital B.

Please provide the quote where I pushed Brietbart?s side or Sherrod?s
side.

I mad a statement about how too many witnesses can cause problems with
trying to keep a story straight.

On 2/13/11 7:14 PM, BAR wrote:
In , atrueboater1
@hotmail.com says...

On 2/13/11 6:13 PM, Gene wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 15:56:29 -0500, wrote:

In articleTOCdnflXi67X3sXQnZ2dnUVZ_gKdnZ2d@earthlink .com, payer3389
@mypacks.net says...

Lawsuit Over Video

Andrew Breitbart, the owner of several conservative Web sites, was
served at the (CPAC)conference on Saturday with a lawsuit filed by
Shirley Sherrod, the former Agriculture Department employee who lost her
job last year over a video that Mr. Brietbart posted at his site
biggovernment.com.

The video was selectively edited so that it appeared Ms. Sherrod was
confessing she had discriminated against a farmer because he was white.
In the suit, which was filed in Washington on Friday, Ms. Sherrod says
the video has damaged her reputation and prevented her from continuing
her work.

Mr. Breitbart said in a statement that he ?categorically rejects the
transparent effort to chill his constitutionally protected free speech.?

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/13/us...cpac.html?_r=1

Just wait until discovery. It will be very interesting When Ms.
Sherrod?s co-workers, business associates, friends and acquaintances are
all called in to be deposed.

From what I heard immediately after the Breitbart "exposé,"
"co-workers, business associates, friends and acquaintances" were on
her side.

If they stick to their original story, as I heard it, Breitbart will
be convicted of yelling, "Fire!" in a crowded theatre.... and his
right of free speech defense won't hold water....

This really isn't an example of yelling "Fire" but of Libel. If his
editing did change the tone or meaning of her comments he probably will
be found guilty of Libel, and she would be compensated for all of her
damages and pain and suffering.

As you suggested, from what I read at the time, it looks like she has
one hell of a case.

Editorial/journalistic license. The media does this all the time.

Bertie-Birther has the "equivalence disease."

On 2/13/11 7:16 PM, BAR wrote:
In article4ZydnSScr7Eg7cXQnZ2dnUVZ_uKdnZ2d@earthlink .com, payer3389
@mypacks.net says...

On 2/13/11 6:33 PM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

In om,
says...

In ,
says...


If they stick to their original story, as I heard it, Breitbart will
be convicted of yelling, "Fire!" in a crowded theatre.... and his
right of free speech defense won't hold water....

All you need is someone with a conscious and the rest of them are up on
a threat of a perjury charge. How many of your co-workers are you
willing to become a convicted felon for.


Looks like Krause wss right about you all along.
Wasn't sure until now.

I made no statement for or against anyone. I seek only fairness from all
and fairness for all.


Bull****, with a capital B.

Please provide the quote where I pushed Brietbart?s side or Sherrod?s
side.

I mad a statement about how too many witnesses can cause problems with
trying to keep a story straight.




The original unedited video is available, and the "slightly edited to
change the meaning" edited video of Breitbart is available. If a jury
sees the tapes, it will see what Ms. Sherrod said and what Breitbart, et
al, changed the tape to make it appear she was making a racist remark.

I would guess Breitbart will offer a settlement. I hope the woman
doesn't take it.

In article ,
says...

On 2/13/11 7:16 PM, BAR wrote:
In article4ZydnSScr7Eg7cXQnZ2dnUVZ_uKdnZ2d@earthlink .com, payer3389
@mypacks.net says...

On 2/13/11 6:33 PM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

In om,
says...

In ,
says...


If they stick to their original story, as I heard it, Breitbart will
be convicted of yelling, "Fire!" in a crowded theatre.... and his
right of free speech defense won't hold water....

All you need is someone with a conscious and the rest of them are up on
a threat of a perjury charge. How many of your co-workers are you
willing to become a convicted felon for.


Looks like Krause wss right about you all along.
Wasn't sure until now.

I made no statement for or against anyone. I seek only fairness from all
and fairness for all.


Bull****, with a capital B.

Please provide the quote where I pushed Brietbart?s side or Sherrod?s
side.

I mad a statement about how too many witnesses can cause problems with
trying to keep a story straight.




The original unedited video is available, and the "slightly edited to
change the meaning" edited video of Breitbart is available. If a jury
sees the tapes, it will see what Ms. Sherrod said and what Breitbart, et
al, changed the tape to make it appear she was making a racist remark.

I would guess Breitbart will offer a settlement. I hope the woman
doesn't take it.

Where is the original video?

On 2/13/11 7:49 PM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

On 2/13/11 7:16 PM, BAR wrote:
In article4ZydnSScr7Eg7cXQnZ2dnUVZ_uKdnZ2d@earthlink .com, payer3389
@mypacks.net says...

On 2/13/11 6:33 PM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

In om,
says...

In ,
says...


If they stick to their original story, as I heard it, Breitbart will
be convicted of yelling, "Fire!" in a crowded theatre.... and his
right of free speech defense won't hold water....

All you need is someone with a conscious and the rest of them are up on
a threat of a perjury charge. How many of your co-workers are you
willing to become a convicted felon for.


Looks like Krause wss right about you all along.
Wasn't sure until now.

I made no statement for or against anyone. I seek only fairness from all
and fairness for all.


Bull****, with a capital B.

Please provide the quote where I pushed Brietbart?s side or Sherrod?s
side.

I mad a statement about how too many witnesses can cause problems with
trying to keep a story straight.




