
The Tea Party's Uni-Tea rally in Philadelphia today marked Andrew Breitbart's first public speech since Shirley Sherrod's firing from the USDA, but Breitbart ducked TPM's questions about the incident, and didn't bring it up at all in his 20-minute long speech.
Before he spoke, TPM asked Breitbart whether he would address Sherrod's ousting in his speech. "We'll see," he replied.
His speech did not address the incident, but mostly laid out specific incidents Breitbart says prove the Tea Partiers are not racists, and prove "collusion by the political class and the media class."
As proof of the "media bully cabal," Breitbart brought up Journolist, which he described as "an inner cabal that the mainstream media will not play up."
And he mentioned Cedra Crenshaw, a female black Republican candidate for Congress in Illinois, who the "Democratic machine" is trying to get "off the stage because it doesn't want black America to see that there's another way."
Breitbart talked about Kenneth Gladney, who claimed he was beaten up at a town hall for Rep. Russ Carnahan (D-MO) because he was handing out "Don't Tread On Me" signs. Breitbart bragged that he helped bring about charges for the alleged attackers: "That was us. That was fighting for a black man who was beaten for handing out 'Don't Tread On Me' flags. The media won't tell you that narrative."
And then there was when Tea Partiers and other anti-health care activists shouted racial epithets at black Congressmen during the health care debate. "Something really rotten happened" Breitbart said about the incident. "They made it up."
The Democrats had to "find a way to put the Tea Party in its place because it could be an unstoppable juggernaut," he said. "We are armed with cameras, and we are on the lookout for their lies."
"We are a unified America," said Breitbart. "Blacks, whites, hispanics and all the rainbow people all around the world."
TPM asked Breitbart for an interview after his speech, but he told us he "already spoke."
He also ignored further inquiries by TPM about Sherrod, until someone who appeared to be his bodyguard brushed us off.
Breitbart has previously spoken about the Sherrod video with TPM, saying that he "did not edit this thing."
A spokesperson for the event, former New Jersey State Senator Richard LaRossa (R), expressed some regret at Breitbart's association with the Sherrod incident, and TPM asked if Breitbart's presence would detract from the event's success in reaching out to black conservatives. "Possibly," he said. "His message is an anti-racist message. But unfortunately he stepped on his own rhetoric a little."
Other organizers were also quick to distance themselves from the Sherrod video, mildly criticizing Breitbart for his role in the incident.
Event organizer Jeffrey Weingarten said that "he's not a racist," but "I might have done things differently, and so might you have. But I'm not going to hold him to a higher or different standard than the USDA or the President. He did not fire anybody."
Whenwillthisnightmareend
July 31, 2010 4:59 PM
get this f'ing racist liar out of my city!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Zentrails
July 31, 2010 6:44 PM in reply to Whenwillthisnightmareend
Let's get him out of Philly, too. LOL
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JEP07
July 31, 2010 8:24 PM in reply to Zentrails
"it could be an unstoppable juggernaut,"
anyone else get a sense of extreme delusions of grandeur here? Who do you all suppose Brainfart imagines is at the head of that juggernaut?
...sounds like something Adolph once dreamed of...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
LonewackoDotCom3
August 1, 2010 2:28 PM in reply to Whenwillthisnightmareend
Which is more dangerous?
1. "Racist liars" (note: I don't think Breitbart is the first, even if he occasionally gets things wrong)?
- OR -
2. Those who want to prevent others from speaking?
I'd hope most real liberals would agree that the second is far more dangerous, yet the second appears to be far more prevalent among those on the left.
I'd hope also that many liberals would realize how toxic constantly playing the race card is. It does tend to work, because the 'partiers are mostly idiots. That doesn't mean it's right or a good thing for the U.S. If you want to do what's right and what's good for the U.S., point out the other issues the tea parties have.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jakie7
August 1, 2010 2:50 PM in reply to LonewackoDotCom3
Hey, Dopey, the issue isn't us 'liberals' trying to gag Breitbart's right to free speech, it's Ms. Sherrod's right to defend herself from libel. You see, we have laws in this country because over the years, some people did some wicked things so we created a system of laws to punish people who do bad things. Get it now? You see, if Breitbart had raped Shirley Sherrod, you know nothings couldn't really say that us 'liberals' were trying to suppress Breitbart's freedom to rape. Get it now? Libel = rape. Both bad things. Breitbart did a very bad thing. Breitbart's lawyers have explained this to Breitbart. Breitbart's snobby Brentwood wife very sad. Breitbart very frightened. Breitbart on anti anxiety medication while his 'team' processes this. Breitbart shutting his ugly lying mouth not because he has had his 'free speech' suppressed but because his lawyers have explained to him the very real price his provocations will cost before a jury. Get it now?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
johnny b
August 2, 2010 1:36 PM in reply to jakie7
If you libtards had actually watched the original video on Breitbart instead of getting the headlines from the HuffPo and TPM, you would have seen that the original video DID include her explanation, and showed that she was telling about her own personal epiphany.
