Sarah Palin Sues the New York Times over fake news tying her to Giffords Shooting

The New York Times are about to feel the wrath of former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin! Palin hired Hulk Hogan's lawyers, Ken Turkel, Shane Vogt, and S. Preston Ricardo, and filed a lawsuit against the New York Times Tuesday over a flimsy editorial that tied her to the January 2011 shooting of Arizona congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords.

Kudos to Sarah Palin for taking a stand against the NY Times for defamation, falsely accusing her in a June 14th editorial of using rhetoric that incited Jared Lee Loughner to shoot Rep. Gabby Giffords. The NY Times had the audacity to run the editorial on the same day that James Hodgkinson shot House Majority Whip Steve Scalise!

The editorial implied that Governor Palin is part of the 'sickening familiar pattern' of using politically motivated violence and that she incitedthe violent 2011 shooting of Gabby Giffords. In that horrific event the shooter, Loughner, seriously wounded numerous people and killed 6, including a federal judge and a 9-year-old girl.

Palin's legal team are saying that the paper defamed her in the June 14 editorial. The editorial entitled "America's Lethal Politics" linked Palin's rhetoric to the shooting and then tried to clean it up the next day by saying "no such link was established."-too little too late.

We got an important fact wrong, incorrectly linking political incitement and the 2011 shooting of Giffords. No link was ever established.
— NYT Opinion (@nytopinion) June 15, 2017

This same editorial also claimed, incorrectly, that an ad from Palin's political action committee put "Giffords and 19 other Democrats under stylized cross hairs," Palin's lawyers stated in the suit. Palin is seeking damages in an amount that is to be determined by a jury. Let's all hope that the public will get an opportunity to be a fly on the wall as Palin puts the NY Time on notice for their irresponsible reporting.

You may wonder, does Sarah Palin really have a libel case? Well two specific criteria stand out which gives this case grounds for holding the Times responsible for libeling a public figure. The news paper committed a reckless disregard for the truth, and secondly, the presence of malice is also a given.

The Times received public backlash from Palin's critics on the left and right. It was only then that the Times issued corrections. Palin's lawyers are asserting that the Times had "ample facts available that established the fact that there were no connection between Mrs. Palin and Loughner's crime," by pointing to the article that was published by the Times on January 15, 2011. That article stated that it was "recognized that no direct or clear link between political rhetoric and Loghner's actions could be claimed." Her lawyers also pointed to NY Time's columnist Charles Blow's article where he wrote that "the only problem is that there was no evidence then, and even now, that overheated rhetoric from the right had anything to do with the shooting" of Giffords.

Folks this one sounds like it has the potential to set some serious precedence against fake media pundits! Palin's lawyers have went on record to say that the Times' "conduct was committed knowingly, intentionally, willfully, wantonly and maliciously, with intent to harm Mrs. Palin, or in blatant disregard of the substantial likelihood of causing her harm, thereby entitling Mrs. Palin to an award of punitive damages."

If you all don't remember, Palin's lawyers Messrs. Turkel and Vogt successfully represented Hulk Hogan in his $140 million invasion of privacy suit against Gawker, winning a veridict that was on of the largest in Pinellas County history. It comes as no surprise that the New York Times did not respond to a request for comment to any media outlets.

Let's hope that this lawsuit will start a ripple-effect of legal actions against those fake news pundits who are recklessly dropping stories with no foundation!

D&S AFFILIATIONS