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.

White Man Sues Target Following Vicious Beating in Store Parking Lot by Two “Teens”

Derek Whitener, the gay man pictured above, went shopping in a Target store in the Dallas-Fort Worth area of Texas that has seen a lot of crime.

Whitener sought the help of store security in clearing the area of two menacing teens before he left the store. Guess the race of the thugs or check out the photo below.

Store security and an off-duty cop assured him that everything was A-OK.

DEREK WHITENER BEFORE THE ATTACK.

NBCDFW

A Dallas man who was viciously attacked in a Target parking lot earlier this year is now suing the retail giant, claiming negligence.

Derek Whitener and his attorney, Chris Hamilton, filed the lawsuit in Dallas County Thursday morning. They’re seeking more than $1 million in damages.

On January 14, two teenage boys severely beat Whitener with a wooden stick as he was leaving the Target store at 2417 N. Haskell Avenue in Dallas. The attack put him in a coma for several days.

Speaking to the media Thursday, Hamilton said they hold Target liable for the attack because the store had several opportunities that night to prevent it from happening.

“There are a series of things here that put this almost entirely on Target’s back,” said Hamilton.

In the lawsuit, he states Whitener spotted his attackers as he was entering the store and reported them to Target security, telling them two young men in masks appeared to be following him — an account backed up by Dallas police.

The suit claims the head of store security then told employees not to let Whitener call the police, insisting they would take care of it themselves.

Dallas Police have said Target security and an off-duty police officer working the shopping center approached the two teens, had a discussion with them, and told them to leave the property.

The suit claims Whitener finished his shopping, then asked security whether it was safe for him to leave the store. The head of security reportedly told him it was and that they had taken care of the young men.

But when Whitener left the store, the two teens approached him, and allegedly told him, “So, we heard you fear us. We are going to teach you what fear is.” That’s when they attacked him.

Hamilton insists Whitener saw no security or off-duty police officer in the parking lot at the time.

He said what makes this incident even more egregious is that this particular store has lengthy history of violent crimes occurring in its parking lot.

In the lawsuit, he documented 223 calls Dallas police responded to at the store between January 2014 and January 2017 — including robbery, suspicious persons, criminal mischief, theft, burglary of a motor vehicle, injured persons and major violent disturbances.

“This isn’t a situation of a random criminal act at an otherwise safe and properly operated location,” said Hamilton. “This is a situation where we have an unacceptable recurring pattern of violence. But even more — even if nothing like this had ever happened at this Target store before, even if there weren’t hundreds of prior violent criminal incidents, when a customer comes in and says there are men in masks armed with sticks out in the parking lot and I feel threatened, a store has an obligation to be honest with the customer, to not interfere with the customer calling police and to provide basic protection.”

Hamilton says Whitener is still suffering from his injuries, which include permanent brain damage, limited motor function in his right hand and speech impairment.

“What Derek wants to see happen is for Target to clean up their act, take responsibility for what happened, and take the steps to make sure this doesn’t happen again,” said Hamilton. “Rather than just continue to cover up the problem in a way that endangers the community.”

Because the lawsuit was just filed, a spokesperson for Target tells NBC 5 the company has not yet seen it — and therefore, cannot comment on the allegations.

Both teens have been arrested and are awaiting trial.

There’s the stench of negligence coming through this story. I strongly suspect that store management and security were nonwhite. Nonwhites seem to take a more casual attitude toward crime than whites do. It’s just one of the differnces in the races.

The Daily Mail story that appeared when the crime was committed can be read by clicking the link.

Unlike the American press, the DM published this picture of the thugs. Surprised?

Honors Student Committed Suicide After Accusing Rich Powerful Older Man of Rape

MEGAN RONDINI. SUICIDE BY HANGING.

Before laying out the issues in the tragic suicide of Megan Rondini, be aware that the comments at the Daily Mail are very much sympathetic toward her.

Now, for the issues:

1. We have a college girl who drinks alcohol and passes out. I once was part of a group of white males who loaded a passed out girl into her girlfriend’s car after a group of Mexican males tried to spirit her away, presumably to have sex with her unconscious body. I guess we’re lucky we didn’t get shot. It’s not clear from the details in this story how the girl ended up at the home of her alleged rapist.

