Sarah Palin testified Thursday that she felt "mortified" and lost sleep after the New York Times published an editorial incorrectly claiming there was a link between a map her political action committee had posted with crosshairs over congressional districts and the shooting that injured former Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and killed six others. #CNN #News
Legal analyst: Palin testimony exposed gaps in her case against the New York Times
Sure hope Palin LOSES.
The point of this lawsuit was never to win. It was to put the NYT on blast, air her grievances in a very public forum and the paper squirm.
@A T Oh good! Then she will lose.
https://youtu.be/zFJ2AN_CZH8
She’s the original political hate monger. I remember a “shift” in politics when she came on the scene. I don’t think she’s very smart quite honestly.
“Palinesque” is a good word for it. That’s the way she talks about everything.
No sympathy for this mess she’s trying to sue for. She’s like a shock jock and that’s all. I liked McCain but he made a big mistake by bringing her on.
@Freddie Riboni ghj ummm yeah, no we’re not.
@Shawn Murray right? Think @reality needs to go ahead and come out of the closet already.
@Dee Lee your a girl. Ha ha. Maybe your not I heard the girls wear the pants ..
Ha ha.
@Dale Hartley u r a clown
Have you by chance, seen the stuff said by Democrats about George H.W. Bush. Did you not see the article in the Guardian, suggesting his assassination? Look a the stuff said about Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon , . . . . .STOP – When I said Nixon, did you not immediately think something about your hate for him? This goes back to Hamilton and Burr, and before that. No, Sarah Palin was not the original political hate monger. You say “I don’t think she’s very smart, quite honestly.” Applying “Hitchens’s Razor” I can say I don’t think you’re very smart either, quite honestly, though I infer that you think you are very, very smart. .The point is certainly not Sarah Palin. The point in discussion is whether the New York Times is granted license to lie or not. They admitted that what they said was untrue. They say that their falsehood was – well intentional, but not malicious. The play with the definition of “malice” as though it were vernacular. “Malice” is a term of art, which includes a reckless falsehood. Recklessness does not require and evil intent, it just means a falsehood that is an extreme departure from the care a reasonable person would exercise in similar circumstances. The Times admits that it they did no investigation before publishing their falsehood. Without looking at recklessness as to result in her physical or financial injury (It is not “Did the Times, by suggesting that Palin had incited a murder put her in danger of assassination herself?”) there is certainly a recklessness in injuring her reputation by leading people to believe she was the sort who incites assassinations. That is the law that is important here – not whether Palin is prone to word salad but whether she was libeled.
Palin and Greene ..what a team!
PARIS FRANCE TODAY:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_yJZYjk1io
@Variant Ways It’s not Biden who wanna overturn a fair and secure election (according to the Republican in charge of security And former AG Bill Barr and Every court and judge who got the lawsuits)
It was not Biden calling Brad Raffensperger demanding him to Find/invent Enough Votes for him to win- in spite of the fact he actually lost this time. (you can listen to the whole call. I did. It’s on YT. Raffensperger recorded it. Good move)
It was not the Biden Campaign who sent fake electors to capitols in several swing states.
And I could keep going.
Don’t Forget that she can see Russia from her house.
@Joe Rubio I Think You mean To Say That The Gazpacho should Take all 3-of them to the Gulaush with the rest of the Nachos.
@Variant Ways I Care About That Bobble Headed Bimbo Palin, (That Comedian Tina Fay can Easily Impersonate), And says that she can see a Russian Goulaush from her house, where they have German Nacho prisoners held by the Russian Gazpacho. I Think You’d Fit Right In With Them PERFECTLY…
Good reporting. I’m guessing that Sarah Palin is fundraising, nothing more. Kudos to the NY Times for owning up to corrections. That’s how it’s supposed to work.
@Upper 90 Are you privy to the settlement between CNN and Nicholas Sandman ? Why would you think that he is a millionaire ? That seems unlikely . He was part of a group of
Catholic BOYS protesting against a woman`s right to an abortion , a group of boys who ” catcalled” girls who were walking by , and a group who mocked indigenous
people, by doing a fake chant . These boys are taught by Catholic priests , a group of whom 6 % are pedophiles . Most of these boys will never touch a woman . Why
would abortion be any of their business ? I am curious as to how many of those boys will end up in jail for molestation .
