Sherrod To Sue Breitbart

Andrew Breitbart speaking at the SRLC

The news of the day:

Ousted USDA employee Shirley Sherrod says she will sue conservative blogger Andrew Breitbart, the Associated Press reports.

Sherrod made the announcement Thursday in San Diego at the National Association of Black Journalists annual convention.

That should be interesting since the bar is set pretty high for public figures suing for defamation, as Ed Morrissey notes:

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.

Morrissey thinks the court might have a problem with the case for another reason — Sherrod’s absurd public statements about Breitbart.  She has accused him of being pro-slavery.

She also continues to erroneously blame Fox News for her firing:

“It wasn’t all media. It was Fox,” Sherrod says in commenting on President Obama’s remarks on The View blaming the media in part for the story.

Fox News didn’t air the story until Sherrod had been fired. Glenn Beck even came to her defense, saying that she deserved her job back after she had been fired.

The woman does not make a credible plaintiff, but since she’s had amazing luck with the courts, she must figure, what the heck.

Exit question: Given the fact that the new media is now sniffing around that Pigford v Glickman case, wouldn’t you think there’d be some bureaucrats at the USDA sort of  wishing this woman would just go away?

Also blogging:

Warner Todd Houston, Gateway Pundit: BREAKING: Sherrod Says She’ll Sue Andrew Breitbart

Drew: AoSHQ: Report: Sherrod To Sue Breitbart

Linked by Michelle Malkin, thanks!


Share

About these ads

18 thoughts on “Sherrod To Sue Breitbart

  1. Pingback: Ruby Slippers

  2. Sherrod is trying to make herself into a national figure like Jesse Jackson, able to coast for the rest of her life in the pool of racism. Her move is for celebrity — she wins the case, she wins, she loses the case, she wins because all the racists will say she was robbed and love her more than ever.

    Like

  3. If I am Fox, Breitbart, and others who supposedly have wronged her good name, I am encouraged to see that she will want to pursue the legal course of action. Be prepared Ms. Sherrod for your can of worms and herd of cats are about to be exposed as the fraud that you are.

    As for this Administration, they should be ashamed of theirselves for sending out this governmnent official to be their mouth piece. As Dick Morris has stated, Ms. Sherrod has been bought by this administration and she is theirs for the attacking and picking. Ms. Sherrod has not the knowledge of what kind of den of thieves she is associating herself with. She had better have a proper sized baseball bat because she is now in the major leagues of press swill.

    As Leslie Neilsen stated so aptly in the movie Airplane, ‘Good luck. We’re all counting on you!’

    Like

  4. “Before the tape, Sherrod was not a public figure for whom a higher legal threshold of “actual malice” would be required, though in this case it would be hard to say that malice or a reckless disregard to the truth wasn’t present.”

    “Fox, by way of offering Breitbart a forum, may be similarly at risk. Under the “republication” doctrine, Fox may be as liable as Breitbart for recklessly running (and rerunning) the doctored footage.”

    Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

    Sherrod is going to OWN Breitbart’s websites. And more.

    Like

  5. Well I think the situation requires more thought on all sides. Lets consider the facts. The clip and sound-bite aired by Mr. Breitbart was clearly doctored. There is no denying that as you can watch the clip from his blog and the clip in whole and see glaring differences. The question becomes is Mr. Breitbart to blame? According to him, he received the sound-bite in question from another source. If this is true, Mr. Breitbart could be sued as an enabler, that is, the person who hosted the bite in question. Under these rules, so too would Fox News fall into this category. But they are not the ones truly at fault if this is so. If Breitbart is smart, he will reveal the source of the bite and avoid most of the blame in the case.
    Defamation can be brought into play here because a loss of property was incurred by the airing of the sound-bite. Because she lost her job partially thanks to this, she has a case. Now, since Fox aired it after the firing, they may be absolved of blame by the court possibly. It does not surprise me that Fox News would air the clip without looking at its authenticity. They, like the “liberal MSM” as it is called are only interested in ratings and will air anything for viewers. The fact that the White House did not look at the authenticity is an obvious sign of how amateur the running of our country, not just by the president, but by the entire government left and right, really is.

