MAGA brats mock Native American with "build the wall" chants

Stacyhs said:
We must be reading different posts. I can't see where portlandatheist said a single word about the young man needing to "learn to respect people".
Click to expand...

(Rolls eyes)

Why else would he hope he “meets lots of great people from different walks of life and politics than his own.”?
 
Giz said:
(Rolls eyes)

Why else would he hope he “meets lots of great people from different walks of life and politics than his own.”?
Click to expand...

Isn't going to college supposed to include meeting lots of great people from different walks of life and politics other than one's own? It's part of a good education. It's like travelling...expanding your world. Or so I always thought. I suppose if one prefers to only meet people just like oneself and with only similar views, one could attend a college with a very limited student body diversity and belief system. But it's interesting that you assume "why else".
 
Stacyhs said:
Isn't going to college supposed to include meeting lots of great people from different walks of life and politics other than one's own? It's part of a good education. It's like travelling...expanding your world. Or so I always thought. I suppose if one prefers to only meet people just like oneself and with only similar views, one could attend a college with a very limited student body diversity and belief system. But it's interesting that you assume "why else".
Click to expand...
That's why some conservatives want it banned.
 
Stacyhs said:
Isn't going to college supposed to include meeting lots of great people from different walks of life and politics other than one's own? It's part of a good education. It's like travelling...expanding your world. Or so I always thought. I suppose if one prefers to only meet people just like oneself and with only similar views, one could attend a college with a very limited student body diversity and belief system. But it's interesting that you assume "why else".
Click to expand...

Yes, it should expand ones horizons. However, as I said, it appears that CNN et al need that far more than the kid does.
 
portlandatheist said:
good for him. I hope he goes to college and meets lots of great people from different walks of life and politics than his own.
Click to expand...

Giz said:
Seems like it’s CNN et al who need to learn to respect people from different walks of life, not the kid.
Click to expand...

Giz said:
Yes, it should expand ones horizons. However, as I said, it appears that CNN et al need that far more than the kid does.
Click to expand...

Portlandatheist made no mention of CNN in his post or 'the kid' needing to learn respect. That was your misassumption and, apparently, still is.
 
The lawyers are slap fighting each other:
https://www.thedailybeast.com/covington-catholic-student-nick-sandmanns-lawyers-go-after-rival-attorney?ref=author

Nick Sandmann, the most prominent of the MAGA hat kids, hired a real attorney. Other unnamed MAGA kids have enlisted the aid of right-wing internet personality Robert Barnes, best known for his legal work with Infowars.

Sandmann's lawyers are threatening to sue Barnes for falsely implying publicly that he is representing Sandmann.

It's right wing grifters all the way down!
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
The lawyers are slap fighting each other:
https://www.thedailybeast.com/covington-catholic-student-nick-sandmanns-lawyers-go-after-rival-attorney?ref=author

Nick Sandmann, the most prominent of the MAGA hat kids, hired a real attorney. Other unnamed MAGA kids have enlisted the aid of right-wing internet personality Robert Barnes, best known for his legal work with Infowars.

Sandmann's lawyers are threatening to sue Barnes for falsely implying publicly that he is representing Sandmann.

It's right wing grifters all the way down!
Click to expand...

What would you say is Sandmann's grift?

The way the lawsuit is going, it seems like he's the victim and CNN is the grifter.
 
All we really know is that CNN and Sandmann reached a settlement. Terms of that settlement, including amounts of money that might have been paid, have not been made public, to my knowledge.

Ex-CNN host 'likely' to be sued over now-deleted 'punchable face' tweet: Sandmann attorney
The tweet in question said:
Mr. Aslan, who hosted CNN’s “Believer” series until it was cancelled in 2017, tweeted on Jan. 19, 2019, “Honest question. Have you ever seen a more punchable face than this kid’s?”

The tweet, which showed a photo of the January 2019 standoff between Nicholas and elderly Native American activist Nathan Phillips, was removed last week, the day after CNN settled the $275 million lawsuit filed by the Sandmann family for an undisclosed amount.
Click to expand...
 
theprestige said:
What would you say is Sandmann's grift?

The way the lawsuit is going, it seems like he's the victim and CNN is the grifter.
Click to expand...

I was more generally commenting on the greater "right wing outrage" machine. Sandmann's lawyers seemed to have had a fairly focused legal strategy and conducted themselves like real lawyers. The details of these settlements aren't public, but it is an indication of some success on their end.

