"Winter Soldiers" Drop Lawsuit to Avoid Depositions

Discussion in 'Politics' started by carpro, Jul 26, 2006.

  1. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,897
    Likes Received:
    294
    http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2006/07/17/vietnam_veterans_drop_suit_over_2004_anti_kerry_film/

    Vietnam veterans drop suit over 2004 anti-Kerry film
    By Maryclaire Dale, Associated Press Writer | July 17, 2006

    PHILADELPHIA --Several Vietnam War veterans who sued over a documentary about Sen. John Kerry's anti-war activities have dropped their libel suits, leaving just one lawsuit pending over the controversial 2004 film.

    Filmmaker Carlton Sherwood says the outcome shows the suits were frivolous complaints filed by Kerry operatives to try to block the film's release in the final weeks of the presidential race.

    "We've always believed that Kerry controlled these lawsuits," Sherwood said Monday. He said the suits were dropped as depositions got under way. "We also felt we were getting a tad too close to the truth about Kerry."
     
  2. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,303
    Likes Received:
    784
    Imagine that!
     
  3. Daisy

    Daisy
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2003
    Messages:
    7,751
    Likes Received:
    0
    From the article:
     
  4. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,897
    Likes Received:
    294
    Where was his concern for his family before he filed his suit. Did the fool not think he would be deposed?

    It was a sham, politically orchestrated lawsuit from the getgo.

    Now we all know he's a fraud in one way or the other.
     
  5. genesis12

    genesis12
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2005
    Messages:
    799
    Likes Received:
    1
    And jerk Kerry is tooling up for another run.........
     
  6. Daisy

    Daisy
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2003
    Messages:
    7,751
    Likes Received:
    0
    Perhaps he didn't consider that his friends and family would be.

    I'm not convinced; you've in no way proved Cambell to be a fraud.

    Libel trials are always difficult, especially where political speech is involved. Since Cambell and Bjornson are not politicians, it may be difficult to prove that they were harmed enough to recoup the lawyers' fees by the film's deceit. What would they be likely to gain at this point by pursuing vindictiveness?
     
  7. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,897
    Likes Received:
    294
    Nice rationalization. But backwards. Proving libel is tons harder for politicians. It would be easier for Campbell. He just had no case to start with.

    It won't fly but it was a good effort.:applause:

    I don't have to prove Campbell is a fraud. He did it himself
     
  8. Daisy

    Daisy
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2003
    Messages:
    7,751
    Likes Received:
    0
    You misunderstood - not proving libel, but proving harm from the libel is difficult.

    Burden of proof is on the one making the claim - it is you who is claiming fraud. Merely asserting it over and over and over may seem good enough for you, but that is an excruciatingly bad arguement.

    You maintain that his dropping the lawsuit proved him a fraud? He gave an explanation for it which I found plausible and which you have done nothing to discredit. The ball is in your court, but you're correct, you don't have to hit it.
     
  9. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,897
    Likes Received:
    294
    And I don't.

    I don't believe we've ever disagreed before, have we, Daisy?

    His godfather, Kerry, probably told him to not be deposed under any circumstances.:smilewinkgrin: The likely scenario was to file suit to harass Sherwood, cause him to spend a lot of money defending , and drop it before you have to go under oath.

    Where was his concern for his family before he filed his suit. Did the fool not think he would be deposed? He is either stupid beyond all imagination or it was just a harrassment suit to begin with. IMHO:smilewinkgrin:
     
  10. The Galatian

    The Galatian
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    9,687
    Likes Received:
    0
    Do you think Kerry is hiding under your bed, carpro? Is there anything in the world that scares or annoys you that you don't think Kerry is responsible for?
     
  11. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,897
    Likes Received:
    294
    I'm not easily frightened. Psalms 27:1 will tell you why.

    Kerry is a bit of snake as well as a traitor but he's not responsible for other peoples gullibility. He just enjoys it.
     
  12. The Galatian

    The Galatian
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    9,687
    Likes Received:
    0
    Good heavens, carpro, you are obsessed. Were you asleep in class when they told you what "treason" meant?

    Except in the Republican party and Cuba, disagreeing with the government is not treason.
     
  13. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,897
    Likes Received:
    294
    It appears that your obsession is with personal attacks instead of dealing with the subject.

    However, you are correct. Disagreeing with the government is not treason. Aiding and abetting the enemy in time of war is. Kerry is an unprosecuted traitor in the same category as Jane Fonda.

    Try sticking to the subject. Here's a hint. It is not me. Nor you.
     
  14. El_Guero

    El_Guero
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    0
    Kerry just proves that the rich have always gotten away with things. The cowards just buy their way out of military service, combat, driving their woman friend into chappaquiddick, or other mayhem.

    I am not perfect, but I thank God that my clean slate comes from the Blood of my Risen Savior and not from filthy lucre.
     
  15. El_Guero

    El_Guero
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    0
    PS

    Carpro, I don't know if we have agreed on anything, much of anything, or everything - but, we agree on Kerry!

    Any coward that would tell his daughter such evil bedtime stories, and scare the children of thousands of other patriotic families, has a scary political agenda.

    What happened to the legacy of the filthy rich dying for their country? What happened to pledging one's wealth to make America a better place to live?

    Patrick Henry's sacrifice was not a waste of human life, but if one does not believe in his sacrifice then move to france.
     
  16. El_Guero

    El_Guero
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    0

    May be found at: http://www.historyplace.com/speeches/henry.htm
     
  17. The Galatian

    The Galatian
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    9,687
    Likes Received:
    0
    Aiding and abetting the enemy would be something like going AWOL from your unit. Disagreeing with the government's war policy is not treason. You've confused Bush with Kerry.

    You know how Fonda and Kerry differ from Bush?

    Kerry and Fonda actually went to Vietnam. Fonda to help them, and Kerry to defeat them, but they still went. Dubya went AWOL.

    What do you think Kerry did that was as bad as Bush walking away from his pledge to defend the US?
     
  18. El_Guero

    El_Guero
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    0
    googling your words might help a little with your politic.

    Bush did not go awol.
     
  19. El_Guero

    El_Guero
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    0
    If you want reason - then don't go from protecting a coward like kerry to throwing around the name of a rich traitor like hanoi jane.

    And before you bring in the jane game, you might want to buy replacement windows, hang 5 layers of carpet inside all exterior walls, doors, and windows. I would also suggest moving way out of state - iraq might be a good move.

    Just remember - I am not one of the ones that would hate you forever for your ignorant use of that woman's name. But, I have accidentally mentioned her name (about a movie she was in), and I was verbally attacked for treasonous activity.

    She got a lot of our boys killed. I have forgiven, not forgotten, but some have not even thought about forgiving her.
     
  20. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,897
    Likes Received:
    294
    Why do you try to misdirect the issue? We are not discussing Bush. Can you not ever stay on subject?

    Now, for your information, treason and AWOL are not anything alike.

    Kerry, as far as I know, was never AWOL. Whether or not Bush was AWOL simply is not germaine to the issue.

    But Kerry did aid and abet the enemy in time of war. He even did it while an officer in the U.S. Navy Reserve. According to the Constitution, that makes him a traitor.
     
    #20 carpro, Jul 29, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 29, 2006

Share This Page

Loading...