Fox News Host Eric Bolling Sues Muslim Journalist for $50M Over Lewd Photo Allegation

Yashur Ali has been called out as crazy or sex obsessed before.

Eric Bolling, suspended Fox News host, has essentially labeled him a liar. It would be great to see a liberal Muslim writer ruined. He could always find work as a future taxi driver.

Excerpt from Hollywood Reporter

Yashar Ali is being sued over stories about sexual harassment via text message.
Recently suspended Fox News host Eric Bolling is suing journalist Yashar Ali for defamation and is seeking $50 million in damages.

The lawsuit comes just days after Ali wrote an Aug. 4 story for HuffPost claiming that more than a dozen sources told him Bolling sent “an unsolicited photo of male genitalia via text message to at least two colleagues at Fox Business and one colleague at Fox News.”

On Saturday, Fox News suspended Bolling — recently a host on the talk show Fox News Specialists and Cashin’ In and formerly of The Five — amid an investigation into the claims. He has worked at Fox News since 2008.

Ali wrote Wednesday on Twitter that he has received a summons from Bolling and says he stands by his reporting and will protect his sources. In the initial story, Ali says he spoke to 14 sources on the condition of anonymity because they either currently work at the networks, can’t speak to press without permission or signed confidentiality agreements.

The summons, which was filed Wednesday in New York state court, says Bolling is seeking both damages and injunctive relief arising from Ali’s efforts to injure his reputation through “intentional and/or highly reckless publication of actionable false and misleading statements” about his conduct and character.

HuffPost issued a statement in response to the summons: “Yashar Ali is a careful and meticulous reporter. We stand by his reporting.” Editor-in-chief Lydia Polgreen also wrote on Twitter that Ali is a paid freelancer under contract with HuffPost and the outlet has “no hesitation about standing by him financially in this case.”

Because Bolling is a public figure, to succeed on a defamation claim he will have to prove Ali either knew the information was false or acted with reckless disregard for the truth. He has retained Michael Bowe and Ronald Rossi from Kasowitz Benson Torres — the firm whose name partner Marc Kasowitz reps President Donald Trump. The firm also has ties to ousted Fox News host Bill O’Reilly.

In addition to HuffPost, Ali writes for Mother Jones and New York magazines. He has previously worked in politics, having served as deputy chief of staff to then-San Francisco mayor Gavin Newsom.

Ali has been described in press reports as a “Los Angeles businessman” and was named a “Hillblazer” for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, a term that refers to individuals “who have contributed and/or raised $100,000 or more for Hillary for America, the Hillary Victory Fund and/or the Hillary Action Fund since the launch of this historic campaign on April 12, 2015.”

Ali also noted that HuffPost isn’t named in the suit. “[H]e is coming after me personally,” he tweeted. “I’m a big boy…but very telling.”

Conflicting Claims Mark $3 Million Former “Aryan Goddess” Taylor Swift Groping Lawsuit


For awhile back in 2016 I believe it was, Andrew Anglin had declared Taylor Swift to be an Aryan Goddess. He and his crew produced memes that showed Taylor spouting the words of Adolf Hitler.

Then Taylor’s lawyers sent Anglin a letter. He removed the material from his site under threat of a lawsuit. That was wise of him, not cowardly, in my opinion.

Since then, his enthusiasm for the lovely Miss Swift has diminished and he’s done many fewer posts on her.

Taylor is back in the news in regard to a legal issue, although Anglin is not involved. A DJ who may be a Jew and may not be has filed a $3 million lawsuit against the diva for falsely accusing him of sexually assaulting her by groping her bottom. She’s counter-suing him on principle, asking for $1.

Look at the position of Taylor’s left arm in the photo. Is she touching Mueller’s bottom? Look at David Mueller’s right arm. Is he touching her bottom. This photo is the key evidence in the case.

Would Taylor still be smiling if she were being sexually assaulted? Could Mueller’s girlfriend have felt up Taylor?

What’s your opinion? Share it by commenting below.


A former radio disc jockey accused of groping Taylor Swift before a concert testified Tuesday that he may have touched the pop superstar’s ribs with a closed hand as he tried to jump into a photo with her but insisted he did not touch her backside as she claims.