Unfortunately for Sandmann, the right wing griftosphere has taken up the issue. You got Barnes suing everyone on the planet and repeatedly implying that he represents Sandmann, the most public face of this controversy. Bad faith lawsuits, misleading headlines, and other pointless inflammatory nonsense abounds.

It sucks to be an honestly aggrieved right wing figure because all the right wing grifters rush in like a shark that smells blood.
 
Is the punchable face comment defamatory?

I don't see how the punchable face comment falls under defamation. I am not a lawyer, but the comment is opinion.
 
Chris_Halkides said:
I don't see how the punchable face comment falls under defamation. I am not a lawyer, but the comment is opinion.
Click to expand...

I agree, I doubt he'll get **** for it. I would bet it's dismissed but when you're throwing things at the wall to see if they stick, you might as well throw all of it against the wall.
 
Chris_Halkides said:
I don't see how the punchable face comment falls under defamation. I am not a lawyer, but the comment is opinion.
Click to expand...

The linked article doesn't say whether it will be a defamation suit. I'm not sure what actual complaint fits best, but I hope there's at least one or two. It seems like there's an obvious incitement-to-violence problem with the tweet, that merits some sort of sanction.
 
theprestige said:
The linked article doesn't say whether it will be a defamation suit. I'm not sure what actual complaint fits best, but I hope there's at least one or two. It seems like there's an obvious incitement-to-violence problem with the tweet, that merits some sort of sanction.
Click to expand...

I would easily say that Trump has lowered that bar by a significant margin. If saying someone has a punchable face is something you can take action on then Trump should be sued 10x over. I'll stand by my statement that this will get thrown out as being covered under the first amendment. He isn't asking anyone to punch the kid, just stating an obvious opinion.
 
According to the Opening Arguments podcast, the original "defamatory" article/video on CNN is still up. If you believe that Sandmann won big in this settlement, you have to believe that he got what he wanted while getting no apology nor any removal of the offensive material. That would be a pretty foolish inconsistency.

In all likelihood, Sandmann's lawyer made an offer slightly less than CNN's attorney fees.
 
I Am The Scum said:
According to the Opening Arguments podcast, the original "defamatory" article/video on CNN is still up.
Click to expand...

I can't find it. The lawsuit claims CNN made defamatory statements in its Jan. 19, 2019 TV coverage of the incident, and its Jan. 19 and Jan 20 online stories titled "Teens in Make America Great Again hats taunted a Native American elder at the Lincoln Memorial" and "Native American man confronted by teens speaks out" respectively. When I search for Sandmann, Covington Catholic, or Nathan Phillips, I get no results for those days. When I search for the article by those titles, I get no results.

In all likelihood, Sandmann's lawyer made an offer slightly less than CNN's attorney fees.
Click to expand...

Or maybe Opening Arguments is wrong. Can you find the original article?

ETA: The lawsuit provides an HTML link to the initial TV coverage. As you can see if you follow the link, "This video is no longer available".
 
Last edited:
Ziggurat said:
I can't find it. The lawsuit claims CNN made defamatory statements in its Jan. 19, 2019 TV coverage of the incident, and its Jan. 19 and Jan 20 online stories titled "Teens in Make America Great Again hats taunted a Native American elder at the Lincoln Memorial" and "Native American man confronted by teens speaks out" respectively. When I search for Sandmann, Covington Catholic, or Nathan Phillips, I get no results for those days. When I search for the article by those titles, I get no results.



Or maybe Opening Arguments is wrong. Can you find the original article?

ETA: The lawsuit provides an HTML link to the initial TV coverage. As you can see if you follow the link, "This video is no longer available".
Click to expand...

Fairly sure the title was changed during an update on the story. This appears to be the original article, and it is still able to be found on CNN. It also lists the correction of Philips to denote the fact he didn't serve in Vietnam, so I'm pretty sure it's the original one. I can look for the other one, but the article dates change with any update.

ETA: I think the link I provided in this post also has the original video. Again, it's URL easily could have changed with updates to the article. That's fairly common.
 
Last edited:
plague311 said:
I would easily say that Trump has lowered that bar by a significant margin. If saying someone has a punchable face is something you can take action on then Trump should be sued 10x over. I'll stand by my statement that this will get thrown out as being covered under the first amendment. He isn't asking anyone to punch the kid, just stating an obvious opinion.
Click to expand...

I agree. It'll get thrown out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom