Sarah Palin Suing New York Times For Defamation

New York Times in trouble for publishing a story about Sarah Palin supposedly having something to do with inciting the shooter in the Gabby Giffords case a few years ago.

Well now they are getting sued for defamation.

The MSM getting whacked around lately for printing certain "news" and "opinions".

Well ?

Sarah Palin Suing New York Times For Defamation

Sarah Palin is suing The New York Times for defamation, according to documents filed in federal court Tuesday that were obtained by The Daily Caller.

The lawsuit has to do with an editorial the NYT ran on June 14 that falsely smeared Palin as inciting the 2011 shooting of Democratic Rep. Gabby Giffords by a mentally ill man. There is no evidence to support the NYT’s implication that Palin played a role in inciting the Giffords shooting.

“Mrs. Palin brings this action to hold The Times accountable for defaming her by publishing a statement about her that it knew to be false: that Mrs. Palin was responsible for inciting a mass shooting at a political event in January 2011,” Palin’s suit states.

People getting fed up as the MSM keeps getting exposed for some of their phoniness.

a reply to: xuenchen

It might not end well, but seeing the pendulum swing back to the right no matter how it ends is a sweet sweet song!

Good for her!! Them laying the blame on her. They must be working with CNN!

Governor Palin should sue the guy who produced an X-rated movie spoofing her too. Very disrespectful.

Hope she sues them for BIG bucks...Carlos Slim has lots!

a reply to: xuenchen

New York Times in trouble for publishing a story about Sarah Palin supposedly having something to do with inciting the shooter in the Gabby Giffords case a few years ago.

It says right in the article that there was no connection between Palin and the Gifford shooting.
America’s Lethal Politics

Was this attack evidence of how vicious American politics has become? Probably. In 2011, Jared Lee Loughner opened fire in a supermarket parking lot, grievously wounding Representative Gabby Giffords and killing six people, including a 9-year-old girl. At the time, we and others were sharply critical of the heated political rhetoric on the right. Before the shooting, Sarah Palin’s political action committee circulated a map that showed the targeted electoral districts of Ms. Giffords and 19 other Democrats under stylized cross hairs. But in that case no connection to the shooting was ever established.

Now that Palin has been thrown under the bus by the GOP she is just trying to extend her fifteen minutes.

a reply to: xuenchen
It's a thing of beauty when an establishment politician calls out phony journalism. And a lawsuit to boot? Nice!

Exactly, she'll lose this lawsuit too. If I am the NY Times, I go after her for attorneys fees.

originally posted by: buster2010
a reply to: xuenchen

New York Times in trouble for publishing a story about Sarah Palin supposedly having something to do with inciting the shooter in the Gabby Giffords case a few years ago.

It says right in the article that there was no connection between Palin and the Gifford shooting.
America’s Lethal Politics

Was this attack evidence of how vicious American politics has become? Probably. In 2011, Jared Lee Loughner opened fire in a supermarket parking lot, grievously wounding Representative Gabby Giffords and killing six people, including a 9-year-old girl. At the time, we and others were sharply critical of the heated political rhetoric on the right. Before the shooting, Sarah Palin’s political action committee circulated a map that showed the targeted electoral districts of Ms. Giffords and 19 other Democrats under stylized cross hairs. But in that case no connection to the shooting was ever established.

Now that Palin has been thrown under the bus by the GOP she is just trying to extend her fifteen minutes.

originally posted by: buster2010
a reply to: xuenchen

New York Times in trouble for publishing a story about Sarah Palin supposedly having something to do with inciting the shooter in the Gabby Giffords case a few years ago.

It says right in the article that there was no connection between Palin and the Gifford shooting.
America’s Lethal Politics

Was this attack evidence of how vicious American politics has become? Probably. In 2011, Jared Lee Loughner opened fire in a supermarket parking lot, grievously wounding Representative Gabby Giffords and killing six people, including a 9-year-old girl. At the time, we and others were sharply critical of the heated political rhetoric on the right. Before the shooting, Sarah Palin’s political action committee circulated a map that showed the targeted electoral districts of Ms. Giffords and 19 other Democrats under stylized cross hairs. But in that case no connection to the shooting was ever established.

Now that Palin has been thrown under the bus by the GOP she is just trying to extend her fifteen minutes.

The article was edited 12 hours after original publication.
You are citing the article after it was changed.
Daily Caller

Update: Almost 12 hours after this article was published, the NYT removed the language blaming Palin for Giffords’ shooting. The updates were initially done without an editor’s note but after further criticism the NYT conceded: “An earlier version of this editorial incorrectly stated that a link existed between political incitement and the 2011 shooting of Representative Gabby Giffords. In fact, no such link was established.”  