David Mueller told jurors at the civil trial on dueling lawsuits filed by Mueller and Swift that he and the singer-songwriter were trying to reach around one another and “our hands touched and our arms touched” during a photo opportunity he estimated lasted no more than 40 seconds.

Under questioning by his attorney, Mueller said he may have touched Swift’s “rib cage, or rib, or ribs.”

The 2013 photo of Swift, Mueller and Mueller’s girlfriend taken at the pre-concert event in Denver is a key piece of evidence in Mueller’s suit claiming he was fired after being falsely accused by Swift. He is seeking at least $3 million.

The photo shows Mueller with his hand behind Swift, just below her waist. Both are smiling.

Her lawyers have called the photo “damning” proof that Mueller groped her.

Mueller’s lawyer, Gabriel McFarland, showed jurors the photograph during his opening remarks. Two jurors stared at the photo on their computer monitors while a few others kept glancing at it as McFarland spoke.

Swift has said she is positive it was Mueller who groped her.

Swift has countersued Mueller, claiming sexual assault. She is seeking a symbolic $1, saying she wants to serve as an example to other women who have been assaulted.

In his opening statement, Douglas Baldridge, an attorney for Swift. told jurors that his superstar client is “absolutely certain” she was sexually assaulted and will prove it in court.

Baldridge also asked what possible reason Swift would have to make up an allegation.

“That’s the one and only story we have to tell you — that Mr. Mueller grabbed her rear end,” he said.

Mueller’s attorney told jurors that inappropriate touching is wrong, but falsely accusing someone of the offense is equally unacceptable.

The trial continues.

Trump’s Pick for New FBI Director Confirmed by the Senate 92-5 after Pledging to Uphold the Law

You can see how leftist Vice News reports the confirmation of Christopher Wray as America’s new FBI Director. Their emphasis is on the idea that Trump is interested in a lawman who is loyal to him, not the Constitution. The only evidence for that are the utterings of former director Comey, who has reason to be biased against Trump.

Vice News

It’s official: Christopher Wray is in as the FBI’s new director, securing an overwhelming confirmation vote after promising the Senate that he’d never pledge loyalty to President Donald Trump — the very thing Trump allegedly asked of Wray’s predecessor, James Comey.

The Senate voted 92-5 on Tuesday to confirm Wray, who served in George W. Bush’s administration as assistant attorney general before returning to the private sector. The spectre of Comey’s dramatic ouster clearly weighed on senators’ minds throughout Wray’s confirmation process — during his July confirmation hearing, Wray was repeatedly asked about his independence from the White House.

“I’d never allow the FBI’s work to be driven by anything other than the facts, the law and the impartial pursuit of justice,” Wray said. “Period.”

Wray was also asked whether, in the course of vetting him for the FBI job, any White House officials had asked him to agree to be loyal to the president. “No one asked me for any kind of loyalty oath at any point during this process and I sure as heck didn’t offer one,” Wray answered.

Comey had alleged that Trump asked him for “loyalty” and requested he drop his investigation into former national security advisor Michael Flynn. The information was revealed in a series of memos leaked to the New York Times.

Wray signaled that he would not acquiesce. When asked what he’d do if the president asked him to do something illegal, Wray said he’d first try to talk Trump out of it — and if that didn’t work, he’d resign.

“Now more than ever, the bureau needs a resolute and independent leader,” said Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, a Democrat from Rhode Island who serves on the Senate Judiciary Committee. “Christopher Wray has assured us he can be that leader.”

Senators Elizabeth Warren, Kirsten Gillibrand, Ron Wyden, Jeff Merkley, and Ed Markey — all Democrats — were the lone votes against Wray’s confirmation.

We really don’t know much about Wray’s real views on controversial matters, such as the death of Seth Rich, #pizzagate, Hillary Clinton, and so forth. Here’s some material suggesting that Wray will butt heads with Trump at some point:


One noteworthy thing about Wray is that he appears to disagree with many of the president’s views.

First — and most critically — he doesn’t believe special counsel Robert Mueller is on a witch hunt as he leads the Russia probe. “I do not consider Director Mueller to be on a witch hunt,” he told Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC).

