Former respected attorney and current Trump ass-kisser, Alan Dershowitz, recently made his thoughts known on Covington Catholic High School student Nick Sandmann and his family's $250 million lawsuit against The Washington Post for libel. Speaking on Hill.TV's Rising, Dershowitz said the following:
"I think they have a reasonable case, I mean the world was guilty of libel. These poor kids seemed to be doing exactly the right thing, and then suddenly because they are thought to be white, privileged kids, suddenly everyone's ganging up on them. I'd be interested to see how the case unfolds. I mean they're asking for a lot of money, I don't think that's going to be taken too seriously. But I do think that they have a significant case and it will be interesting to see how the Post defends against their reporting in the case. It's important to air this issue out in the public, and one of the functions that a suit like this has is to lay it all out in the public. The media has to be responsible for their reporting particularly when you have kids who have no ability generally to defend themselves against media reporting."
Due to this statement alone, I think Alan can now accurately be referred to as Dotard Dershowitz. First off, he starts his spiel with, "I think they have a reasonable case," but then later contends that "...they're asking for a lot of money, I don't think that's going to be taken too seriously." So, in essence, Dershowitz is saying, "The Sandmann's have a reasonable case that probably shouldn't be taken too seriously, therefore making it unreasonable." Okay then...
Then, after a single comma, Dershowitz goes on to suggest, "I mean the world was guilty of libel." So, according to him, every single person in the entire world was guilty of libel against Nick Sandmann and the rest of the Covington Catholic High School students whom were part of the well-documented confrontation. This then means Alan Dershowitz himself is guilty of libel. How idiotic is that? He's admitting to a crime. Oh, but as he'll utter in defense, "I didn't mean that literally." No, of course not, but how can you claim everyone was guilty of libel, not really mean it, and then go on to declare, of all the guilty parties, The Washington Post should be singled out? It'll be interesting to see Dershowitz's opinions on this subject moving forward to see if they "evolve" or stay consistent. If he stays true to his word, regardless of whom Sandmann and company try to sue, he'll respond to the lawsuit with, "I think they have a reasonable case, I mean the world was guilty of libel." It'll be even more interesting if a lawsuit is brought against him. "Mr. Dershowitz, you did say everyone was guilty of libel. Are you not someone?" Well, in my opinion he's not, so perhaps he'll have an argument, but I digress...
What bugged me the most about his commentary was the next line: "These poor kids seemed to be doing exactly the right thing, and then suddenly because they are thought to be white, privileged kids, suddenly everyone's ganging up on them." Seriously, in Black History Month of all months, Dershowitz wants to play the reverse-racism card and ask that we all pity "white, privileged kids"? Give me a frickin' break... Not only that, but where does he get the idea that these kids were "doing exactly the right thing"? Kids mocking Native Americans, at least one of whom happens to be a veteran, after attending a rally which supported stripping women of rights over their own bodies? To me, that sentiment reads, "These poor sexist, racist kids seemed to be doing exactly the right thing..."
As usual anymore, Dotard Dershowitz said exactly the wrong thing.
https://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/430728-dershowitz-says-covington-catholic-student-has-reasonable-case-against-the
"I think they have a reasonable case, I mean the world was guilty of libel. These poor kids seemed to be doing exactly the right thing, and then suddenly because they are thought to be white, privileged kids, suddenly everyone's ganging up on them. I'd be interested to see how the case unfolds. I mean they're asking for a lot of money, I don't think that's going to be taken too seriously. But I do think that they have a significant case and it will be interesting to see how the Post defends against their reporting in the case. It's important to air this issue out in the public, and one of the functions that a suit like this has is to lay it all out in the public. The media has to be responsible for their reporting particularly when you have kids who have no ability generally to defend themselves against media reporting."
Due to this statement alone, I think Alan can now accurately be referred to as Dotard Dershowitz. First off, he starts his spiel with, "I think they have a reasonable case," but then later contends that "...they're asking for a lot of money, I don't think that's going to be taken too seriously." So, in essence, Dershowitz is saying, "The Sandmann's have a reasonable case that probably shouldn't be taken too seriously, therefore making it unreasonable." Okay then...
Then, after a single comma, Dershowitz goes on to suggest, "I mean the world was guilty of libel." So, according to him, every single person in the entire world was guilty of libel against Nick Sandmann and the rest of the Covington Catholic High School students whom were part of the well-documented confrontation. This then means Alan Dershowitz himself is guilty of libel. How idiotic is that? He's admitting to a crime. Oh, but as he'll utter in defense, "I didn't mean that literally." No, of course not, but how can you claim everyone was guilty of libel, not really mean it, and then go on to declare, of all the guilty parties, The Washington Post should be singled out? It'll be interesting to see Dershowitz's opinions on this subject moving forward to see if they "evolve" or stay consistent. If he stays true to his word, regardless of whom Sandmann and company try to sue, he'll respond to the lawsuit with, "I think they have a reasonable case, I mean the world was guilty of libel." It'll be even more interesting if a lawsuit is brought against him. "Mr. Dershowitz, you did say everyone was guilty of libel. Are you not someone?" Well, in my opinion he's not, so perhaps he'll have an argument, but I digress...
What bugged me the most about his commentary was the next line: "These poor kids seemed to be doing exactly the right thing, and then suddenly because they are thought to be white, privileged kids, suddenly everyone's ganging up on them." Seriously, in Black History Month of all months, Dershowitz wants to play the reverse-racism card and ask that we all pity "white, privileged kids"? Give me a frickin' break... Not only that, but where does he get the idea that these kids were "doing exactly the right thing"? Kids mocking Native Americans, at least one of whom happens to be a veteran, after attending a rally which supported stripping women of rights over their own bodies? To me, that sentiment reads, "These poor sexist, racist kids seemed to be doing exactly the right thing..."
As usual anymore, Dotard Dershowitz said exactly the wrong thing.
https://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/430728-dershowitz-says-covington-catholic-student-has-reasonable-case-against-the
Comments
Post a Comment