In fact, when I went to your link I find that correction right at the bottom of the article.
From your link:

Correction: June 16, 2017

An editorial on Thursday about the shooting of Representative Steve Scalise incorrectly stated that a link existed between political rhetoric and the 2011 shooting of Representative Gabby Giffords. In fact, no such link was established. The editorial also incorrectly described a map distributed by a political action committee before that shooting. It depicted electoral districts, not individual Democratic lawmakers, beneath stylized cross hairs

They admit that they did just what you claim they didn't do.
Did you miss that 'correction' or were you being misleading?

a reply to: butcherguy

Deliberately misleading as always.

They count on nobody actually checking the facts, just like the fake news media does.

a reply to: buster2010

single>
. . dimension>
. . . hysteria>

www.nytimes.com...

and on the top of that page is:

"The Opinion Pages | Editorial"

don't we all have the freedom to express our opinions, regardless of how non-factual they may be??
heck, some politicians seem to come up with some of the most insane, non-factual opinions around!!!
at least these journalists came back and retracted when they learn that they've made a mistake....

Giffords, a third-term legislator, supported Obama's health care reform bill. This earned her a place on the map, posted to Takebackthe20.com by Sarah Palin's Political Action Committe, that literally put Democrats in the cross-hairs last spring after the bill passed. "Don't retreat, instead- RELOAD!" was how Palin introduced the map to her Twitter followers. Days later, a vandal smashed the glass door of Giffords' Tucson office. Giffords' father tells the New York Post that members of the Tea Party "always threatened" his daughter.

Giffords' Tea Party opponent in the 2010 election, Jesse Kelly, went even further with the violent rhetoric. Kelly's campaign held an event called "Get on Target for Victory in November." Description: "Help remove Gabrielle Giffords from office. Shoot a fully automatic M16 with Jesse Kelly."

gawker.com...

It's all freedom of speech, right Sarah??

a reply to: dawnstar

Freedom of speech has limitations.
Civil cases of defamation are filed, tried all the time.

Under common law, to constitute defamation, a claim must generally be false and must have been made to someone other than the person defamed. Some common law jurisdictions also distinguish between spoken defamation, called slander, and defamation in other media such as printed words or images, called libel.

Defamation

The fact that it was in the editorial pages, means it was APPROVED by the NYT Editorial Board.

a reply to: butcherguy

oh, in that case all of us liberals should get together and sue yous for your constant claim that we are all mentally ill violent creatures that deserve to be locked up, right???
obama should be suing trump for going on for god knows how long claiming he wasn't a natural born citizen.
cruz should sue trump for claiming his father played a part in the kennedy assassination.
hillary should be having a lawsuit field day with all the off the wall crap that fox and fiends had said about her!!
shall we talk about the poor pizza owner who got his floor shot up??
palin is just playing her part in what seems to be a mass assault on the free press, by conservatives who seem to think that only their hard right propaganda has a right to be called news and be broadcasted.
got news for you... even if it came down to where fox was the only one left standing... I wouldn't watch it!!

a reply to: IAMTAT

ya, and I seem to remember that there's been alot of pro-life editorials published along the years that have made some off the wall errors in them also!!
never seen planned parenthood sue any newspapers for them.

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: IAMTAT

ya, and I seem to remember that there's been alot of pro-life editorials published along the years that have made some off the wall errors in them also!!
never seen planned parenthood sue any newspapers for them.

Lawyers are expensive.
PP probably needed to sell more dead baby body parts, before they could afford to hire them.

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: butcherguy

oh, in that case all of us liberals should get together and sue yous for your constant claim that we are all mentally ill violent creatures that deserve to be locked up, right???
obama should be suing trump for going on for god knows how long claiming he wasn't a natural born citizen.
cruz should sue trump for claiming his father played a part in the kennedy assassination.
hillary should be having a lawsuit field day with all the off the wall crap that fox and fiends had said about her!!
shall we talk about the poor pizza owner who got his floor shot up??
palin is just playing her part in what seems to be a mass assault on the free press, by conservatives who seem to think that only their hard right propaganda has a right to be called news and be broadcasted.
got news for you... even if it came down to where fox was the only one left standing... I wouldn't watch it!!

If any of those above think that they have a viable case, they should sue. Both to clear their reputation and to lay claim to any reparations for damages done.
In some of those cases, I would bet that they would rather not have the details dragged out for public scrutiny in a courtroom.

I can see the headline defaming her now, "Sarah Palin is a Raving Genius"

a reply to: butcherguy

more than likely, they just don't have that kind of money to waste...

and palin probably doesn't have the money to waste, maybe someone should try to track down just where that money is coming from?