July 29, 2010

Oh Pretty Please... Shirley Sherrod Announces She Will Sue Andrew Breitbart

I suspect that this will end badly. For Sherrod.

Note the creative writing in the AP story (my bold):

Ousted USDA employee Shirley Sherrod says she will sue conservative blogger Andrew Breitbart, the Associated Press reports.

Sherrod made the announcement Thursday in San Diego at the National Association of Black Journalists annual convention.

Breitbart posted a heavily edited video of Sherrod speaking to an NAACP group and appearing to admit that she had deliberately refrained from giving full assistance to a farmer because he was white.

The political fallout from the posting eventually prompted the Agricultural Department to fire Sherrod to resign.

First a few words about the narrative that the AP writer is trying to further.

The video was not heavily edited... it wasn't edited at all. It was merely an excerpt proved to Breitbart from a much longer speech. That speech, viewed in its entirety, seems to suggest that Shirley Sherrod does in fact continue to struggle with racism. Some of her more recent comments (post-firing) also show Sherrod to be a woman fighting a battle against her own racial biases.

The other amusing claim is that the video led to her eventual firing. Eventual? The Administration was so eager to see her gone that she was driven to pull over to the side of the road and resign on her Blackberry... they didn't even let her get to the office.

But now let's back to the story, and away from the narrative.

Sherrod claims she wants to sue Breitbart. I don't see him being the kind of guy to back away from a challenge, so there is a pretty good chance he won't settle, and they'll wind up in court.

Frankly, Sherrod seems to have a lot more to lose during legal proceedings than Breitbart. She and her husband have profited immensely from race-baiting, and they both have racist and or race-baiting comments caught on video that they cannot deny. Discovery and a cross-examination by a good attorney are not something I think either Sherrod would want to address.

I think she's bluffing, but I kinda hope she isn't.

Posted by Confederate Yankee at July 29, 2010 12:47 PM

I'm no lawyer, but I thought you needed to prove financial harm to receive a judgement. Breitbart is the best thing that ever happened to Shirley Sherrod. A full week of totally underserved media attention. A tour of the morning shows. Chatting with the gal's on The View. Phone chat with Pres. Hussein hisself. A bigger and better job offer. The list goes on...

Posted by: Diogenes Online at July 29, 2010 02:45 PM

Just exactly what is she suing him for?

Posted by: Sooser at July 29, 2010 02:51 PM

She'll get some angry sleazy left-wing ambulance chasing lawyer to represent her pro bono, whether he thinks she has a good case or not, just so he can drag Breitbart into court and get media exposure for himself.

Then Breitbart will get the case dismissed because all he did was post an excerpt of a video from a speech she gave. It's indisputable they are her words on the tape he posted. She hasn't denied she didn't give the speech attributed to her. How can he be liable for defaming her when all he did was post her words?

It's ridiculous. Once the case is dismissed, then her 15 miniutes of fame will finally be over. She can then slink into obscurity and the sleazoid lawyer can go back to chasing ambulances.

Posted by: Scott at July 29, 2010 03:49 PM

Good name calling - it really proves your point - Mrs. Sherrod is a dyed in the wool racist, and a halfwit to boot. The tape and the response of the audience and her future statements will all be used as evidence. Maybe she can explain where USDA regulations or federal law indicate that her 'job' is to 'help the have nots against the haves' or maybe she can explain her statement about how Breitbart wants to 'put black people back into slavery.'?

Posted by: bandit at July 29, 2010 04:10 PM

I do believe that Sherrod will be liable to pay Breitbart's legal fees if her lawsuit proves to be without merit. That should be a wakeup call for her when she receives the counter-suit from Breitbart demanding she pay up.

Time to wage lawfare in return on these scumbag leftists.

Posted by: iconoclast at July 29, 2010 04:19 PM

Sherrod made the announcement Thursday in San Diego at the National Association of Black Journalists annual convention.

The National Association of Colored People, the National Association of Black Journalists .. does this women ever NOT appear at racist organizations?

Posted by: flenser at July 29, 2010 05:14 PM

It would seem virtually impossible for a public figure to win a slander case. As I recall, General William Westmoreland sued CBS News for slander. Westmoreland proved that CBS lied and knew they lied. Westmoreland still lost.

I think Breibart would relish a lawsuit. Sherrod is on tape as saying Brietbart wanted to restore slavery. Sherrod had no factual basis for her claim.

Please pass the popcorn.

Posted by: DavidL at July 29, 2010 05:35 PM

Breitbart's lawyer could probably sell tickets in the gallery when he starts serving up his dicovery motions...

Posted by: emdfl at July 29, 2010 10:00 PM

Let's see:
1) black vs. white
2) woman vs. man
3) leftist vs. rightwing
Breitbart doesn't stand a chance in hell to win.

Posted by: J.T. Wenting at July 30, 2010 05:41 AM

J.T., there's winning the battle (or court case) and winning the war. The discovery motions alone will be pure gold.

The NAACP: Who was at the gathering, who was the videographer, does he have the original of this video in it's entirety, does he have other videos of other parts of the gathering (for comparison with this one to see if there are any discrepancies in style, equipment, etc.), which NAACP President was she addressing, the state or national? etc.

USDA: What were the nature of her duties, what was the outcome of her carrying out those duties with Black vs White recipients, a nice sample of her memos and e-mails to determine if her "recovery from racism" was genuine, all correspondence within USDA and the White House relating to the decision to fire her, the cell phone records of the person who supposedly had her resign long-distance, etc.

There should be material for YEARS of exposes....

Posted by: SDN at July 31, 2010 08:49 AM