Shirley Sherrod sues Andrew Breitbart

http://www.salon.com/news/andrew_breitbart/?story=/politics/war_room/2011/02/13/sherrod_sues_andrew_breitbart

I'm not sure what her chances are. I guess it would depend on whether or not she was a public figure before Breitbart released the video.

I hope she succeeds.

 

Or whether Breitbart is considered a journalist.

 

that was really getting fun.

So now we've got d_B for double posting when somebody else has already posted ...

and smallpotatoesing for d_Bing yourself?

 

I liked the way Secretariat put it better.

 

The first time I tried starting this thread, I didn't think it got through. That's why I started it again.

 

I still can't believe that Breitbart fired her without at least hearing her side of the story. That was fucked up.

 

I see the point you're trying to make, but if Breitbart didn't release that video, she'd still have her job.
And if any of us did what he did, we'd be fired.

 

Fired from what - doesn't he work for himself?

 

That's on the administration for firing her.

 

I understand that. I'm just saying the stunt Breitbart pulled wouldn't fly at any legitimate news organization.

 

I think she could make a case that the firing wasn't as big of an injury as being portrayed as a racist. It was a political appointment, she serves at the pleasure of the President.

 

Whether or not the administation acted rashly is hardly in dispute. But it seems fair to say she has a good chance of proving he libeled her. There was obvious malicious intent from the way the video was edited, and she suffered legitmate harm (in a legal sense) from his claim. He'd be wise to argue she's a public figure and thus the burden of proof is higher, but how dumb the administation was is sort of irelevant. She was still fired (or forced to resign) because of a lie he told with intent to harm, and from the way the video was selectively edited, it doesn't seem to hard to prove he knew it was a lie. That is libel.