2. A very important part of the story here revolves around the fact that the alleged rapist was 34 and comes from a very wealthy, politically connected family. You have to ask yourself if, like Hillary Clinton, he’s too big to jail. Since the girl was allegedly passed out, could he have put a date rape drug in her drinks? Some facts not reported in the Daily Mail story can be read at the Tuscaloosa News

3. Alabama rape law requires that a rape victim MUST physically resist (kicking, punching, etc.) or else there is no rape. Is this a fair law?

4. The dead girl supposedly stole her alleged rapist’s gun. She said she did so in order to protect herself from him. Police and the DA were ready to charge her with theft. Does this seem fair?

5. Can you reason out a broad message for both males and females from this tragedy? I assume that men prefer not to be accused of rape. Likewise, I assume that women prefer not to be victims of sexual assault.

Not only does there seem to be a male-female divide in this story, but also a strong class divide, along with a possibly corrupt legal system.

Daily Mail

A college student may have been driven to suicide after she was turned on by police when she accused a powerful man of rape.

University of Alabama honors student Megan Rondini, 20, reported in July 2015 that she was sexually assaulted after a night of drinking.

The man whom she only knew as ‘Sweet T’ turned out to be business man TJ Bunn, 34, the son of an influential Tuscaloosa family.

In an explosive account published by Buzzfeed News, Megan’s family reveals how she never imagined she’d been viewed as a criminal and that investigators would find Bunn to be the true victim.

Continue reading

Christian Woman Ordered by Cops to Stop Praying in Her Home Loses in Court

MARY ANN SAUSE.

Police have the right to invade your home and abuse you if you’re a Christian.

That’s the essence of a ruling by the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in closely watched case involving Mary Ann Sause.

If the plaintiff were a Muslim, you have to wonder if the police officer’s conduct would have been ruled illegal discrimination or whether the Court ruling would be the same.

Christian Post

The United States Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled against a Kansas Catholic woman who claims that she was ordered by police to stop praying in her own home.

On Tuesday, the three-judge panel voted to uphold a judge’s dismissal of Mary Anne Sause’s lawsuit against two Louisburg officers, who she said demanded to be allowed into her home and wouldn’t tell her why they were there. She alleged that when she began praying, the officers, who were there because of a noise complaint, ordered her to stop.

An opinion written by Judge Nancy Moritz states that the court assumes that “the defendants violated Sause’s rights under the First Amendment” by repeatedly mocking her, ordering her to stop praying “so they could harass her,” insisting that she reveal scars from a double mastectomy and threatening her with arrest.

“But this assumption doesn’t entitle Sause to relief. Instead, Sause must demonstrate that any reasonable officer would have known this behavior violated the First Amendment,” the judge argued, citing the 2011 Supreme Court ruling in Ashcroft v. al–Kidd, which asserts that the former U.S. attorney general could not be personally sued for the jailing of a U.S. citizen after the events of September 11, 2001.

“But while the conduct alleged in this case may be obviously unprofessional, we can’t say that it’s ‘obviously unlawful,'” the judge added. “It certainly wouldn’t be obvious to a reasonable officer that, in the midst of a legitimate investigation, the First Amendment would prohibit him or her from ordering the subject of that investigation to stand up and direct his or her attention to the officer — even if the subject of the investigation is involved in religiously-motivated conduct at the time, and even if what the officers say or do immediately after issuing that command does nothing to further their investigation.”

First Liberty Institute Deputy General Counsel Jeremy Dys, who represents Sause, said in a statement that the court’s “harsh criticism of the officers’ conduct in this case supports our First Amendment claim.”

“No one should face the prospect of being arrested for praying in their own home,” Dys said.

The First Liberty Institute said in a press release that the government defended the police officers by arguing that the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment only “protects an individual’s right to choose a religion.” Sause’s attorneys argued that the government’s argument misconstrues the fact that the First Amendment protects the right to exercise faith.

“While Ms. Sause’s appeal was ultimately unsuccessful, the court stated clearly that Sause’s First Amendment rights may have been violated, but the legal doctrine of qualified immunity shields the officers from any liability,” First Liberty Institute stated. “The concurring opinion condemned the police officers’ ‘extraordinary contempt of a law abiding citizen.'”

This ruling protects police who might be ignorant of your rights. Be careful when praying in the presence of abusive cops who like to shove people around.

