|
It's about time.
Update, 726/2014: The Daily Kos is reporting Beck's defense in this trial.
Malice? When was Glenn Beck not intending to do harm, to President Obama (mentioning "impeachment" for the first time) and by the lies told about him, to Alharbi during that period? At least Beck is not trying to claim that he told the truth about Alharbi. That would be easy to disprove in court.
Hopefully, Alharbi has a good lawyer.
Update, 12/02/2014: Mediaite is reporting that the judge in this lawsuit, Judge Patty Saris, is allowing the lawsuit to move forward after Beck's lawyers asked to have the suit thrown out. She wrote that Beck “made numerous bogus claims about Alharbi on his radio show, even after he was cleared by the FBI.” She shot down the idea Rahman Ali Alharbi attempted to “thrust himself into a controversy;” so he does not fall into various categories of what constitutes a public figure.
She concludes:
Update, 726/2014: The Daily Kos is reporting Beck's defense in this trial.
Alharbi sued Beck for defamation in federal court in late March. And now, in a batch of little-noticed motions, Beck has lashed back, saying Alharbi is trying to “punish” and impede Beck’s First Amendment rights. Beck argues the bombings made Alharbi a “limited purpose” and “involuntary” public figure who must prove not just that Beck made false accusations, but that Beck did it with “actual malice.”The author adds, "Alharbi became an 'involuntary' public figure in large part because Glenn Beck insisted on making him one; once Glenn Beck made him one, you have to prove that Glenn Beck acted with malice when he supposed that the English student was a 'proven terrorist' and the 'money man' behind the horrific act."
Malice? When was Glenn Beck not intending to do harm, to President Obama (mentioning "impeachment" for the first time) and by the lies told about him, to Alharbi during that period? At least Beck is not trying to claim that he told the truth about Alharbi. That would be easy to disprove in court.
Hopefully, Alharbi has a good lawyer.
Update, 12/02/2014: Mediaite is reporting that the judge in this lawsuit, Judge Patty Saris, is allowing the lawsuit to move forward after Beck's lawyers asked to have the suit thrown out. She wrote that Beck “made numerous bogus claims about Alharbi on his radio show, even after he was cleared by the FBI.” She shot down the idea Rahman Ali Alharbi attempted to “thrust himself into a controversy;” so he does not fall into various categories of what constitutes a public figure.
She concludes:
As a private figure, Alharbi is not required to allege actual malice in order to make out a claim for defamation. Instead, the level of fault required on the defendants’ part is merely negligence… The facts alleged in Alharbi’s complaint easily permit an inference that the defendants were negligent as to the truthfulness of their reports after the authorities cleared his name. The Court need not determine whether the allegations create a plausible claim of actual malice.The judge's full opinion can be read here (pdf) on the Politico website.
For a summary about Glenn Beck, see "Becoming Paul Revere"
For a Mormon criticism of Mr. Beck, see "Rough Stone Soaring"Before more people start tuning into Beck's reactionary, yellow propaganda,get involved!Post a commentAll non-spam comments approvedFree speech is practiced here------------------------------------------------------Please get involved for 10 minuteshttp://sharethisurlaboutglennbeck.comThank you