The point of the video was not to hurt Sherrod, but to show the people in the crowd getting all excited when she spoke about this white farmer, and how she was only going to give him enough help to cover his ass.
Why do liberals hate context so much? They just hate going to the horses mouth to get their information. If it isn't coming from a liberal news organization they just couldn't be bothered. It's sad.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
menjo9
July 31, 2010 5:10 PM
And the TeaBagger wonder why everyone thinks they are racist group. Look's who they have speaking at their event the biggest racist POS ever.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jakie7
July 31, 2010 5:14 PM
This ain't difficult. Breitbart's smear of Shirley Sherrod is the very definition of libel, as any lawyer will tell you, and as her lawyers have clearly advised her, and his lawyers have clearly have advised him He is aware he is in real jeopardy of losing his nice Brentwood home and etc. Orson Bean is pissed, his family is in despair. So he is shutting up so as not to add fuel to the fire he set. Will make me very, very happy when that fat rich boy has to write Ms. Sherrod a check for all his assets as a result of his brazen and malicious assault on her. Poor Orson Bean's daughter is going to have to move in with friends. It's not at all what she signed up for. Oh well. You either believe in personal accountability or you don't. We have libel laws for a reason, and Breitbart clearly -- and with malice aforethought -- violated 'em.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rynato
July 31, 2010 5:45 PM in reply to jakie7
It may be libel; proving it will be another matter entirely. Should Sherrod choose to sue, Breitbart will have help in defending him, just like Paula Jones did.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jakie7
July 31, 2010 7:03 PM in reply to rynato
I'm a lawyer and would kill to take Ms Sherrod's case. It is a classic, textbook, deadbang winner example of actionable libel. The tape exhibited wanton disregard for the truth, it was maliciously edited and in terms of damages, it cost Ms Sherrod her job, international humiliation and grave personal distress. Can you imagine a jury trial in Breitbart's city of Los Angeles? The damages would be in the multi millions. Plus, American juries take racism very very seriously, unlike Breitbart's insular claque of clowns in the Tea Party. The proof of course is in the pudding. Note how timid this formerly braying jackass has become. Remember he was all over TV every chance he got after the Acorn hit. The fact that he has shut up completely tells me he knows very well the kind of jeopardy he is in. Watch and wait...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JEP07
July 31, 2010 8:01 PM in reply to jakie7
jakie, you aren't the first lawyer I've heard expound on the slam-dunkedness of Sherrod's case, Apparently those who are sayingotherwise seem to be Brainfart advocates. His adoring fans seem to be the only ones who think he's going to skate on this one.
No offense to lawyers, per se, my son is a lawyer, but as a flock they tend to sniff carrion from miles away, and from what I hear, this is better than the leftovers at Gettysburg,
Brainfart's mental methane was just too stinky this time around, and the fact that so many lawyers yearn to earn from it just shows how far he crossed the line. Maybe the fact he has gotten away with it for so long just made him so full of hubris and other stuff, he just figured he was immune.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Prefabfan
August 1, 2010 12:09 AM in reply to JEP07
damages are an issue,since she was offered her job back, or possibly a better one, the next day. Her mental distress might have been terrible for the day, but she got lots of publicity for her view, to mitigate it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jakie7
August 1, 2010 12:47 AM in reply to Prefabfan
Damages are indeed an issue and are a huge problem for Mr Breitbart and his legal tesam, which is why, you see, he has shut his fat, provocative face -- trust me on this, or ask any lawyer. All over the country there are people who now believe she is a radical black racist. She lost her job, her stature, her dignity and her livelihood, all as a result of Breitbart's malicious defamation. Juries are by definition unpredictable, but given the vicious -- and deliberate -- nature of this smear, and who Breitbart is and who Shirley Sherrod is, I anticipate the legal fees to your pal Breitbart in themselves will run into the millions (there goes his house) and the jury verdict will be several millions more. You see, you can't just make up lies about people and publish them willy nilly, just as you cannot commit rape and then say well, they let Kobe Bryant off.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jakie7
August 1, 2010 12:53 AM in reply to jakie7
Or, to be more specific to your analogy, you can't commit rape and then try to justify it by saying 'yeah but the victim got lots of free publicity so what's the big deal?' The law is very specific. Wouldn't hurt if you would educate yourself before saying dumb things.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Prefabfan
August 1, 2010 10:49 AM in reply to jakie7
I am a lawyer and have more knowledge of this topic than both of you. If she could have returned to work the next day, that would limit her damages from the loss of her job to 1 day o floss of wages. You say there are millions of people who think she is a rascist, BUT if the publicity was greater of the correction, then your theory there are still people who think she is a racist goes down the tubes. Breitbart his not held responsible of people who refuse to accept the truth when presented to them on CNN and MSNBC. Note, Fox ain't touching the story. The one thing she has going for her is that the law of defamation presumes damages when the defamation is to your ability of fitness to do your job, she does not have to prove each $$$. If Brietbart had apologized the next day, wit the same publicity he gave to the false charges, and she had been offered her job back, she would still have a case but not worth millions. And this case ain't worth millions, yet as long as she refuses to mitigate her damages (take a job!).