    Like

  6. ROFL – The liberal mainstream media aired the Sherrod clip before FOX did… would love to see MSNBC, ABC, CBS, and CNN sued by this idiot woman. Especially now that a separatist, racial speech against “the white man and Uncle Toms, stealing our elections” has been made public by Saint Shirley’s loving husband, Charles. His message is that all blacks who are not in lockstep with the socialist agenda, voting Democrat, being liberal, embracing welfare entitlements must be PUNISHED for their betrayal. Voting must be based on skin color… I’m guessing Saint Shirley was oblivious to her husband’s racism all these years, right?

    While we’re talking about suing… tea partiers should sue the MSM for that “racial epithet” claim at the DC tea party event last spring. The one where two congressmen, Lewis and Cleaver, claimed that the N-word was flung at them at least a dozen times and that one of them was spat upon. Video and audio footage prove they were lying (and their press release on the bogus event was sent out in less than an hour), but the MSM ran with the story, never checking it for veracity, for weeks, with no proof – some Democrat politicians are still talking about it on talk shows as though it were real. Now there is a lot of back-pedaling from the two congressmen, and while no evidence has been produced nor arrests occurred, the lies continue.

    And how about let’s all sue the 400-plus “JournoListers” for their collusion and contrived lies about conservatives, tea party attendees, the Palin family, the hiding of the racism of Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s affiliation with radicals, ACORN & the SEIU?

    At this rate, we’ll be done with “hopenchange” litigation in the year 2166.

    Like

  7. Sherrod looks either very very tired, drugged, or drunk.

    … and clearly projecting racism and agenda onto Breitbart.

    When is it wrong to take what someone says and play it back?!! What an insane situation… overpaid public servants suing private citizens. Sheesh!

    Like

  8. It isn’t that its wrong to play it back, its to cut and chop it and then release it as though it were the truth. Thats what is at question here.

    Like

  9. I think Andy jumped the gun. This is not about what is legal or right. It is about trying to throw shit at the Right and hoping it’ll stick enough to energize the base and give them an excuse to attack the Majority, who they know oppose everything they stand for. The Left is still using the term “swiftboated” despite the fact that T. Boone Pickens offered a million dollars to anyone who could prove John O’Neils charges in his book were untrue and O’Neil challenged Kerry to prove it in court. Truth is unimportant to them. They must be defeated utterly and continually, for the price of freedom is Eternal Vigilance.

    Like

  10. Pingback: Nice Lady Gaga Music photos - Lady Gaga Video

  11. It isn’t that its wrong to play it back, its to cut and chop it and then release it as though it were the truth. Thats what is at question here.

    I totally understand the issue/question. No one forced this gal to say what she said. She said it. No body changed her words. In fact she said more that damaged her than what Breitbart initially reported. She revealed her stripes. Just because she threw somebody a bone in there doesn’t change that she said plenty that reveals her general attitude and core beliefs.

    Her blaming her problems on Breitbart is like blaming Bush.

    Like

  12. Mrs. Sherrod is a marxist and racist. Thanks to the Obama Administration, she is now a rich racist. Thanks to the NAA[L]CP she is famous racist.

    There will be no lawsuit. The her patrons, the NAA[L]CP abd the Obama administration don’t want any more publicity on the Pigford scam.

    Like

  13. Ms. Sherrod has something big on her side. That is the corrupt ((under this administration) D of J. The only reason that the Black Panther case was not persued in the courts was that they had not had time to get all the judges in line. They have remedied that problem.

    Like

  14. It isn’t that its wrong to play it back, its to cut and chop it and then release it as though it were the truth.

    Not quite. Breitbart just released it – he didn’t cut and chop it.

    Like

  15. Exactly, but he released it without checking the validity of it first. Because he released a doctored clip and gave it a host, ie his site, and because it cost a person property, he can be brought up on defamation charges. He needs to reveal his source to save him grief.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s