The original unedited video is available, and the "slightly edited to
change the meaning" edited video of Breitbart is available. If a jury
sees the tapes, it will see what Ms. Sherrod said and what Breitbart, et
al, changed the tape to make it appear she was making a racist remark.

I would guess Breitbart will offer a settlement. I hope the woman
doesn't take it.

Where is the original video?



Under lock and key, one hopes. I've seen copies of both on various
sites. I'm sure a high school grad like you can find it, if you are that
interested.

In article , payer3389
@mypacks.net says...

The original unedited video is available, and the "slightly edited to
change the meaning" edited video of Breitbart is available. If a jury
sees the tapes, it will see what Ms. Sherrod said and what Breitbart, et
al, changed the tape to make it appear she was making a racist remark.

I would guess Breitbart will offer a settlement. I hope the woman
doesn't take it.

Where is the original video?



Under lock and key, one hopes. I've seen copies of both on various
sites. I'm sure a high school grad like you can find it, if you are that
interested.



So it doesn?t exist.

On 2/13/11 7:14 PM, BAR wrote:
In , atrueboater1
@hotmail.com says...

On 2/13/11 6:13 PM, Gene wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 15:56:29 -0500, wrote:

In articleTOCdnflXi67X3sXQnZ2dnUVZ_gKdnZ2d@earthlink .com, payer3389
@mypacks.net says...

Lawsuit Over Video

Andrew Breitbart, the owner of several conservative Web sites, was
served at the (CPAC)conference on Saturday with a lawsuit filed by
Shirley Sherrod, the former Agriculture Department employee who lost her
job last year over a video that Mr. Brietbart posted at his site
biggovernment.com.

The video was selectively edited so that it appeared Ms. Sherrod was
confessing she had discriminated against a farmer because he was white.
In the suit, which was filed in Washington on Friday, Ms. Sherrod says
the video has damaged her reputation and prevented her from continuing
her work.

Mr. Breitbart said in a statement that he ?categorically rejects the
transparent effort to chill his constitutionally protected free speech.?

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/13/us...cpac.html?_r=1

Just wait until discovery. It will be very interesting When Ms.
Sherrod?s co-workers, business associates, friends and acquaintances are
all called in to be deposed.

From what I heard immediately after the Breitbart "exposé,"
"co-workers, business associates, friends and acquaintances" were on
her side.

If they stick to their original story, as I heard it, Breitbart will
be convicted of yelling, "Fire!" in a crowded theatre.... and his
right of free speech defense won't hold water....

This really isn't an example of yelling "Fire" but of Libel. If his
editing did change the tone or meaning of her comments he probably will
be found guilty of Libel, and she would be compensated for all of her
damages and pain and suffering.

As you suggested, from what I read at the time, it looks like she has
one hell of a case.

Editorial/journalistic license. The media does this all the time.

Each and every story will now be devoid of video and audio. If any
editing is done then the person who believes they have been caste in a
bad light will sue.



It doesn't matter what the person thinks, it has to do with what a
reasonable man (and the jury) thinks.

On 2/13/11 7:58 PM, BAR wrote:
In articleDuWdnbRBg84r4cXQnZ2dnUVZ_q6dnZ2d@earthlink .com, payer3389
@mypacks.net says...

The original unedited video is available, and the "slightly edited to
change the meaning" edited video of Breitbart is available. If a jury
sees the tapes, it will see what Ms. Sherrod said and what Breitbart, et
al, changed the tape to make it appear she was making a racist remark.

I would guess Breitbart will offer a settlement. I hope the woman
doesn't take it.

Where is the original video?



Under lock and key, one hopes. I've seen copies of both on various
sites. I'm sure a high school grad like you can find it, if you are that
interested.



So it doesn?t exist.



You're still the dumb****.

On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 18:20:49 -0500, Harryk
wrote:

On 2/13/11 6:18 PM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 15:56:29 -0500, wrote:

In articleTOCdnflXi67X3sXQnZ2dnUVZ_gKdnZ2d@earthlink .com, payer3389
@mypacks.net says...

Lawsuit Over Video

Andrew Breitbart, the owner of several conservative Web sites, was
served at the (CPAC)conference on Saturday with a lawsuit filed by
Shirley Sherrod, the former Agriculture Department employee who lost her
job last year over a video that Mr. Brietbart posted at his site
biggovernment.com.

The video was selectively edited so that it appeared Ms. Sherrod was
confessing she had discriminated against a farmer because he was white.
In the suit, which was filed in Washington on Friday, Ms. Sherrod says
the video has damaged her reputation and prevented her from continuing
her work.

Mr. Breitbart said in a statement that he ?categorically rejects the
transparent effort to chill his constitutionally protected free speech.?

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/13/us...cpac.html?_r=1

Just wait until discovery. It will be very interesting When Ms.
Sherrod?s co-workers, business associates, friends and acquaintances are
all called in to be deposed.

From what I heard immediately after the Breitbart "exposé,"
"co-workers, business associates, friends and acquaintances" were on
her side.

If they stick to their original story, as I heard it, Breitbart will
be convicted of yelling, "Fire!" in a crowded theatre.... and his
right of free speech defense won't hold water....

All you need is someone with a conscious and the rest of them are up on
a threat of a perjury charge. How many of your co-workers are you
willing to become a convicted felon for.


Oh, please. Breitbart is a scumbag. It's telling that you are sticking
up for him.

Bertie seems to be slipping ever further toward the edge of sanity.