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jakie7
August 1, 2010 2:56 PM in reply to Prefabfan
I doubt you are a lawyer, my friend. What law school did you graduate from, and what bar have you passed? What is your name so we can google you. You exhibit absolutely no comprehension of libel law. Indeed, if what you said was true, there would be nothing to prevent me, or anyone else from defaming you as a child molestor, watching you and your family suffer, you losing your job etc. and then shrugging my shoulders and saying oh well, he could just get another job, and lots of people believe he is not a child molestor, so no harm no foul. Get it now?
Further, libel and damages are determined by juries. You want to put Breitbart on the stand to defend his years of sliming and racism? You really want to play lawyer, Bucko?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jakie7
August 1, 2010 8:49 PM in reply to jakie7
Note the silence from Prefabfan. An impostor exposed...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
August 2, 2010 7:37 PM in reply to jakie7
Go Jakie7! You Rock. Cenk/ TYT so-o-o agrees with you: http://youtu.be/NkBazOiPSz8
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JEP07
August 1, 2010 12:58 AM in reply to Prefabfan
"but she got lots of publicity for her view, to mitigate it."
she was by no means a public figure if that is what you mean, although this event could turn her into one.
So now Brainfart's defense is: I made her famous, she should be grateful"!?!?!?
She wasn't a public figure when it happened, so assuming she is willing to trade her anonymity for this dubious reward is a stretch, especially in terms of convincing 12 reasonable people of it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JEP07
July 31, 2010 8:29 PM in reply to jakie7
PS, jakie, you said it all in this one sentence, in terms of their unmitigated hubris and the club blinders they enable each other to wear.
" Breitbart's insular claque of clowns in the Tea Party."
They spend too much time watching Fox News, listening to each other and ignoring all the rest of humanity because it simply hurts for them to hear the truth.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
heir ball
July 31, 2010 10:13 PM in reply to JEP07
As a former doctor, and current financial advisor, I'm not clear on the Orson Bean connection. Explain?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Captain Canard
July 31, 2010 10:51 PM in reply to heir ball
Let Me Google That For You
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rachelrachel
August 1, 2010 2:33 AM in reply to Captain Canard
That's great! I've never seen that lmgtfy before!
Thanks for sharing!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ZeraLee
August 2, 2010 4:42 PM in reply to jakie7
Because he let someone else do the editing before he got the video, does that give him any kind of plausible deniability?
Do defamation laws have an intent test, and could intent be proven in this case?
I smell malice all the way, but that's just my opinion. I still do not know how this would play out in court.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CityGuy
July 31, 2010 7:28 PM in reply to rynato
Sherrod has already indicated that she intends to sue un-Breitbart. To be fair to him-there's a first time for everything-he may have been advised against commenting further on Shirley Sherrod.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jakie7
July 31, 2010 8:18 PM in reply to CityGuy
For shizzle he's been told not to speak about Shirley Sherrod -- any new provocation will tack on an extra million or so in legal fees and untold millions more in damages. Duh. Which is an interesting case study in right wing agitprop and how much these guys actually believe in what they are saying. They know the media will let them get away with endless lies -- and that they are insulated by Fox news. But the courts have a higher standard. If more people had the balls to stand up and sue the Breitbart's of the world, we'd have a better chance of restoring a rational politics.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bloke1
August 1, 2010 3:56 PM in reply to jakie7
Discovery on this one should be a doozie. Briebart hand over your emails......
BTW if he really was sent it by a "source" will he go to jail to protect the "Source"? That would be the action of a true journolist.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
It's Pat
July 31, 2010 5:24 PM
Breitbart is a coward. Even after it was found he misrepresented that video, his website continued to make Sherrod an issue.
He could have avoided all this by apologizing and saying he'd be more careful next time. Instead, he dug in his heels, insisted it was about NAACP while still lying and saying the black audience cheered her supposed racist rants.