Bill Cosby To Hold Town Hall Meetings To Educate Teens On How To Avoid Sexual Assault Charges

Will Bill Clinton join Bill Cosby at his talks on how to avoid becoming a rapist?

It’s a tossup as to who’s raped more women. So, two Bills are better than one. Their techniques for raping women and getting away with it are different enough that the two could really put on a rip-roaring educational experience for teens.

Would you let your child attend a Bill Cosby rape workshop? It’s hard to imagine a school sponsoring this really bad idea.

Yahoo

Bill Cosby’s plan to educate teens about the dangers of sexual misconduct was slammed by attorney Gloria Allred on Thursday, saying the comedian’s tour was aimed at influencing the jury pool in his Andrea Constand trial. Cosby, whose sexual assault trial recently ended in a mistrial, is likely to face a second criminal trial.

“Mr. Cosby’s so called workshops appear to be a transparent and slick effort to attempt to influence the jury pool from which jurors will be selected for his second criminal trial. Mr. Cosby should understand, however, that this is not about optics. It is about evidence and according to news reports at least 10 jurors out of 12 voted to convict him on one felony count,” Allred, who represents several women who have accused the favorite TV dad of assaulting and drugging them decades ago, said in a statement to ABC News. “Under the circumstances Mr. Cosby should not be conducting sex assault workshops, but if he does do them then the best advice he can give to those attending is that if you do not drug and sexually assault women, then you need not worry about being charged with a crime.”

Twitter exploded with reactions Thursday after Andrew Wyatt, a spokesman for Cosby, revealed the news during an interview with an Alabama news station. The 79-year-old actor is preparing himself to host a series of such “town hall” meetings with youths where he would discuss how to avoid sexual assault. Wyatt told WBRC Fox 6 News that one of the meetings will be in Birmingham, “sometime in July.”

“We’re going to talk to young people because this is bigger than Bill Cosby,” Wyatt said. “This issue can affect any young person, especially young athletes of today, and they need to know what they’re facing when they’re hanging out and partying, when they’re doing certain things that they shouldn’t be doing.”

Wyatt said the decision was made after several organizations, including churches, contacted the comedian to “come out and speak to young men and women on how this could affect their lives.”
“This is bigger than Mr. Cosby now. … Mr. Cosby is going to go out and use his voice, to let it be heard, and to try to educate young men and women on how to avoid this because they do not have the wealth of resources that he has,” Wyatt said. “But I think that he can give them some direction.” Wyatt also said the tour would educate people on what constitutes an allegation of sexual assault — something that not many people are aware of.

“You could walk in a baseball game, a crowded baseball game, and you could bump up against a female, touch her butt or her breasts by accident and that’s sexual assault,” Wyatt said.

Judge Steven T. O’Neill declared a mistrial Saturday in Cosby’s criminal trial, for which jurors had been deadlocked after deliberating since June 12. Montgomery County District Attorney Kevin R. Steel, who has held the position since 2016, announced he will be retrying the case now.

Bernie Sanders Wife Facing Bank Fraud Charges

President Donald Trump may have to think about building a special Club Med type prison for Democrats.

If America gets lucky and justice is served, there could be an all-star lineup of prisoners at Democrat Federal Prison: Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, Loretta Lynch, John Podesta, and many more, now to include Jane Sanders.

CBS News is reporting that Bernie is also under investigation.

Oy vey!

According to Politico, prosecutors might also be looking into allegations that Sen. Sanders’ office inappropriately urged the bank to approve the loan.

Bernie lost credibility with working class whites when he supported Hillary Clinton and soon purchased a new lake house for over half a million dollars.

Yahoo

Bernie Sanders Wife Facing Bank Fraud Charges

International Business Times
Pritha Paul
International Business TimesJune 23, 2017
Jane Sanders, the wife of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, is facing charges for the time she allegedly used her political influence to obtain bank loans for Burlington College, an institution that is now defunct, so that the college could purchase its former North Avenue campus. It was revealed Thursday that Jane has hired lawyers now that the Department Of Justice has taken over the probe into her past financial dealings.

Burlington College was a private, non-profit liberal arts college that was placed on probation in July 2014 for failing to meet the standards regarding financial resources and ultimately closed down on May 27, 2016. Jane Sanders served as the president of the college from 2004 to 2011, Politico reported.

