Zimmerman sues NBC

christiefan915 said:
Lol, pot meet kettle. Don't you mean illegally, since slander and libel aren't legal? And why are you missing the point that you can't pick and choose that NBC gets a lawsuit while Breitbart gets a pass. Before you tell me you, yourself didn't say that, some of your conservative pals here did.
Click to expand...

can you link us up to what you are referring to? Thanks!
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
Professor Baxter said:
How about I sue damo over his lawsuit?QUOTE]

What lawsuit has Damo filed, that you could sue him over?
Click to expand...

That's not what I wrote.

You and Grind are not just taking me out of context like pmp does habitually and you takers seem to think entitles your loser hero to NBC's money. You are adding words I never used.

Professor Baxter said:
How about when you add in words that I never said, should I be able to sue damo or you over that?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Thought Thieves said:
lol you don't have freedom to libel and slander and splice audio to suggest you said things that you never said. they are going to lose their asses.

They'll probably end up settling though.

prepare for zimmermillion.
Click to expand...

I'm preparing for Sherrodmillion.

"Andrew Breitbart made a mistake. Based on a two-minute video excerpt of Shirley Sherrod's speech at an NAACP dinner last year, he accused her of practicing racism as a federal employee. He neglected to mention that in the excerpt, she was clearly talking about events in a different job 20 years ago. And when the rest of the video turned up, it proved that her story was about transcending her old racial resentment."

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/...rew-breitbart-shirley-sherrod-defamation-case
 
Professor Baxter said:
That's not what I wrote.

You and Grind are not just taking me out of context like pmp does habitually and you takers seem to think entitles your loser hero to NBC's money. You are adding words I never used.
Click to expand...

That's not what you wrote!! :eek2:
Just taking you out of context!! :eek2:

What words did I ad?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Aoxomoxoa said:
[/COLOR]

Can you explain this in simple English? It is ambiguous.
Click to expand...

I don't see how.

I have never supported racial profiling. I have always supported the requirements for probable cause. I have never supported bad police work.

Being the same color as some person that committed a crime at some earlier point is not enough reason to arrest, detain or harass someone.
 
christiefan915 said:
See my post #165, there are links in it.
Click to expand...

really do appreciate it... I believe I was one of those that jumped on the bandwagon to railroad her after the initial Breitbart piece... same type of thing... yes, she should have sued him, unfortunately for her he died. He deliberately painted her as something she was not by taking a portion of her comments out of context and pretending they meant something else.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
That's not what you wrote!! :eek2:
Just taking you out of context!! :eek2:

What words did I ad?
Click to expand...

Damn, you are stupid. You missed my point, then made the same point I made and thought you were being clever and original? Are you trying to take Nova's cap?

You added the words, "over his lawsuit." I did not ask if I should be able to sue damo over his lawsuit. What lawsuit? I asked

How about when you add in words that I never said, should I be able to sue damo or you over that?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Professor Baxter said:
I already made the point that he was behaving like NBC, you fucking retard. That's the one where you butchered the quote. Should I be able to sue him or damo?
Click to expand...

Back the boat up there Bax.
You said I was adding words that you didn't say.
Can you show me what words I added, before your comment gets lost in more of your hubris?
 
Professor Baxter said:
USFREEDOM911 said:
Damn, you are stupid. You missed my point, then made the same point I made and thought you were being clever and original? Are you trying to take Nova's cap?

You added the words, "over his lawsuit." I did not ask if I should be able to sue damo over his lawsuit. What lawsuit? I asked

How about when you add in words that I never said, should I be able to sue damo or you over that?
Click to expand...

Professor Baxter said:
Because that's what you feel? How about when you add in words that I never said, should I be able to sue damo or you over that?

Sure it can be both. As I said, I don't think his lawsuit is frivolous. He definitely has a bone to pick. They may uncover or disclose something in trial that helps their case. But they need more or should need more, Imo.

There is no dissonance grasshopper. Not everything is either all black or all white. Nbc screwed up, but I don't know if it is something the state should punish.

I understand, you think dozens of dead six year olds are a fair price for the second amendment but the reputation of your favorite nword guy is too much for free speech.
Click to expand...

Yes you did use those words and I added nothing, you liar.
Click to expand...
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
You seem upset.
Why would you get upset over someone making it appear you said something you didn't?
Click to expand...

Any frustration is because you are totally missing the point that I was making.

Should I be able to sue damo, grind or now you? Should the state step in through the civil courts?

Whether I should be upset is not the issue. Likewise, I don't care one bit if Zimmerman is upset.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top