The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

If Breitbart Had Managed To Get An Ambassador Snuffed, Maybe Andrew’s Wife Would Be Left Alone

Posted on | February 21, 2014 | 17 Comments

by Smitty

Stacy isn’t the only one living in legally exciting times. Pigford, of course, is one of the relatively minor vote-buying schemes afoot these days. Her sorely missed husband’s involvement continues to haunt Andrew Breitbart’s widow:

When fuller context for Sherrod’s remarks emerged, the administration offered to return her to her job, which she declined. In 2011, she sued Breitbart and his employee Larry O’Connor for defamation. Breitbart died unexpectedly in 2012, but his wife was substituted as a defendant in the suit.

At the outset of Thursday’s hearing, Leon lit into Glass for filing a 21-page statement outlining the government’s position—a filing submitted electronically just after midnight Thursday along with a stack of nine exhibits. The judge called it “a self-serving pleading, not requested by anyone” and repeatedly suggested it was filed for “public relations” reasons rather than because it might be useful to the court.

The case has drawn attention because of the subject matter and, more recently, because of indications that the Obama White House might assert executive privilege to block some of the parties’ demands for information.

This country needs thorough, top-down reform so badly that it hurts.

Bookmark and Share
Category: Andrew Breitbart

Comments

  • Pingback: Political Rift » If Breitbart Had Managed To Get An Ambassador Snuffed, Maybe Andrew’s Wife Would Be Left Alone

  • CrustyB

    Shirley Sherrod said some racist things. Breitbart aired the video of her saying racist things. A longer video came out where she said she no longer thinks racist things. Breitbart was the first to air it. Where’s the defamation?

  • richard mcenroe

    You’ll never make it as a Democrat or a black man.

  • traveling-SAP

    The second video went down the memory hole. The first video is all anyone knows. That and Brietbart was a favored of the conservative circle and had associated with Project Veritas,. So anything that Andrew said was defamatory in the modern political world, but not anything on the progs side is considered defamation even after a court ruling (because of the evil KOCH BROTHERS! Who bought judges).

  • RKae

    What gets forgotten (quite intentionally) is that she…
    1.) said something racist
    2.) the audience applauded and agreed with it
    3.) she said she no longer thought that.

    It was point #2 on that list that was the offensive thing; that an audience would say “Yup!” when they heard something anti-white.

  • http://evilbloggerlady.blogspot.com/ Evi L. Bloggerlady

    I cannot see how that lawsuit has continued (I do not see how Sherrod wins). If she had a beef with Andrew and wanted to slug it out that is one thing, but Sherrod is a despicable POS to continue it against Breitbart’s widow.

  • http://evilbloggerlady.blogspot.com/ Evi L. Bloggerlady

    The evil KOCH Brothers, who fund the ballet and arts. They are so bad for doing that too.

  • traveling-SAP

    To those on the left the Koch Brothers are the new fascist rising, the evil octopus on top of the world manipulating things, the boogie man. It does t matter that they donate to art (must of been some tea bagger art or some evil backwoods religious crap, is the justified thought) or that they donate almost evenly to the other side in politician war chests of.the D’s (they were DINOs anyways). Nope! The Koch Brothers are the personification of evil, the devil in person and why they need people like Soros or big Union dollars to offset this imbalance in obscene amount of campaign finance money out there. The Democratic party can’t compete against the deep pockets of the evil corporate bundlers that is the modern GOP.

  • EquineLover

    She’s a racist pig. Oh, you believe her when she says she don’t hate whitey no more and stopped discriminating against him in the capacity of her then job? I don’t.

  • Ben Franklin

    Your number 2 is what Andrew was pointing out. The audience applauded the racism without knowing the person telling the story would later disavow it.

    But worrying about all of that is beside the point. Pigford was a way of buying votes, nothing more, nothing less. It was as racist a program as we are likely to see these days and the people who thought it up and administered it were scumbags. Sherrod deserves whatever grief comes her way just for being part of it because no decent person would have participated in such a thing.

  • cmehusky

    Lay off the dope.

  • cmehusky

    Is that you Bill, Neal, Brent?

  • SPQR9

    Don’t forget that Andrew Breitbart’s point in putting out the video was to illustrate the audience’s approval of her story of racist opinions.

  • traveling -SAP

    Hey sunshine its called being sarcastic. Just because you don’t recognize it doesn’t mean you need to be insulting.

  • Quartermaster

    That’s actually a compliment!

  • Pingback: FMJRA 2.0: Washington’s Birthday Hangover Edition : The Other McCain