It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Washington post and CNN getting sued big time

page: 8
66
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 11 2019 @ 07:34 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck



You just posted two different excerpts that specified that tort laws are indeed laws, then claimed that no laws were being broken. Really?


Oh my goodness, you are confused. Tort law is a type of legal practice that attempts to reconcile civil wrongs, whether intentional or deliberate, through civil courts.

Tort law is about asking the court to judge the liability of the perpetrator of some act that may have caused the plaintiff harm. A wrongful tort could address an illegal act that harmed individual, but a wrongful tort doesn't have to be a crime or even deliberate. A wrongful tort could be accidental or inadvertent.




posted on Mar, 11 2019 @ 07:36 AM
link   
a reply to: 727Sky

I don't see this going anywhere.

I fully expect an out of court settlement.



posted on Mar, 11 2019 @ 07:44 AM
link   
a reply to: looneylupinsrevenge



there is a difference between "freedom of the press" and liable/slander. Both of which the Post and CNN are clearly guilty of both, no two ways to cut it.


Sorry, but I'm just not seeing liable or slander here.




They lied,


No they didn't. They didn't present the whole story.


and worse yet knew (the full video was posted and shared well within 24 hrs of the incident taking place) they had lied and kept it going for several days.


The press isn't required to tell or give a fair and balanced account, if that was true, the National Inquirer and several FOX News commentator's shows would not exist. Propaganda is legal in the USA, unfortunately.


edit on 11-3-2019 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2019 @ 07:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Box of Rain



They showed a heavily-edited version of a video and used that edited video to push a false narrative when the full video told a different story.


Maybe they did, but that's not illegal. That's the story angle that they chose to cover. People complain all the time about being unfairly represented in the press, on Twitter, in some book or some movie.

President Trump pushes false narratives daily. So, do the bulk of politically motivated actors.



posted on Mar, 11 2019 @ 08:07 AM
link   
He's guaranteed to get a settlement pay out, even if he doesn't "win" the lawsuit.



posted on Mar, 11 2019 @ 08:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Box of Rain



They showed a heavily-edited version of a video and used that edited video to push a false narrative when the full video told a different story.


Maybe they did, but that's not illegal. That's the story angle that they chose to cover. People complain all the time about being unfairly represented in the press, on Twitter, in some book or some movie.

President Trump pushes false narratives daily. So, do the bulk of politically motivated actors.


It may not be "illegal" (not criminal), but if a person can show that a news outlet was negligent in only discussing the contents of the edited video rather than attempting to get the entire story -- which was available to them, if they simply tried -- then the person might have the makings of a good civil case. Or maybe they did have the full video, but didn't air it because it didn't fit the narrative their main demographic was looking for.

If this person can show that CNN purposefully pushed the narrative they did just because they thought it would be what their viewing demographic wanted, and did so even thought they knew the video presented a false narrative, then this civil case might have some legs.

And we are talking about the possible defamation of an individual by a media company, not the president making general claims that may be false, or telling us that he thinks Person X is a "horrible" or 'terrible' or a 'dumb doodie-head' (I'm waiting for Trump to use that one) .

Nor is it like FOX news or MSNBC (MSNBC's show hosts use the same tactics as FOX news, just from the opposite end of the political spectrum) intentionally direct stories that push an ideology, but not necessarily by falsely throwing an individual under the bus by using incomplete information about that individual.


edit on 2019/3/11 by Box of Rain because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2019 @ 08:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: BrianFlanders
Oh please. CNN can withstand a lot more than a petty lawsuit. Histrionics. There's nothing big time about it.


Anderson Cooper, is this you?



posted on Mar, 11 2019 @ 08:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Lumenari

Have you read their claim? It's stoopid!


That's a great defense! "Your Honor, I'd like this case thrown out 'cause it's a stupid. And so is your face."

What law school did you go to, Sookie?


