Palin Sues NYTimes

anatta

100% recycled karma
Sarah Palin is planning to subpoena almost two dozen New York Times staffers as part of her defamation lawsuit against the newspaper

In a motion arguing for the case to be dismissed, attorneys for The New York Times said that Palin’s lawyers had served notice that she plans to subpoena “23 non-party current and former Times reporters, editors and other employees -- most of whom had nothing to do with the editorial issue,” according to court documents the New York Post obtained Wednesday.

Palin’s legal team also reportedly plans to ask the Times to produce “every internal communication it has had about her since 2011,” in an effort to obtain “documents that might reveal, among other things, their ‘negative feelings’ toward her,” the Times reportedly told the judge on Wednesday.

The New York Times did not immediately respond to Fox News’ request for comment.

The former Alaska governor and vice presidential candidate is suing the Times after the newspaper published an editorial on June 14, hours after House Majority Whip Steve Scalise, R-La., was shot and wounded at a Republican congressional baseball practice. Palin claims that the editorial tied her to the January 2011 shooting of Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords.

The editorial, attributed to the Times’ editorial board and titled “America’s Lethal Politics,” initially linked Palin’s rhetoric to the shooting that killed six people and wounded 13 others, including Giffords.



The Times posted a correction the following day, admitting that “no such link was established.”

The editorial also claimed, incorrectly, that a now-infamous ad from Palin’s political action committee put “Giffords and 19 other Democrats under stylized crosshairs.” The Times also corrected that statement, admitting that the crosshairs on the map targeted “electoral districts, not individual Democratic lawmakers.”

“The Times used its false assertion about Mrs. Palin as an artifice to exploit the [Scalise] shooting,” Palin’s attorneys stated in the lawsuit.

“The Times published and promoted its editorial board’s column despite knowing…the false assertion that Mrs. Palin incited [Tucson shooter Jared] Loughner to murder six people,” the suit added. “In doing so, the Times violated the law and its own policies.”

The New York Times has reportedly claimed that Palin has no case because she cannot claim malice, which is the legal standard for claiming defamation
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...dozen-new-york-times-staffers-in-lawsuit.html
 
even if she loses the case eventually exposing the anti- gop pro democrat bias of the times is already useful.

GO palin. Girl power ; )

remember only bigots and misogynists oppose women!
 
pO' victum palin, merely another sore loZZZZER!!!

Po' actor, pO' reality tv actor & now trying to pull a kardashin for free, cheap publicity... I hope it is tossed out on it's lack of merit-simple as that-as said above, who doesn't hate her?? :dunno:
 
pO' victum palin, merely another sore loZZZZER!!!

Po' actor, pO' reality tv actor & now trying to pull a kardashin for free, cheap publicity... I hope it is tossed out on it's lack of merit-simple as that-as said above, who doesn't hate her?? :dunno:

its not a reality stunt. Getting NYT to acknowledge their pro-democrat bias in a court of law has a lot of value.
 
its not a reality stunt. Getting NYT to acknowledge their pro-democrat bias in a court of law has a lot of value.

BULL SHIT!!! You want to sue fox news for being biased to the wacko right?? YOU EVER HEARD OF FREEDUMB OF THE PRESS, FREE SPEECH??

They can say wtf they want if you, me or a fuckin old bag of rocks from wasila like it or not..... & that's that :evilnod:
 
BULL SHIT!!! You want to sue fox news for being biased to the wacko right?? YOU EVER HEARD OF FREEDUMB OF THE PRESS, FREE SPEECH??

They can say wtf they want if you, me or a fuckin old bag of rocks from wasila like it or not..... & that's that :evilnod:

of course theres freedom of the press. There is also the press claiming to be non-biased. Time to put a stop to that : )
 
of course theres freedom of the press. There is also the press claiming to be non-biased. Time to put a stop to that : )

Perhaps I missed their saying that?? Was it on page 23 somewhere??

All these news "businesses" share one thing in common, TO MAKE MONEY............ Po' victim bag of rocks will lose, & you know it... There isn't anything to argue about.....:dunno:

Now some unbiased news-
hqdefault.jpg
 
The New York Times has reportedly claimed that Palin has no case because she cannot claim malice, which is the legal standard for claiming defamation

lol....do they even have to bring evidence that the NYT has malice toward EVERY conservative?.......this should be taken by the court as a matter of record.....
 
pO' victum palin, merely another sore loZZZZER!!!

Po' actor, pO' reality tv actor & now trying to pull a kardashin for free, cheap publicity... I hope it is tossed out on it's lack of merit-simple as that-as said above, who doesn't hate her?? :dunno:

po'victim NTY, whining because they got caught with their collective pants down........
 
Good. These left wing hack news media need to be held accountable for the lies and defamation they produce.
 
BULL SHIT!!! You want to sue fox news for being biased to the wacko right?? YOU EVER HEARD OF FREEDUMB OF THE PRESS, FREE SPEECH??

They can say wtf they want if you, me or a fuckin old bag of rocks from wasila like it or not..... & that's that :evilnod:

No they can't say what they want. There are limits as the NYT is about to find out.

If Fox bothers you as you have been programmed to believe then you sue them sugar tits
 
Back
Top