Wray also believes Russia acted in an adversarial manner toward the United States when it tried to influence the 2016 election. And he believes he and the president should not meet one on one unless there is an important national security matter to discuss. Finally, he’s not of the opinion that Comey is a “nut job,” as Trump described him back in May.

Throughout his hearing, Wray made a point to show that he is not Trump’s guy — just his pick. He even noted he would leave his post if he felt he were being asked to do something unethical by the president. “I would try to talk him out of it,” Wray said, if that kind of inquiry came in to him. “And if that failed, I would resign.”

But for now, Wray has the job. Many will be interested to see what he does with it — especially the president.

Heavy offers more info on Wray in its 5 Fast Facts format.

Influential conservative actor and Tweeter James Woods is happy:

Donald Trump, Jr. Hires Mafia Lawyer Amid More Russia Connection Accusations


Obviously, Donald Trump, Jr. is Mafioso. He hired a Mafia lawyer, so he’s guilty. And by extension, they’re all guilty.

After President Trump’s brief respite from the usual ridiculous Russian stories while he was in Hamburg, Germany for the G20 meetings, the smear jobs have come roaring back, as predicted here.

This is all fake news, stories run by an unhinged media with a strong hatred of Donald Trump because of his lack of political correctness and because of their allegiance to the (((Deep State))).

Hiring a lawyer is exactly what you must do when you’re being framed. The lawyer’s past clients are irrelevant.


Donald Trump Jr., under scrutiny amid revelations that he met last year with a Russian lawyer, has hired a New York criminal defense attorney with a practice that’s included high-profile organized crime and cybercrime cases.

Alan Futerfas runs a small law firm in New York that focuses on white-collar investigations and prosecutions. Futerfas confirmed that he is representing Donald Trump Jr. to BuzzFeed News by email after Reuters reported the news.


In hiring Futerfas, Donald Trump Jr. has followed his father in tapping an attorney outside the cadre of white-collar defense attorneys based in Washington, DC, who frequently represent people involved in political controversies. Earlier this year, President Trump hired Marc Kasowitz — a New York attorney with little white-collar defense experience — to represent him in connection with Department of Justice and congressional inquiries into Russian interference in the 2016 election.

Unlike Kasowitz, however, Futerfas’s practice is steeped in high-profile white-collar matters, as well as the occasional political controversy. News archives show that Futerfas has long represented clients with alleged ties to organized crime, including alleged members of the Bonanno, Gambino, Genovese, and Colombo crime families. Last year, he represented the son of a New York pizzeria owner who was found guilty of drug-related charges in a case that stemmed from an investigation into drug trafficking by the Italian mafia.

Futerfas has also handled several cybercrime cases. His clients have included a Russian man who created computer malware and rented it out to criminals to rob banks, and an Israeli man who was one of several defendants charged in a massive hack of consumer data from JPMorgan Chase and other financial institutions.

The New York Times reported over the weekend that Donald Trump Jr. met last summer with Natalia Veselnitskaya, a Russian lawyer who had been working to change US policy, after he was promised damaging information about Hillary Clinton. Asked about the meeting by the Times, Donald Trump Jr. initially said that it was mostly about adoption policies — but when presented with new information, he said that the Russian lawyer claimed to have information connecting Russia to Clinton and the Democratic National Committee.

“Her statements were vague, ambiguous and made no sense. No details or supporting information was provided or even offered. It quickly became clear that she had no meaningful information,” Trump Jr. said in a statement.

Sarah Palin Sues New York Times Over Editorial Linking Her to Violence

The New York Times did not get its facts correct when it maligned Sarah Palin in a recent editorial. A later effort to set the record straight did not even mention her name, according to NBC.

The press (and the rest of us) are entitled to express our opinions about anyone, but we’re not allowed to make up “facts.” Palin will have to prove damages in order for a judge to set compensation if she does win the case. I can’t recall the details, but one case involving defamation saw the plaintiff win, but walk away with a dollar in damages. I’m pretty sure it involved the Rev. Jerry Falwell’s defamation suit against Hustler publisher Larry Flynt.

Unless the lawyers are taking Palin’s case on contingency (meaning they get 30 percent of any payout to her) then she’d better have deep pockets. This type of lawsuit is expensive to pursue.

Most of the time, these cases are settled before going to trial.

NBC News

Sarah Palin, the former governor of Alaska and 2008 Republican vice presidential nominee, sued The New York Times on Tuesday alleging that the newspaper defamed her in an editorial that appeared to link her to political violence after the shooting of House Republican Whip Steve Scalise earlier this month.

The Times said it would “vigorously” fight the action.

Scalise, R-Louisiana, and three other people were wounded on June 14 by a gunman who fired a volley of shots at Republican lawmakers practicing in Alexandria, Virginia, for the annual congressional baseball game.

In an institutional editorial titled “America’s Lethal Politics” — an unsigned piece intended to represent the opinion of the newspaper — the Times’ editorial board included rhetoric by a political action committee associated with Palin among examples of “how vicious American politics has become.”

Citing the 2011 shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Arizona, in Tucson, the editorial said: “Before the shooting, Sarah Palin’s political action committee circulated a map of targeted electoral districts that put Ms. Giffords and 19 other Democrats under stylized cross hairs.”

Palin strongly objected to the editorial in a Facebook post, calling it “sickening” and characterizing it as an attempt “to destroy innocent people with lies and more fake news.”

In fact, writings by the gunman in the 2011 case, Jared Loughner, made it clear that he’d been planning the attack for a long time before the Palin map was circulated. Moreover, the map didn’t depict Giffords and the other Democrats themselves in cross-hairs — only outlines of their congressional districts.

The Times soon corrected the editorial, saying there was no link between political rhetoric and the 2011 shooting, as well as clarifying its depiction of the map. The correction didn’t mention Palin by name.

In the lawsuit (PDF), filed in U.S. District Court in Manhattan, lawyers for Palin accused The Times of having published “a statement about her that it knew to be false” and of following up with a correction that didn’t sufficiently make up for “the falsehoods that the paper published.”

“The underlying premise of the Palin Article is that there is a ‘sickening’ pattern of politically incited violence against members of Congress and that this pattern stems from Mrs. Palin’s direct and clear incitement of Loughner’s 2011 shooting in Arizona,” the suit argues.

“But The Times fabricated this supposed ‘pattern’ and Mrs. Palin’s role in it, resurrecting a debunked connection between Mrs. Palin’s political activities and Loughner’s 2011 rampage in Arizona. By doing so, The Times implicitly attacked the conservative policies Mrs. Palin promotes and drove its digital advertising revenues at Mrs. Palin’s expense,” it says.

Breitbart is also covering this story, going into more depth about the evidence than NBC.

Phiando Castile’s “Fambly” Paid $3 Million to Settle Lawsuit Over His Death

Once the dashcam video of the shooting of Philando Castile was released last week, it was clear that Officer Jeronimo Yanez should never work in law enforcement again.

Thus, the disturbing video, embedded below, suggests that civil liability was present, i.e., wrongful death.

Still, very few wrongful deaths end up with a $3 million payout. It is, I believe, excessive by a factor of 10. I suppose it can partly be chalked up to the city wanting to keep its fine black citizens from rioting over the not guilty verdict for ex-cop Yanez.


The mother of Philando Castile, who was fatally shot by a Minnesota police officer in 2016, agreed to a $3 million settlement, lawyers announced Monday.

Castile, 32, was shot during a traffic stop in St. Anthony, Minn., by Officer Jeronimo Yanez. The shooting was in the national spotlight as Castile’s girlfriend, a passenger in the car, live-streamed the shooting on Facebook. Her 4-year-old daughter was also in the car.

Yanez, 29, was acquitted on June 15 of manslaughter and discharge of a firearm, prompting several days of protests. Yanez was fired from the St. Anthony police force.

A statement from the government, and from lawyers on both sides of the case, was released Monday. It said in part, “The death of Philando Castile is a tragedy for his family and for our community. The parties moved expeditiously to resolve potential civil claims resulting from this tragedy in order to allow the process of healing to move forward for the Castile family, for the people of St. Anthony Village, and for all those impacted by the death of Philando Castile throughout the United States.”


The statement added that Valerie Castile will be paid though insurance funds, and that “no taxpayer monies” are involved.

Watch the disturbing video that shows a nervous Jeronimo Yanez, variously identified as Latino or Native American.

Many other deserving families of dead victims don’t get anything close to this kind of payout. Black privilege appears to be at work again.