On June 14, 2017, James Hodgkinson attempted to assassinate a number of U.S. House members. On the same day, June 14, 2017 the Times accused Sarah Palin of Palin a “clear” and “direct,” connection, inducing the attack on on Gabby Gifford a few years before. To me, the article was a tu quoque, the Times tacitly arguing that a Bernie Sanders supporter attempting to murder a bunch of Republican legislators equates to Sarah Palin putting survey markers (they were never cross-hairs by the way) on a political ad. Do you not see the possibility that another James Hodgkinson might not decide it a good idea to assassinate Palin, to punish her for her own participation in another assassination? Now three is no dispute that what the Times said was a lie. It said that Gabby Gifford attempted assassination had connection to Palin that was “clear” and “direct.” Okay, it was a day involving an attempted assassination against Republican House members. The Times publishes an editorial that says “they do it too” essentially. There are shot up Republicans, Steve Scalise quite possibly close to dying that day. You think a mushy-mouthed correction a day later. You say Kudos. Good job guys. You hid your accusation and didn’t apologize in any way. “That’s how it’s supposed to work” that the Times does exactly what it claimed Sarah Palin did when she didn’t. The Times recognizes that such statements as they made can get people killed. You think, “no harm no foul” and Palin should have no recourse for something that might well have gotten her killed. I don’t think the Times was due any “Kudos” – particularly when they obviously did not think they had done an adequate correction, or they would not have done another correction – and they never apologized, never acknowledged the dangerous game they were playing. I don’t think that “That’s how it’s supposed to work” in libel law.
@Upper 90 You know , CNN may have offered to pay for ” therapy ” for Nicholas Sandman , out of concern for his well being . He , and the other Covington boys, deserve some
sympathy for their unfortunate circumstances . Without some help , that group can , and will , cause a lot of harm .
@Dan Dominus It would be hard to damage Sarah Palin`s reputation . She , and her family , have already done a bang up job on that front . Alcohol , drugs, and violence seem to
have followed them around . ( The Times , and all media sources , need to slow their roll , and be more cautious of what they say . However, it is kind of ”
rich” for a conservative to complain about media accuracy . That takes hypocrisy to a new level . )
But yet, despite her being so emotionally distressed, she can still dine freely (with impunity) WHILE being treated for + COVID in a NY restaurant, laughing and joking…..I call BS…
@julia howard did the truth hurt your feelings? So sorry to trigger you, snowflake 🦄🌈
@Greg All it’s all rainbows 🌈and unicorns for you lefty’s isn’t it? Keep believing that there are an infinite amount of genders and that climate change is going to kill you in the next 30 to 45 minutes… and the Trump is the cause for all of your personal problems in your life and tthatif he would just go away everything would be perfect. ❄️❄️❄️
The Gazpacho Police will definitely becoming for her…
@Jean D’Arc Looks like you in love with tRump’s truth. Dear you have no idea what is real propaganda. Go back to school and learn or atleast learn how to find the truth.
@Jean D’Arc and you are one of them.
These gaps you speak of are not gaps in her testimony they are the gaps that span the space between her ears.
Those gaps could reach infinity and beyond. Shes a special case to be sure. Just sad.
🤣🤣🤣
https://youtu.be/zFJ2AN_CZH8
Dave Fudurich… 😂👏🏻💯 palin talks about the emotional damage she suffered…what about the emotional damage she inflicted on the country since 2008???
Duly noted! Hahaha
Palin is a simpleton. Period.
How can anyone take her seriously
I don’t believe she had the COVID VIRUS like she wanted us to believe
She was out all around town having a great time
I’m sick and tired of people like this
It’s an attention seeking publicity stunt to get her face back in the news.
It’s not a stretch to think she’s just doing this before she announces she’s going to run against Lisa Murkowski for Senate. She misses her limelight.
@Renda Jones Bingo! That’s exactly what she’s up to and publicly stated her intent previously because Lisa didn’t appropriately worship King Cheato. Too bad for her, that the Chewbacca impersonator, Holy Corrupted Reverend Tshibaka, got to him first. But then, he’s backing all primarying Cheato tots now, so maybe she can still get his attention.
@Phuk YouTube give me an example.
@Kim K you used the term Karen incorrectly.
https://youtu.be/zFJ2AN_CZH8
She was grifting the republicans before Trump.
She can spread hurtful or outright falsehoods but she’s hurt to the point of a lawsuit when it’s done to her. She’s a politician and should be used to this kind of scrutiny. Claiming SCOTUS will vindicate her just adds to her grift.
You leftists are really gobbling it up, aren’t you? Guzzling down your establishment media until you gag on it. One day you’ll wake up. Most have realised, but you’re just the last and bottom percentile. There but for the grace of god.
I do understand libel law, to whoever it is who commented. I didn’t say she should win her case, I was pointing out to the person who commented that she didn’t understand libel law, based upon her one-dimensional comment. Your libel law is based upon the English law of tort, as I understand it, but please correct me if I’m wrong – you need to demonstrate that there was both a wrong and some form of loss. Whether there was loss or not, it doesn’t distract from my original comment, which was directed at a crass comment which suggested no understanding whatsoever.
