Breitbart's Sherrod/NAACP story disintegrates

[meegbear]

Yesterday, Andrew Breitbart released heavily-edited video of a speech that Shirley Sherrod, then-USDA Georgia Director of Rural Development gave at the NAACP Freedom Fund dinner in Georgia this year. Breitbart writes that in the video, "this federally appointed executive bureaucrat lays out in stark detail, that her federal duties are managed through the prism of race and class distinctions."

But Breitbart's suggestion that Sherrod was describing actions that she recently took as an Obama administration official is clearly false.

In an interview with the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Sherrod said that her comments had been taken out of context, and that the story she had described took place decades ago, when she worked for the Federation of Southern Cooperative/Land Assistance Fund:

But Tuesday morning, Sherrod said what online viewers weren't told in reports posted throughout the day Monday was that the tale she told at the banquet happened 24 years ago -- before she got the USDA job -- when she worked with the Georgia field office for the Federation of Southern Cooperative/Land Assistance Fund.

Sherrod said the short video clip excluded the breadth of the story about how she eventually worked with the man over a two-year period to help ward off foreclosure of his farm, and how she eventually became friends with him and his wife.

"And I went on to work with many more white farmers," she said. "The story helped me realize that race is not the issue, it's about the people who have and the people who don't. When I speak to groups, I try to speak about getting beyond the issue of race."

The facts corroborate Sherrod's statements about when the story she described took place. In the video, Sherrod describes her work helping a "white farmer save his farm." Sherrod says in the video that she took the farmer to a lawyer who "had attended some of the training that we had provided, because Chapter 12 bankruptcy had just been enacted for the family farm."

Chapter 12 bankruptcy was enacted in 1986. In a June 2009 press release touting Sherrod's appointment to USDA, the Federation/LAF states that Sherrod had worked for them "Since 1985."

Breitbart has still yet to release the full video of Sherrod's speech.

In a CNN interview today, the wife of the farmer called Sherrod a "friend" and praised her for having "helped us save our farm."

http://mediamatters.org/blog/201007200030

[malaise]

1. Duh

Breitbart is going to fuck with the wrong person one of these days.

Be afraid white people - that's his only agenda.

[Karenina]

16. This is the "ACORN template" in motion.

:tinfoilhat:

[sabrina 1]

18. He won't since his targets are usually Democrats, mostly

minorities. Democrats don't fight back, which he is confident of.

After ACORN was thoroughly vindicated Democrats remained silent, despite the fact that many, many lives were ruined. They rushed to unconstitutionally defund ACORN, all but 75 House Dems, handing yet another victory to some of the lowest of the low political dirty tricksters in this country. The media helped. But there was no story about the many investigations that proved Breitbart/O'Keefe and Giles outright lied, broke the law in two states, and refused, until threatened with criminal prosecution, to hand over the unedited tapes.

What kind of country allows these people to have so much power to destroy decent people? And what kind of weak political Party cannot take them on with so much ammunition to destroy THEM, cannot demand an investigation into their funding, and put THEM out of business, instead of helping them in their quest to destroy minorities just as they begin to succeed in any way.

I am sick and tired of belonging to a party that cannot even fight morons like these who leave a trail of evidence against themselves in plain sight for someone to pick up. How can we expect the same party to fight off corporate influence on our government?

This case is a symptom of what is wrong with Democrats. They cannot fight, they'd rather be 'bi-partisan' making it easy even for bumbling fools like Breitbart to beat them over the head on a regular basis. It is embarrassing.

I want to belong to a party that FIGHTS for the people, that can handle morons like the vile Breitbart. This is just disgusting after all we went through with ACORN.

[BrklynLiberal]

23. I gotta agree with you 100%.

It is downright humiliating to see how easily the Democrats bend over and ask for more...betray their own.

[sabrina 1]

26. Lol, that cartoon

seems very appropriate. After a while you do feel embarrassed to say you are associated with such wimps.

[T Wolf]

2. Doesn't matter if it fades (or crashes) now. The damage is done. The Dems did not fight back.

The pukes move on to their next lie.

Rinse and repeat.

Until our side (a) decides it wants to work against the interests that drive the enemy and (b) actually take some (any?) actions to that end, nothing will change.

Democrats - poor defense and no offense. Not a way to win - but then, winning (on policy) is not their goal.

[disillusioned73]

5. Their lack of FIGHT is quite noticable and

at this point - complicit to an extent.

[AspenRose]

11. I agree.

[Gold Metal Flake]

8. Correct. Breitbart said "Jump", Obama Admin asked "how high?".

[jgraz]

25. Well, on the positive side, I'm sure Andrew Breitbart likes Obama now.

:eyes:

[Gold Metal Flake]

30. Yeah. He will be a guest poster.

No, I think Breibart (I don't care how it's spelled) is real awful ever-so busy trying to get ahold of the unedited version of the speech that he has not seen yet according to his own statements. Working hard. Like OJ.

[BrklynLiberal]

22. and a woman lost her job..and was publicly humiliated.

