You just can't make this stuff up.CNN is reporting that The Reverend Al Sharpton and his lawyers say they are preparing to file a defamation lawsuit against conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh for an op-ed published Saturday, which Sharpton alleges "erroneously" characterizes his (Sharpton's) role in a string of violent incidents in New York in the early 90's.
In the op-ed published in Saturday's Wall Street Journal Limbaugh writes Sharpton "played a leading role in the 1991 Crown Heights riot (he called neighborhood Jews ‘diamond merchants’) and 1995 Freddie's Fashion Mart riot."
The Crown Heights riot began after a Hasidic Rabbi accidently struck and killed an African American boy with his car. The boy died from the injuries–sparking four nights of riots. The Rabbi was not charged, but Sharpton played a large role in rallying on behalf of the young boy’s family and the African American community.
According to a statement put out by Sharpton’s media consultant, a study New York Governor Mario Cuomo commissioned showed Sharpton was not involved in the Crown Heights incident until after the rioting concluded.
"Mr. Limbaugh's blatant and defamatory statements regarding the Crown Heights Riots falsely give the impression that Rev. Sharpton was present during the violence that occurred when in reality he had been called in by the family after the violence," Sharpton’s statement says.
9 comments:
For Sharpton to even open his fat mouth on this, when we already have a list of corporations he helped fund (and I have it, you know Rush has it) to defame Rush these past two weeks is laughable.
More proof his large ass is cutting off the blood supply to his brain when he sits.
In talking to my husband, who is from New York, he confirmed my suspicions, that Rush hit the nail on the head. Rush is correct!!
And, like Dr. Dave said, after the horrible way Sharpton treated Rush this week, he has no room to talk. Sharpton needs to just shut up.
Rush has been defamed by lies. I don't know about Sharpton. Seems odd to go on about it after what happened to Rush this week.
Sharpton should be one of the defendants in a libel suit. And Rush has the money to make it happen.
Don't forget the Tawana Brawley incident Sharpton flapped his jaws about. It was a hoax, but I never heard him utter a retraction!
go for it sharpton...
he's messing with the wrong dude this time....
rush out banks him
out smarts him
and is the one who - as has already been proven- is the victim in the latest slimefest of the left....
sharpton?
he really did say defamatory statements.....
so he's filing suit for what???
All -
I can not say that I remember the specifics of the Crown Heights riot, so I do not know whether Sharpton was involved in the events / rhetoric that led to the riot.
I spent some time last night searching the NYT records, but could only find information about Sharpton being involved in the aftermath.
This is clearly the *technicality* that Sharpton is trying to work.
Even if he was not involved in creating the fervor that led to the riot, Sharpton was involved in much of the inflammatory rhetoric surrounding the incident, but if he thinks he can go after Rush on a choice of words, so be it. Chances are he'll find himself up against the problem many celebrities find themselves fighting when it comes to these kinds of suits.
Having said that - Sharpton is a horse's ass no doubt (sorry, horses everywhere), and is most certainly guilty of much worse than anything he even begins to accuse Limbaugh of having said or done. Should Sharpton choose this course, it will recoil massively, because Limbaugh will undoubtedly counter, either individually, or research the perfect situation and bring a class-action suit against 'The Reverend.'
Happy Sunday, all!
"The Reverends" are long overdue some goes around comes around.
Rush should do it. The blacks hate Rush and they always swill so he's got nothing to lose, and maybe might have something to gain. Sharptone and Jackson Hole aren't that popular with their own race.
Ya, goodluck with that not-so-Sharp-ton. First of all, Limbaugh will surely have said these statements long before he published them, in which case it is "slander" at the best, and must be proven to show actual provable damages - which, obviously, has not happened. If it had been merely libel, the damages don't need to be proved except under certain cases (not sure if being famous is one of them or not). Lastly, Rush's statements are his opinion based on facts. He did not say, for example, that "Sharpton was caught beating a white man on the corner of 5th and Jack street".
As I stated in another forum.
Bring it on Al!!!
Post a Comment