I couldn’t care any less about Palin, or anybody else for that matter, because as the precious one above says, Moore or Less (and I’d suggest less), I’m not from here.
And it’s squire, not esquire, where I come from, squire.
* detract
@TheDiamond2009 you are not from here. Stay out of our business clown.
Joe is not very intelligent though. You trust his opinions.
Ignore the off topic copy paste comment by the fake account bot that goes by @reality. That troll is under investigation by the SPCA for sexually assaulting farm animals and family pets.
Palin suffered “emotional” distress. Gee whiz, is she gonna sue her kids for that, too? People who live in glass houses, etc.
In a libel suit, there is no need to prove actual damages of any sort. So, the emotional distress is not the basis of the suit, and it would have nothing to do with her children. Nice to bring insults to people’s children into an argument by the way. Classy on your part.
@Dan Dominus Huh? Obviously you don’t have kids. Emotional distress comes with the territory. Not that it has to do with the New York Times. If you’re a public figure seeking publicity, you can get more scrutiny than you like. Goes with the territory. Sober up.
@Nino 718 your comment is 100% out of context.
@Dan Dominus was it not her daughter who is so desperate for money she went on a television show called dancing with the Stars?
No her kids are not off the table
Palin tried putting lipstick on a pig with this lawsuit
She’s evasive and lied on the stand while claiming the NYTs lied. Lol!
In what sense do you believe her to have lied? Certainly neither of the commentators at CNN seem to have said she lied. Or did I miss something? It really illustrates the issue in a way. The Times believes that it needs no support for the allegations in its story. It admits that it did not investigate the allegations. It doesn’t seem to denied that the allegation was such as to harm a person’s reputation. So you say things, don’t support them and seem to have done no investigation before making them. So, that is the whole point of the case. Is it all right, to make up calumnies and try to injure people’s reputations? Libel law is designed to make the need for dueling unnecessary. Calumny can be refuted and honor proved. Why is this important today? Look at stories about murders in New York City, or in Chicago, etc. You men in gangs kill each other, because it is the only way they believe their good name may be restored. Of course, today Burr is not going to kill Hamilton. But, in absence of any way of restoring one’s good name, society becomes less civil in many non-violent ways.
@Dan Dominus he said she lied
Palin couldn’t form an intelligent argument? Shocker
Only the best cons racists and traitors, GOP republikkkans
Democrats are brainwashed lemmings that are being manipulated by the elite of their party and left leaning legacy media. Democrats are the ones amongst us incapable of critical thinking. They are cancer.
Is Palin legally competent to stand trial? Someone who is unable to comprehend court proceedings shouldn’t have to testify.
If that was so, what about the former guy and the GOP, straight to the white jacket brigade lol
*So, I can start suing everyone that has ever hurt my feelings?* 😏
*Is it possible that Palin is just using this a way to raise money?* 🤷🏻♀️
That’s exactly what I was thinking. Definitely a desperate move!!! She must be broke 🤦🏽♀️
You would think her lawyers would’ve explained this to her but maybe they just wanted the money and go through the motion
https://youtu.be/zFJ2AN_CZH8
Hahaha Palin whining about how it’s hard when people are saying lies about you with malicious intent deserves its own 2022 National Irony Day Parade with fireworks, tanks, and Disney princesses. Goddamn the hypocrisy is just ridiculous.
This is not argument. This is insult. If you want to accuse her of libels, then lay them out. All your post does is declares your own hate, and vituperation without any support, any discussion of the issue. Did you not see that, on the day when James Hodgkinson almost killed Steve Scalise and others, it was more than just pollical background noise to lie and effectively say Sarah Palin had, herself, incited an assassination attempt? Hahaha is a pretty jejune way of articulating a comment on libel law.
Being general and evasive, Sarah Palin has always been this way. That’s why most people don’t take her seriously at all.
Again, the actions of the defendant, in a libel suit, are pretty much irrelevant. The evasiveness of the newspaper is what is relevant to the lawsuit – in the sense that they evade the truth of the indisputable fact that they had not relational basis for their allegations. So, you insult, but you miss the whole point of the suit, the law.
@Dan Dominus, there wasn’t a case, NYT called it an honest mistake and there wasn’t any damage done to Palin. Don’t be such be a goofy little child when trying to Comment.
https://youtu.be/zFJ2AN_CZH8
Letting her speak is the best defense the Times could have used, she is her own worst enemy.
she just needs to be arrested for treason and misinformation, locked up for life, no trial needed
So someone reports that she’s stupid and she sues that person for telling the truth? Anyone remembers her talking about men and dinosaurs walking the earth together some 4000 years ago? Give me a break!