Breitbart fucked with he wrong person this time. I hope he pays.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Grokenstein
July 31, 2010 5:27 PM in reply to It's Pat
Fingers crossed. We'll see if the system stands up for--or knocks down--his defense strategy, which seems to be "la la la I can't hear you."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
superking
July 31, 2010 5:32 PM
He was talking about the "Sherrod Incident" the whole time - the point of the doctored video was to drive the news cycle away from talking about polls/evidence that racial fears are driving tea party turnout. It's already sunk down the memory hole, but the entire week before the "Sherrod Incident" the media was getting dangerously close to that conclusion. Now the debate is over "reverse racism" rather than mounting evidence of good old white supremacy.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
de TOQUEville
July 31, 2010 6:32 PM in reply to superking
Excellent points.
I hope this putz gets sued from here to Timbuktu.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Homefries
July 31, 2010 5:32 PM
I doubt you'll get him to make any comment about Sherrod, unless you waterboard him. Any comment he might make is almost certainly a lose-lose proposition.
As mad as many are, he really has done us all a service. We Demos have a tendency to get complacent and side-tracked by distractions. Breitbart did us a favor by pointing out just how awful the other side is, and what's at stake when we vote for reps that might not be as progressive as we like.
The alternatives really are far worse.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Ahmedsaid
July 31, 2010 6:08 PM
Who? Sherrod? That horse is dead, except where journolisters try to kick it back to life. Let's move on.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
benjoya
July 31, 2010 6:20 PM in reply to Ahmedsaid
you're right. let's leave it for the courts. at least breitbart knows enough to STFU once he's being sued.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JEP07
July 31, 2010 8:08 PM in reply to Ahmedsaid
"move along, nothing to see here, move along..."
what are you, a blog cop? Good luck with that at the TPM Hole in the Wall AKA "The Cafe..."
You aren't fooling this crowd, i might work over at Red State of LGF, but this bunch of misfit eggheads won't fall for it.
This story has so many legs, it's up for the centipede pulitzer.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JEP07
July 31, 2010 8:21 PM in reply to JEP07
"it" might work over at Red State "or" LGF,
(had to correct THAT typo, doncha know, wouldn't want people thinking i work over at red state!)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
donquijoterocket
July 31, 2010 8:56 PM in reply to Ahmedsaid
Has that informal, inconsequential online discussion group the jornolist really gotten you wingnuts knickers in such a knot? Have they become the new ACORN for you know-nothings?You realize that several investigations have well proven there as no there there with ACORN. I guess when you're as stupid and desperate as the baggers a dead horse is as good to beat as anything. These suits against Breitbart and slime mold jr. O'Keefe ought to be interesting.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Speedy
August 1, 2010 8:18 PM in reply to donquijoterocket
What's got their poutrage meter pegged is that this latest "huge" story has elicited a collective yawn from everyone except the drool cup filling faithful. Tucker Carlson trotted it out first over at The Daily Fail, and then threw a fit when everyone shrugged. Now Brainfart's taken it up , hoping to distract people from asking him why he's such a pathetic douche.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Mary Alice
July 31, 2010 9:32 PM in reply to Ahmedsaid
Honest question..What does "journolisters" mean? Is it a tweet word? Is it journalists who tilt to one side? journalists who use Listerine? Please advise.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
zoester
July 31, 2010 10:39 PM in reply to Mary Alice
Recently in the news, and recently shut down. I'm going to cheat, and cut and paste the Wikipedia site, but you can otherwise look it up, under Journolist: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JournoList
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
August 1, 2010 12:25 AM in reply to Ahmedsaid
That's to be seen. One can't just throw another person's life into chaos, cost them their job, refuse to apologize, and go on as if they caused no harm to the person. If Mrs. Sherrod had done to Breitbart what he did to her, he'd have announced sooner than she did that he intended to sue her. He needs this little "lesson" from her because this is not the first time that he's done this. He and his "creative" editing and lies are the reason ACORN is now a defunct organization. He put the organization through the wringer, and after all of the investigations were completed, the organization was absolved of any major wrongdoing. He did it out of spite and with the assistance of O'Keefe and Giles. He must be stopped from practicing his form of journalism. I'm not calling for him to be run out of business, but I am calling for him to stop using his blogs to foment divisiveness and hatred for political and personal gain because this type of behavior is outrageous and not helpful to our country.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AmericanDad
August 1, 2010 9:40 AM in reply to Ahmedsaid
Wishful thinking. Understandable, though: It is uncomfortable having the bight light of national news focused on your immorality.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AmericanDad
August 1, 2010 10:48 AM in reply to Ahmedsaid
Wishful thinking. Understandable, though: It is uncomfortable having the bight light of national news focused on your immorality.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
wlarip
July 31, 2010 6:18 PM
The Sherrod saga is just beginning.
Like the albatross, she will hang around his neck until she brings him down.
Never a good idea to pick on someone who's tougher than you are particularly if they're not bothering you.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
dustbunny44
July 31, 2010 6:37 PM
>>former New Jersey State Senator Richard LaRossa (R), expressed some regret at Breitbart's association with the Sherrod incident...
Breitbart WAS the Sherrod incident!
Without his video fabrication she would not have been falsely accused and there would be no incident.
Breitbart is a propagandist and a liar, and a self-confessed disinformationist.
The fact that he is a "headliner" at an RNC function says it all about the Republican party.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Backcountry
July 31, 2010 6:44 PM
Whow. No sign of this "Uni-Tea" rally on any of the major news sites nor even on the False News site. The Philadelphia Inquirer is completely ignoring it.
Which raises a question: If the teabag rally is falling flat, why not cover it? I guess they only get coverage if the right-wing media has file footage to show somebody turned out.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CityGuy
July 31, 2010 7:34 PM in reply to Backcountry
Oh Ye of little faith! Just wait til FNS tomorrow morning. Chris Wallace will have the file footage of MLK's "I have a dream" speech cropped to take out any visual references to The Mall in Washington. "Look at that huge, diverse crowd" Brit Hume will intone. You betcha!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
just john
July 31, 2010 6:57 PM
That photo makes him look just like Dan Stark in the current TV show "The Good Guys."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FredB
July 31, 2010 7:25 PM
That's funny. My wife just said the same thing. And we thought we were the only ones who watched that show! But we still hold to our claim of being the only ones who watched Cop Rocks.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
BigBadBama
July 31, 2010 7:27 PM in reply to FredB
Sorry. I did, too.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
BigBadBama
July 31, 2010 7:26 PM
You buried the lede. Apparently the world has been invaded by "rainbow people." Sure, they sound pleasant enough, but you can't be too sure.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
monk
July 31, 2010 7:30 PM
We now have two legal actions aganist breitbart.com to follow. One of the ACORN staff defamed by James O'Keefe has filed a suit. The man questioned O'Keefe and the woman posing as the prostitute about details of their underage prostitution ring and then called the police. B but we never heard about his report to the cops. Seems like this is the same tactic they used on Sherrod. Tell only half the story.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
benintn
July 31, 2010 9:10 PM in reply to monk
And isn't O'Keefe an admitted liar and criminal?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
stefsstuff
July 31, 2010 7:34 PM
LOL! He claims that they have "their" people everywhere armed with camera's? As if those pics would ever tell the truth after he was through "editing" or "photoshopping" them. He's a lying blowhard in love with the sound of his own voice and existance.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
baba2nde
July 31, 2010 7:42 PM
The gentleman is history, no? Why help resurrect his image?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JEP07
July 31, 2010 8:15 PM in reply to baba2nde
"move along, nothing to see here, move along..."
what are you, a blog cop? Good luck with that at the TPM Hole in the Wall AKA "The Cafe..."
You aren't fooling this crowd, i might work over at Red State of LGF, but this bunch of misfit eggheads won't fall for it.
This story has so many legs, it's up for the centipede pulitzer.
(no apologies for the cut and paste job from ahmedsaid's comment above, there's a definite attempt by some to tamp down the blog appeal of this story, and I'm just not buying it, everyone who gets on here and trivializes his story or suggests we "move along" needs ot tell us who they really are and who they work for, because you are soo transparent, it is astounding you think you are fooling this crowd.
I've tried, it never worked, so I gave up and got serious when i write here. Don;t assume you can waltz in here and fake it for Brainfart, and no one will see you dancing.
BTW, baba if Brainfart's "history" please explain why he's getting such media attention? And I don;t mean from here at TPM and across the liberal blogosphere, I mean from the MSM?
Today's history, maybe, but if you think he knows yet that his already questionable reputation as a serious journalist is completely ruined, you aren't paying attention to the headlines rolling out every day.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Leftense
July 31, 2010 8:20 PM
I saw you ask him for a comment - it looked like he was unaware of what TPM was?!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JEP07
July 31, 2010 8:31 PM in reply to Leftense
TPM should get that front-row seat, not Fox!!!
Can I get a second?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Joekuh
July 31, 2010 9:13 PM in reply to JEP07
2nd.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Mary Alice
July 31, 2010 9:24 PM in reply to Leftense
And the Oscar goes to........
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cindyperry2009
July 31, 2010 8:57 PM
El Douche wants to meet and finally apologize to her to talk her out of her lawsuit. Dickhead.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Matt Jones
July 31, 2010 10:09 PM in reply to cindyperry2009
"El Douche" LOL :)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Vol-in-tears
July 31, 2010 9:23 PM
I keep hearing, just wait, some day, the tide is turning, the pendulum is begining to reverse. All related to "How long can half of America continue to be bat-s_ _t crazy"
"Brainfart" (not mine) and the "too many-too caustic" at some point have to be recognized as what they are...Don't they
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Clarance Vine
July 31, 2010 9:46 PM
Does anyone know his financial status?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreemanW
August 1, 2010 11:58 PM in reply to Clarance Vine
I believe Goldman Sachs is offering an investment instrument called a Breitbart, they're also selling Credit Default Swap instruments whose terminal value is based upon the total and abject collapse of that Breitbart investment.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Clarance Vine
August 2, 2010 9:04 AM in reply to FreemanW
Nice. Now if Goldman can get AIG to pay out this time, they'll have a winner. Oh, that's right, if they don't, well then you and me, and everyone else here will be obligated. As my brother used to say from his Wall Street days, "all I want is an unfair advantage".
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Joe
July 31, 2010 10:24 PM
I know Sherrod's financial status...she's 300K richer by taking a "pain and suffering" award from the reparations lawsuit...and she isn't a f'n farmer...she was paid with federal dollars.
SHE's a criminal...where's your reporter on this?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Prefabfan
August 1, 2010 12:16 AM in reply to Joe
Can you tell us when she got the money. You claim she is "richer" meaning she has already received the money. Or you are lying.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
August 1, 2010 12:32 AM in reply to Prefabfan
Congress has to approve the payout before any money is disbursed to the farmers in the lawsuit. As for the other poster calling Mrs. Sherrod a criminal, he/she has been reading blogs that say that because there's no evidence to support his/her contention. It's a game involving pushing another smear because your team is looking like a fool due to receiving a licking from a 62 y/o woman.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
August 1, 2010 4:18 AM in reply to Margie
What is known as "the Pigford Settlement" was in two parts. The Sherrods were part of the first settlement and have already received their portion. The case was opened back up because of complaints that the time allotted for filing a claim was insufficient; the second settlement covers claimants who did not meet the original filing deadline. The money to cover that settlement has yet to be appropriated by Congress, even though the money was promised by the end of this past March.
As for the Sherrod claim, my understanding is that the Sherrods had organized a farming cooperative for black farmers which ran successfully for a number of years. When prolonged drought took a toll on the cooperative's finances, they applied for a USDA loan to help the cashflow, as did many other farmers in the area, but the USDA did not grant the loan. The property was subsequently taken in foreclosure and bulldozed over.
The Sherrods evidently satisfied the court that the refusal was part of a pattern of discrimination against black farmers on the part of the USDA, and they were awarded damages accordingly.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
clemenceau
August 1, 2010 12:39 AM in reply to Prefabfan
"Lying" is such a nasty word.
Good choice.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Twisted_Colour
August 1, 2010 2:06 AM in reply to Joe
@Joe: "and she isn't a f'n farmer...she was paid with federal dollars"
Who ever suggested she was a farmer, Dickhead? Also - People who work for the federal govt. get paid with federal dollars.
Here's my report: Joe is a f*cking moron.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cindyperry2009
August 1, 2010 7:10 AM in reply to Joe
Wasn't her father a farmer who was murdered?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
It's Pat
August 1, 2010 7:23 AM in reply to Joe
WTF? Seriously, get some facts.
You're fucking right this was reperations; just like the Hinkley citizens vs Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) case was reperations, the Eveleth Mines case of 1984, Anderson et al. v. W. R. Grace & Co. et al., and the people who sued because of the damage caused by Fen-Phen diet pills (Wyeth).
More facts for you: The money has not been paid and Sherrod is not "richer". Congress has not authorized the payment yet.
One more thing: Everyone has the right to sue a company or individual if they feel wronged. It's not criminal. But you knew that and just threw that charge out in order to defame her actions. That's fucking cowardly. You don't know shit about the farm case nor history yet you sit here and post false accusations, spreading innuendo and lies. Shows what you know, and all that you dont.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JohnW1141
August 1, 2010 8:27 AM in reply to It's Pat
Its Pat,
replying to Joe is like talking to Barney Frank's dining room table.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Clarance Vine
August 1, 2010 8:31 AM in reply to It's Pat
Way to go Pat! Facts always impress me - and a follow up ass kicking.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Prefabfan
August 1, 2010 2:48 PM in reply to Clarance Vine
I hate facts, and clear concise arguments; why I don't post them.
Where can i get crappy Gucci knockoffs made by child labor?
:-)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
juke R
July 31, 2010 10:46 PM
If he didn't edit the video, who did?
Who sent this obvious hit piece to a conservative blogger who was most likely to post it. I actually suspect Breitbart is telling the truth about this. There is definitely some shadowy indivdiual(s) at the heart of this who knew exactly what they were doing. If he is sued, he will likely roll over and identify his source. That's actually the best reason to go forth with a suit.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JEP07
August 1, 2010 1:17 AM in reply to juke R
the real journalist would never have let the edited video on his airspace without seeing the whole story.
Whether he edited it or not, he sure bit hard on that stinkbait, and when the NAACP called on the Tea Party to renounce racism in it's ranks, Brainfart figured he's go all vendetta on em' and pulled the trigger on a half-cocked contrivance.
Mr Right Wing Revolutionary thought it would be the next shot heard round the world, but it fizzled so fast, it just proved once and for all how willingly someone like Brainfart buys into the fear and loathing game, and willingly amplifies the worst of it, regardless of context.
Whether he edited or not is really no longer germane to the legal aspect, his worst mistake was opening his big mouth and adding his personal commentary for all the world to record and remember, despite vain attempts to rearrange his website, it was Stinky's OWN WORDS, along with the video, that will make any jury cringe, especially if they see the whole video first and understand how out of context the Brainfart version proved to be.
Any good lawyer should be able o get him to open that big mouth on the stand, where his inability to display contrition, or even admit his mistakes, could very well lead to one of those "you can't handle the truth" moments we all know and love.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jakie7
July 31, 2010 11:57 PM
Hey Joe, your hero libeled and defamed her. He is going to lose millions in legal fees alone. Hasta la vista, Baby!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Mrwilson1
August 1, 2010 1:00 AM
Isnt Mr Breitbart the dandy?
I think he doth protest a tad too much.
Journolist = Foxnews. Is there a difference?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chitowner
August 1, 2010 2:05 AM
'Spect his lawyer has advised him to shut up about Ms. Sherrod cause she's going to sue his hateful behind.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JasonsRobot
August 1, 2010 2:19 AM
Breitbart says: "And he mentioned Cedra Crenshaw, a female black Republican candidate for Congress in Illinois, who the "Democratic machine" is trying to get "off the stage because it doesn't want black America to see that there's another way."
Well, Andrew, perhaps, just maybe, the Democrats want her off the stage because she's a Republican. Ya know, like they'd do with any Republican.
Regarding 'the mainstream media' these right-wingers always complain about: Aren't these people always pointing out Fox News has more viewers than MSNBC and CNN combined? So, if 'the media' isn't covering something or won't tell the real story, that's on Fox because, per ratings, they are T.V.'s mainstream media.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JasonsRobot
August 1, 2010 2:23 AM
Oops. The quoted passage I posted was from the article itself not a actual quote from Brietbart. I'm sure everyone here can see and work around my faux paux.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rough_draft
August 1, 2010 2:25 AM
Breitbart is one of those guys -- like Dick Cheney -- whose chicken lips always seem to be curled into a nasty sneer. I don't think the tea-tards really even care whether Breitbart's lame excuses make any sense at all. He's just there to be a catalyst for hatred and divisiveness. The more the Republicans can stir up racial tension, the better they think they can do. The fact that he's put on the podium on uni-tard day shows that they'd just as soon shove their hatefulness in peoples' faces than waste time with respect or sensitivity. Anyone who wasn't a dishonest asshole with no shame or decency wouldn't be qualified for Breitbart's job, after all.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
clemenceau
August 1, 2010 4:03 AM in reply to rough_draft
The is something truly baleful about Cheney's sneer. Breitbart's is a ridiculous affection. He comes off as a bit of a temper tantrum prone drama queen to me. He fights dirty more like a pissy jilted lover than a detached true dirty trickster motivated by ideology. He is a natural propagandist, though.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
clemenceau
August 1, 2010 4:05 AM in reply to clemenceau
meant "affectation"
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
monk
August 1, 2010 4:46 AM
No doubt Limbaugh et al will be donating to his defense fund. Even if he is not held accountable, I will love seeing what comes out in the discovery phase.
Sherrod has proven to be one intelligent, tough, determined opponent for Breitbart. I guess he just encountered a "Mama Grizzly" of the Democratic kind.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
avalonjohn@hotmail.com
August 1, 2010 5:49 AM
The dude has a perpetual sneer on his mug, like a self-loathing closet homosexual who lived in his mom's basement until she remarried and kicked him out when he turned 40. He should be wished into the cornfield.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
OhioMan
August 1, 2010 6:14 AM
Conservatives just seem so stupid to me. This event sounds like more of the same. Gosh, I'm tired of this.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
fpie
August 1, 2010 7:14 AM
Does the scumbag have a legal defense fund up and running yet. I know there is no legal action YET but wingnuts in trouble always have big doners for their legal defense fund. He'll probably lose for millions and walk away with a profit.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JohnW1141
August 1, 2010 8:57 AM
I always thought that one of John Kerry's biggest mistakes during the Presidential campaign was his not suing the Swift Boaters.
Since he had his own witnesses and the Navy behind him I thought it was a win. With a lawsuit he could have kept a number of those "witnesses" getting on board with the Swiftboat gang and Jerome Corsi, and a lawsuit would have tempered the charges they were throwing around, or even kept many charges from being made.
Even after the election he should have sued, forget the sour grapes thing, he could have performed a service to the country by dragging these cretins into court and making them defend their charges.
This is why I'm happy to see Sherrod suing, and I hope she has a case. Consider the consequences if she won a lawsuit against this right winger and how it might affect future hit men and women. If she starts a legal fund I'll be first in line to contribute.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Prefabfan
August 1, 2010 2:50 PM in reply to JohnW1141
Close, his biggest mistake was ignoring it out of being above it for three months or so. While he tanked.
Suing them was the least of what he should have done to them.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Splashbash
August 1, 2010 1:08 PM
Hey guys, if you have a minute you might want to check out this interesting politics site. They offer insightful political opinions and coverage of breaking news. http://tiny.cc/kft31
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
inokeah
August 1, 2010 8:41 PM
Just who entitled who to dictate when racism is "Payback" or actionable in the courts?
If you think the NAACP is not racist then please tell me what the court system would think of the NAAWP?
In America we do not get extra freedom because we are a certain color.
We will see a end to racism when we loose the NAACP and all racism for profit organizations.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
BigJim
August 3, 2010 8:07 AM in reply to inokeah
Just who entitled who to dictate when racism is "Payback" or actionable in the courts?
“We the people” make those decisions. “If you think the NAACP is not racist then please tell me what the court system would think of the NAAWP?”
As I view that insipid remark, the NAAWP would be an umbrella organization for the John Birch Society, the NRA, The KKK, The Tea Party, Right Wing talk radio, Skin Heads, Aryan Brotherhood, White Citizens Counsel, I would also include groups like the New Black Panther Party, (not to be confused with the Original Black Panther party) the American Nazi party, The list goes on, feel free to fill in the many I have neglected to enumerate.
Racism is a function of power, not an individual prerogative. A true racist has the means to enforce his or her perversion upon another. One may choose to debate that definition, have at it, I have stated my position and see no need to defend same.
In America we do not get extra freedom because we are a certain color.
The idiot that penned that statement must not be white, or maybe he is white and just a little more stupid than most hate mongers. Can any rational thinking person say that it is not an advantage to be white in this country??? Don’t think we need to pursue that foolish statement, even the most liberal white person will admit that being white is an obvious advantage.
We will see a end to racism when we loose the NAACP and all racism for profit organizations.
Can’t argue with that statement, as long as you include all of the afore mentioned organizations and the many I have not named.
I can’t believe I took the time to respond to such a pathetic individual.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jakie7
August 1, 2010 8:55 PM
Inokeah, your stupidity is showing. Breitbart slandered and lied about Shirley Sherrod to advance a racist agenda. The law protects people from being lied and slandered. Unfortunately for you, the law is colorblind. You would no doubt prefer a society where white people could lie and defame and violate people who were not white with impunity and only when minorities harmed white people would the laws apply. Well, we had that society and in fact fought a war against it 150 years ago. Your side lost. Get used to it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
shle896
August 2, 2010 10:43 AM
This dude is the Jon Gosselin of politics. What a complete douche bag!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
August 2, 2010 10:51 AM
Breitbart will soon join the ranks with Sarah Palin as someone who's endorsement or presence actually hurts whoever he thinks he is helping.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
SkeeterVT
August 2, 2010 10:55 AM
of course Andrew Breitbart clammed up about Shirley Sherrod at the Uni-Tea rally. What did you expect him to do, knowing that he's about to be sued by Sherrod for libel and defamation?
Did you really expect him to say something about Sherrod that would put him in greater legal jeopardy than he's already in? Breitbart might be an arrogant right-wing SOB, but he's not that stupid -- especially if he was instructed by his lawyers not to say anything publicly about Sherrod.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ibsteve2u
August 2, 2010 11:59 AM
I wonder that the American people never contemplate the phrase "Birds of a feather flock together." in the context of the the right...
Or "You are who your friends are...".
I.e., it seems to me that the proliferation of slime within the right should be working on the American psyche to induce revulsion and the extinction of the modern "right"...who so devoutly preach and practice all that is wrong.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Bonedaddy King
August 2, 2010 12:21 PM
Breitbart: Slave Owners, KKK Were Liberal 'Plants'
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?