The couple has chosen eminent lawyer and ardent Bernie supporter Rich Cassidy and the renowned defense attorney Larry Robbins. Robbins has also represented big names such as I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, former advisor to former Vice President Dick Cheney, and disgraced former Louisiana Rep. William Jefferson. The attorney of Vermont, who will be handling the prosecutor’s case, is yet to be appointed by President Trump’s administration.

In May 2017, Bernie tried to field off a question regarding the ongoing investigation into the possible fraudulence committed by his wife, but a reporter from Burlington TV station WCAX refused to back off. Finally, Bernie decided to answer.

“Well, as you know,” he said, “it would be improp— this implication came from Donald Trump’s campaign manager in Vermont. Let me leave it at that, because it would be improper at this point for me to say anything more.”

Even though the Vermont Sen. was done talking about the incident, he elaborated some more when pressed by the reporter who asked him if the news was nonsense.

“Yes,” Bernie responded. “It is nonsense. But now that there is a process going on, which was initiated by Trump’s campaign manager, somebody who does this all of the time, has gone after a number of Democrats and progressives in this state. It would be improper at this point for me to add any more to that.”

The attorney in question that Bernie was talking about is Brady Toensing, who chaired Trump’s Vermont campaign. It is Toensing’s letter to the attorney for Vermont that put the FBI on the trail. In another email that Toensing sent to Politico, he mentioned that the investigation in question had been ongoing on for more than a year and started under the administration of former President Barack Obama.

The investigation surrounding Jane’s financial dealings came to light in April 2017 when VTDigger, an online news outlet, broke the exclusive story that the attorney for Vermont and an FBI agent had reviewed Burlington College records during a then-undisclosed investigation. A former employee of Burlington College was also subpoenaed regarding the matter in February 2016.

The lawyers representing Jane at present have contacted the former employee as well as a couple of former Burlington College trustees to get more information in the case.

“They wanted information on what I had been asked by the FBI. They were trying to get clarification on what the accusations are because they had not been contacted by anybody as to an investigation,” said Coralee Holm, the former dean of operations and advancement for Burlington College, VTDigger reported.

Michael Brown’s Parents, City of Ferguson Reach Settlement Deal in Lawsuit

THE GRIEVING PARENTS OF THE DINDU NUFFINS.

The parents of “Gentle Giant” Michael Brown hit the ghetto jackpot today.

How outrageous is that?

Read the paragraph I bolded to see just how weak and cowardly the fuxated city of Ferguson, Missouri was to settle the lawsuit.

NBC News

The parents of Michael Brown, the black teenager who was shot and killed in 2014 by a white police officer, have reached an undisclosed settlement with the city of Ferguson, Missouri, in a wrongful death civil suit, according to court documents.

The amount of the settlement agreement was sealed. U.S. District Judge E. Richard Webber said in an order that, “Disclosure of the terms of the settlement agreement could jeopardize the safety of individuals involved in this matter, whether as witnesses, parties, or investigators.”

Brown’s parents, Michael Brown, Sr., and Lesley McSpadden, filed a wrongful death suit against the city of Ferguson, Wilson, and the town’s former police chief in 2015.

Michael Brown, 18, was fatally shot by Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson on Aug. 9, 2014. A grand jury later declined to indict Wilson. Wilson in November of 2014 resigned from the Ferguson Police Department.

The shooting sparked protests around the country over the use of deadly force by police against black men. The Justice Department in 2015 cleared Wilson of civil rights violations, but in a report found a pattern of biased policing in Ferguson, a city of around 21,000 west of St. Louis.

The wrongful death suit argued that Wilson used
profane language in his initial confrontation with Brown and another person as they walked in a road, which unnecessarily escalated the situation, and that excessive force was used. It also alleged a racially-biased mentality and culture in the Ferguson police department.

Former Ferguson police chief Thomas Jackson, who was criticized for his response after the shooting and his handling of protests, resigned in March of 2015. The Justice Department found that tactics used by several law enforcement agencies into the sometimes-violent protests made the unrest worse.

The amount of the settlement will be distributed among the two plaintiffs and their attorneys as stipulated in an agreement, the judge’s order says, and all claims against the city and those named in the suit were dismissed.

If things had worked out Brown’s way it would have been Darren Wilson dead instead of him.

There’s no good reason to settle the lawsuit. I believe the city would have won in a fair court.

OFFICER DARREN WILSON’S FACIAL INJURY, INFLICTED BY MICHAEL BROWN.