Probably the same law school as Michael Avanati.



posted on Mar, 11 2019 @ 08:20 AM
link   
lol
the "press" defenders here would not even know who this kid was but for wapo and cnn and the others who intentionally slandered this kid
perhaps next time the "press" will verify a story before publishing it?
perhaps next time the "press" will retract an incorrect story before a lawsuit is filed?



posted on Mar, 11 2019 @ 09:58 AM
link   
LET THE WAR OF WORDS BEGIN..


CNN’s President Jeff Zucker sought to cover for the Democratic National Committee’s decision to box out Fox News from hosting a Democratic Primary debate on Saturday, calling the popular cable news channel a “propaganda outlet.”
More at: bigleaguepolitics.com...

Jeff Zucker is being sued for $250,000,000.00 because CNN is worse than a propaganda outlet.

CNN = ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE.



posted on Mar, 11 2019 @ 11:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Tort laws are still laws. They just don't carry jail time and are not prosecuted in criminal court.

Your own sources say so!

TheRedneck



posted on Mar, 11 2019 @ 11:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
Pretty smart on Sandmann's part. Either way he's going to get a major payout.

The first scenario is he actually wins the lawsuits. Personally I don't see this happening. Without proof of financial harm libel suits are almost impossible to win. I would be surprised if the Sandmann family hasn't actually seen their financial situation improve since the video.

The other scenario is that Sandmann loses and goes on GoFundMe to help cover his legal costs. Considering how well that dumb Wall campaign did I wouldn't be surprised if such a campaign raked in enough to cover his legal fees and then some.


His Lawyer is taking the case ProBono so there will be no legal fees, and of course, the defendants could have retracted like some of them did and not face litigation.



posted on Mar, 11 2019 @ 11:41 AM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Not presenting the whole story is a Lie of Omission.



posted on Mar, 11 2019 @ 11:56 AM
link   
a reply to: yuppa

Still not illegal. And, as far as I'm concerned the fact that there were a group of Black Israelites preaching at the boys does nothing to redeem the Covington Catholic boys of their own collective bad behavior.

I'll never understand why you all hold others to higher standards than the President of the United States.



posted on Mar, 11 2019 @ 11:59 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck




Tort laws are still laws.


They're procedural laws, not laws that set out to restrict the behavior of a free people. Tort laws are not being broken, they're being utilized to find a civil resolution to a civil complaint.



posted on Mar, 11 2019 @ 12:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

"For those just joining in, you are watching the World Mental Gymnastics Challenge. And Bill, we just saw some of the most amazing gymnastics we have seen yet. Sookiechacha for instance, just performed a quadruple backflip with a 720 degree twist while balancing a full teacup on her nose! An amazing display of mental gymnastic ability that will likely go down in sports entertainment history!"

TheRedneck



posted on Mar, 11 2019 @ 01:14 PM
link   
I believe in freedom of speech and freedom of the press, but nowhere in that right is there a right to inappropriately slander a person or organization. I am not fond of CNN or the Washington Post having insurance to cover their actions and not being personally liable for their actions either. The insurance company industry will raise everyone's rates to cover what they pay out, that is how they work. So people who do not do this kind of stuff will be paying extra premiums for what CNN and WAPO did, which is wrong. There needs to be clauses in the insurance industry to deter this kind of action, why should all liability insurance customers have to pay for the actions of WAPO and CNN and other news agencies that do not properly report what really happened?

Being a business man, I know some of how insurance premiums work. WAPO's and other MSM companies should be responsible to cover their liability in a criminal slander case like this.



posted on Mar, 11 2019 @ 01:18 PM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

That is what Trump has been trying to tell people for a long time now, MSM spewing misinformation is being an enemy of the citizens of the country, they are disrupting civility with twisted interpretations of events instead of reporting the news of what is going on. They are worse than the national enquirer ever was.



posted on Mar, 11 2019 @ 04:22 PM
link   
Good! 😉



posted on Mar, 11 2019 @ 05:38 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

The real mental gymnastics are in the plaintiff's emotional and hyperbolic complaint.




top topics



 
66
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join