- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Poli Board Defamation Scholars
Posted on 4/23/26 at 9:46 pm to boosiebadazz
Posted on 4/23/26 at 9:46 pm to boosiebadazz
The Atlantic is going to have to show their work. Let's see if they are willing to do so.
1
Posted on 4/23/26 at 9:51 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
very, difficult to sue a reporter for defaming a public official, due to the NY Times v. Sullivan
quote:
If the outlet can even show that they had a couple of sources that alleged what was in the story,
quote:
I appreciate all of that. It’s not going to be popular here, though.
I think they have to proof the truth first or show that they did not have animus which is very difficult for the publisher given past history.
Of course, one Supreme Court Justice is on record wanting to overturn Sullivan so there is that also.
Posted on 4/23/26 at 9:53 pm to AlterEd
quote:
a letter outlining why the allegations
What word you put here matters. What was the letter really?
A letter stating that the allegations are false? Basically useless.
A letter stating why the allegations are false? Better, but likely not enough.
A letter breaking down extensive attachments proving that the specific allegations are false? That's what you want. Unfortunately the timelines that reporters will give you to respond to unpublished articles is typically a matter of hours. Not even enough time to put a letter of this nature together in most situations.
Posted on 4/23/26 at 9:55 pm to dafif
quote:
I think they have to proof the truth first or show that they did not have animus which is very difficult for the publisher given past history.
quote:
Of course, one Supreme Court Justice is on record wanting to overturn Sullivan so there is that also.
Posted on 4/23/26 at 9:55 pm to dafif
quote:
I think they have to proof the truth first or show that they did not have animus which is very difficult for the publisher given past history.
I am a practicing litigator. Your thinking is wrong. The Plaintiff (Patel, the person who brought the suit) has the burden to prove his case. His burden is to prove falsity, knowledge, and malice. Under the Sullivan case, none of those elements can be presumed based on the contents of the alleged defamatory statements.
Posted on 4/23/26 at 9:58 pm to Crimson77
quote:
A letter breaking down extensive attachments proving that the specific allegations are false?
Well, he can't prove that he wasn't drunk unless they happened to do a BAC or something at the time. So what he would need is the word of someone else willing to go to bat for him who was actually there at the time (Patel alleges The Atlantic's sources do not have first hand knowledge of what they are even alleging) and says they're untrue, right?
Posted on 4/23/26 at 10:04 pm to boosiebadazz
I haven't been following this story.
If the Atlantic is going to claim that higher ups in the federal government are supporting them, it would be nice if those folks would go on record since this involves the FBI Director.
If the Atlantic is going to claim that higher ups in the federal government are supporting them, it would be nice if those folks would go on record since this involves the FBI Director.
quote:Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.
This post was edited on 4/23/26 at 10:05 pm
Posted on 4/23/26 at 10:08 pm to TerryDawg03
quote:
If the Atlantic is going to claim that higher ups in the federal government are supporting them, it would be nice if those folks would go on record since this involves the FBI Director
Call them all to the stand and put them under oath. Patel says that The Atlantic's sources do not have first hand knowledge of these alleged offenses. I mean, I'm not a lawyer, but if that is true, if all of these people were reporting hearsay to The Atlantic, and he has even one other person to contradict their claims who was actually there at the time, and Patel told The Atlantic all of this beforehand but they published the article anyways, it would seem to me like Patel can win his suit.
What would be funny is if it turned out that the FBI was running a COINTEL op on The Atlantic with all of this. You have a few agents feed The Atlantic some bullshite, hearsay rumors, Patel warns them they're untrue, they publish anyways and get sued into oblivion.
This post was edited on 4/23/26 at 10:16 pm
Posted on 4/23/26 at 10:16 pm to AlterEd
quote:
Call them all to the stand and put them under oath. Patel says that The Atlantic's sources do not have first hand knowledge of these alleged offenses. I mean, I'm not a lawyer, but if that is true, if all of these people were reporting hearsay to The Atlantic, and he has even one other person to contradict their claims who was actually there at the time, and Patel told The Atlantic all of this beforehand but they published the article anyways, it would seem to me like Patel can win his suit.
What would be funny is if it turned out that the FBI was running a COINTEL op on The Atlantic with all of this.
This is all vibes and feels and not even in the universe of how this case will be decided.
So do you read and educate yourself to learn or just stay ignorant and rage when it doesn’t go the way you hope it will?
Posted on 4/23/26 at 10:20 pm to boosiebadazz
This is an oddly specific thread taking a dig at a subset of the board. Thankfully I remember the exchange but I imagine many others will be lost.
Posted on 4/23/26 at 10:22 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
rage when it doesn’t go the way you hope it will?
I'm not going to rage about it either way. But by all means, tell me how I'm wrong there. If it turns out that the Atlantic is using "sources" who are reporting hearsay, and Patel warns them that he has witnesses to the event who contradict the hearsay, how does that not satisfy the second requirement of Actual Malice?
If he says something to the effect of, "oh, you talked to Tim down in accounting. He is reporting to you what he heard through the grapevine, but I have people who were there in the flesh at the time and will testify under oath that Timmy is wrong." How does that not satisfy the requirement of proving they published something The Atlantic knew was false? He will have told them beforehand that what they are publishing is untrue and here is the reason why, which will hold up in court.
Posted on 4/23/26 at 10:38 pm to mule74
So know we're not allowed to shotgun beers everytime the US wins the Olympics in hockey? This country is full of pussies.
Posted on 4/24/26 at 5:36 am to boosiebadazz
quote:
I’m so bummed I didn’t think of J. Edgar Boozer myself.
It came out a few months ago that the rank and file calls him a make-a-wish kid. I wonder if his Mossad girlfriend turned on him here.
This post was edited on 4/24/26 at 5:38 am
Posted on 4/24/26 at 5:43 am to boosiebadazz
The ProSloHo will be along shortly to get you straight
Posted on 4/24/26 at 5:44 am to DTRooster
As soon as he finishes licking the windows on that short bus ride
Posted on 4/24/26 at 5:50 am to boosiebadazz
quote:So Fitzpatrick is lying. Far from "careful," and "diligent," he went to press with anonymous sources, and without giving Patel time to respond.
Fitzpatrick: My response is that I stand by every single word of this report.
We were very diligent. We were very careful. It went through multiple levels of editing, review, care.
Liars lie. It's what they do.
Posted on 4/24/26 at 5:53 am to Crimson77
quote:
2) that the outlet new it was false when they published
Wow, an attorney that doesn’t know basic grammar
Posted on 4/24/26 at 5:58 am to boosiebadazz
quote:
Imagine small-talking over mimosas at open houses all day and thinking anyone gives a flying frick what you say about anything of consequence.
Greg’s a nurse!
Posted on 4/24/26 at 6:10 am to boosiebadazz
It's The Atlantic, that's no different than MSNBC's breathless reporting every day of how Trump, Don Jr, etc were on the verge of being arrested for x, y and/or z.
Posted on 4/24/26 at 6:24 am to Jbird
quote:
You got herm Slowblowpro lite!
Page 3 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News