[jgraz]

24. Fight back? Jeebus, they tripped over themselves rushing to comply

[xchrom]

3. Lol! Poor breitbart - he's so well named. Nt

[guitar man]

4. she should sue his ass

until he is homeless :grr:

[wmbrew0206]

13. For what?

I don't like what happened but I don't see anything that he can be sued for.

Even if the tape was edited to leave things out, what was on there was not good as she does say "it is about white and black." I think she was using it as a teachable moment, but that is not something you want to be said in terms of race. Unless this video was edited in such a way where they cropped different sentences together or next to each other to make a totally new meaning, I don't see anything you could sue for.

[guitar man]

15. yeah, you're probably right

He figured out how to cover his ass is all he did was omit the whole story and just put out what he wanted people to hear that supports his slimy agenda, he learned from the acorn pimp and ho show he made up.

What he could really use is a good old fashioned ass whoopin' :evilgrin:

[wmbrew0206]

17. It is one of those thing about the world that people need to realize has changed

You have to assume now that anything you say if you are giving a speech or just talking in public will be recorded. Any part of that speech can be taken completely out of context and used against you.

[AspenRose]

27. I am reminded of Anita Dunn.

http://mediamatters.org/research/200910150044

There must be some special reserved place in hell for people who do these kinds of things.

[Chef Eric]

34. Are you suggesting Sherrod had it coming because she didn't speak in short soundbites? nt

[wmbrew0206]

41. No. I am suggesting that she should have tailored her speech so that

someone could not take snippets of it out of context and make her look bad.

[Chef Eric]

43. She should have done no such thing.

Do you think she regrets making that speech? I seriously doubt it. Nor should she regret it! It was a good speech, something she should be proud of.

[MadMaddie]

21. What about defamation of character and loss of her job?

The damage is real.

People need to start taking these people to court because the only thing they understand is money.

[wmbrew0206]

29. How could you prove defamation of character?

If the tape has not been spliced and the only editing done was just cutting of part of it, then all that tape shows is Ms Sherrod giving part of her speech. You can say someone defamed you by replaying part of your speech that you gave (even if it has been cut short.)

[Chef Eric]

35. It's not the video that amounts to defamation. It's Fox News' false conclusions about it.

O'Reilly talked about her racist behavior, when in fact there was no racist behavior. She was accused of "hurting" a white farmer, when in fact she helped him.

[wmbrew0206]

36. You are not going to able to sue over that.

[LanternWaste]

39. Juan Carlos Vera of ACORN is involved in a lawsuit against...

Juan Carlos Vera of ACORN is involved in a lawsuit against O'Keefe for posting the tapes on the Internet without his consent, causing him to lose his job and other damages. Though specifically done under CA law, I imagine there are other states and other statutes which could quite easily be applied in this instance...

[wmbrew0206]

42. I don't think that applies here because Ms. Sherrod knew she was being taped.

*

[LanternWaste]

44. Part and parcel of the current lawsuit has to do with damage from libel

Part and parcel of the current lawsuit has to do with damage from libel, not from lack of knowledge of taping... so yes, I think it may apply.

[wmbrew0206]

45. I disagree but we'll see if any action is taken on it.

[Rebubula]

6. Pretty weak

The response from Vilsack and the other officials (including the head of the NAACP) was weak and knee jerk reactionary.

Too bad people tend to react before thinking many times.

[soleft]

7. So then why in the hell did she have to resign??????????

We have got to stop caving into this shit.

[Gold Metal Flake]

9. Because Democrats in power have no guts to fight the conservative media machine.

The corporate conservative media machine is our greatest enemy. Greater even than BP or the Pentagon.

[meegbear]

10. I gotta feeling she'll be rehired very quickly

[Blue Owl]

12. Brightfart's phony credibility is more important than the actual truth

Never fear -- the Shitstream Media is on the case.

[Kingofalldems]

14. K and R for the teabaggers and freepers

[Scurrilous]

19. K & R

:thumbsup:

[chat_noir]

20. breitbart being refudiated on Twitter

http://twitter.com/#search?q=%40andrewbreitbart

http://twitter.com/#search?q=%40breitbart

http://twitter.com/#search?q=%23breitbart

[AspenRose]

28. That ass Breitbart is going to be on John King later today

I can only imagine how THAT interview's going to go, knowing what I know about John King. :eyes:

[JoePhilly]

31. I'd like for some one on the left to crawl up this guys ass with a micro-scope.

Clearly he is without sin.

[meegbear]

32. kick

[SpiralHawk]

33. Any decent person would shut off the Republicon propaganda borg altogether

Anyone still sucking up their obvious lies and spin has only themself to blame for the misinformation Fox, Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, O'Reilly, Brietbart and the other Chickenhawk Republicon propaganda pimps spew...

[sam kane]

37. Is the point of this phony story to displace the BP story?

If so, it seems to be working, based on the number of threads here.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

38. I think the release timing was more to distract from the unemployment extension

And the Dems breaking the Republican filibuster.

[Jim__]

40. And right now MSNBC has a huge headline saying it was never about Sherrod.

Breitbart is still spinning - all over the media - and the media are still dutifully reporting what he says. Here