To be fair it was probably also that map with the sniper crosshairs over Gifford’s face as well.
Courtesy of Yahoo News:
Sarah Palin said in an amended defamation lawsuit against the New York Times on Monday that the deep-seated “animosity and ill-will” of the newspaper’s editorial page editor toward her motivated him to falsely link her to a mass shooting.
Palin, the 2008 Republican vice presidential candidate and former Alaska governor, made her claim against the editor, James Bennet, nearly five months after the federal appeals court in Manhattan revived her lawsuit, saying it had been wrongly dismissed by the trial judge.
“Gov. Palin brings this action because Mr. Bennet and The Times did not live up to the primary responsibility attendant to the extraordinary power of the press: tell the truth,” the complaint said.
A spokeswoman for the Times declined to comment.
Palin is seeking damages “far in excess” of $75,000. Her lawyers did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
The lawsuit arose from a June 14, 2017 editorial that Palin said wrongly linked her to the January 2011 mass shooting where six people died and Arizona congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was seriously wounded.
That editorial said Palin’s political action committee had circulated a map that put Giffords and 19 other Democrats under “stylized crosshairs” before the congresswoman was shot.
First I have to point out the incredible hypocrisy of Sarah Palin demanding that anybody else tell the truth.
You first lady!
I swear I thought Palin was dragging this case out simply to keep her name in the papers, but then I read this at the Washington Examiner:
According to court papers amended Monday, Palin is seeking “punitive damages in an amount to be proven at trial far in excess of $75,000.” The filing calls for “restitution in the form of The Times’ advertising revenues attributable to the Palin Article.”
So essentially Palin wants to be paid the amount that the New York Times earned in ad revenue from the article about her.
Remember how she used to say that she wanted Tina Fey to pay for her kids dental work from the money she made through her impressions?
Well, this is kind of the same thing.
She does not want others to profit from impressions or articles that show her in a bad light.
But it really makes no damn difference in the end.
We know what she did, and we know that she does not feel a scintilla of remorse for it.
Suing the New York Times will never change those facts.