Get PJ Media on your Apple

Rule of Law

Breitbart (and PJ Media) vs. Shirley Sherrod

July 9th, 2014 - 2:54 pm

Beginning in early April, the crack legal team representing Sherrod commenced a two-month long escapade trying to serve me with the subpoena. Shirley Sherrod better hope her lawyers are better at examining witnesses at trial than they are serving the subpoenas to get them there.

Process servers attempted to serve the subpoena on me on days when Google could have told you I was speaking at a Chicago law school. When I was out of town, process servers tried to serve process. But when I was in town and appearing live with Megyn Kelly on Fox News multiple times with the Capitol Dome in the background, no attempt was made to serve me at a place they were certain to find me. Nobody came to my office when I was there day after day. Sherrod’s team even took to paying someone to sit outside my house in a car, naturally on days I was in downtown Washington, D.C., scheduled to give a well-publicized talk at the Cato Institute (which is where I was ultimately served).

The company Sherrod hired to serve me boasts about being able to serve difficult process.  But there’s no mention of how good they are at serving easy to find people like me.  The answer is they aren’t very good.

Someone must have money to burn, especially in this purportedly pro-bono lawsuit.

But Sherrod’s lawsuit isn’t about justice and doing what is right. If it were, after Andrew died in 2012, a person who seeks discernment would have told her lawyers not to seek money from widows raising fatherless children. Sherrod’s case isn’t about justice; it’s about shutting up the new and increasingly powerful conservative media.

Recently, a best-selling author with a book launch this summer told me that his publisher nixed all of the perfectly truthful material in his manuscript about Sherrod because of her twitchy trigger finger. Breitbart News can’t touch Sherrod while the litigation is ongoing. Apart from PJ Media, Twitchy, the Daily Caller and few others, hardly anyone even covered the disgraceful story of Sherrod dragging Suzy Breitbart into the lawsuit.

Sherrod’s lawsuit may eventually fail in court, but her lawsuit is winning where it really counts: bullying conservative media.

PJ Media, on the other hand, isn’t going to stay silent. From this posting forward, we will continue to cover Sherrod’s effort to obtain a monetary judgment against Andrew Breitbart’s widow. We’ll cover the ongoing litigation. We’ll cover any effort to take funds which would otherwise be used by Suzy for the raising and education of her four fatherless children. We’ll be covering my deposition later this month.

We will also be examining an inside-the-Beltway big law firm culture that would take Sherrod’s case pro bono in the first place, and look closely at the other pro bono cases Kirkland and Ellis has taken, for free. Here’s a preview: they have an uncanny ideological homogeneity. (More on the law firm representing Sherrod, Kirkland and Ellis, here, here and here.)

So my deposition is scheduled for later this month. In June, I provided Sherrod documents pursuant to the subpoena, including emails to editors at PJ Media about the case and stories about how Sherrod’s law firm once represented a Nazi slave labor camp guard from Treblinka.  (See, 782 F.2d 1374.)

Sherrod Lawyer Alex Stege

Sherrod lawyer Alex Stege

Not satisfied with my document response, Alex Stege, the junior of junior associates on Sherrod’s case expressed blustery dismay to my lawyer, former Justice Department official Robert Driscoll. Driscoll’s response to Sherrod’s lawyer is a story in itself. Every lawyer who has confronted overbroad discovery demands and grand pomp from opposing counsel would enjoy Driscoll’s response. A snip:

In response to my production to you of every document in my client’s possession, custody or control that is responsive to your subpoena, you chose to write an accusatory, inaccurate, and self-serving letter to me (dated July 3, 2014) instead of picking up the phone and having a conversation. Having worked at large law firms for the better part of 20 years during my career, I can only presume that your decision to write (on impressive Kirkland & Ellis stationary, no less, rather than in email) instead of call signals that you intend your letter to serve as “Exhibit A” to some discovery motion currently being crafted deep within the bowels of Kirkland & Ellis by associates eager to escape yet another soul-deadening document review for a brief, pro bono, taste of the adversarial process. Should such a motion come to fruition, which I certainly hope is not the case, I have made the life of your paralegal or secretary a bit easier by labeling this letter “Exhibit B.” Please include it with your letter should you chose to file a motion.

Another:

To recap briefly: you subpoenaed my client, a non-party to the litigation captioned above, and, on his behalf, I produced the few responsive documents in his possession. I glean that you are disappointed that Mr. Adams, like most normal people who are not parties to lawsuits, is not in possession of many documents, particularly emails, from 2010, i.e., four years ago. . (Cf Tommy Vietor, spokesperson for former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, in response to questions about events in Benghazi in 2012: “Dude, this was two years ago.”)

You can, and should, read the whole thing here.

I’ll be reporting much more on the saga of Shirley Sherrod vs. Suzy Breitbart, Larry O’Connor and the in terrorem defendant not mentioned in the pleadings, Conservative Media.

Until then, ponder why members of the NAACP audience laughed out loud at this statement by Shirley Sherrod about a white farmer – “What he didn’t know while he was taking all that time trying to show me he was superior to me was I was trying to decide just how much help I was going to give him.”

<- Prev  Page 2 of 2   View as Single Page

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
She should be in jail after admitting what she did. That's a fraud on her employer and on white people. Oh that's right, white privilege doesn't extend quite that far does it?
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
pro malo masquerading as pro bono.
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
Why on Gaia would a law firm take a case pro bono for a client with assets apparently in the low eight figures at minimum? Could it be that the law firm is part of the lawfare that the left has been waging against the right for decades, a way to contribute to the cause of despotism without having to worry about declaring it as a political donation?
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (34)
All Comments   (34)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
Let me see if I get this straight: Shirley wants millions from Breitbart and PJmedia for pointing out what she has done is illegal. Why it MUST be RACISM. After all, both Jesse and Al have profited greatly by doing the same, why shouldn't she? It beats the Hell out of working.
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
Isn't Sherrod's case a lot like George Zimmerman's suit against NBC, which was thrown out. Public figure; selective editing, etc.
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
No. Breitbart committed no selective editing, and Zimmerman was no public figure in any sense before the MSM began to spread deliberate lies about him.
23 weeks ago
23 weeks ago Link To Comment
Let’s hope that the federal government isn’t filled with many other employees who share Sherrod’s old (and unconstitutional) attitude about helping Americans based on skin color. Let’s hope they hold the views of the redeemed Sherrod, not the racialist Sherrod.

A forlorn hope at best. And I'm not at all convinced that Sherrod has changed her stripes.
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
"Sherrod’s law firm once represented a Nazi slave labor camp guard from Treblinka." -Well there's plenty of evidence the guy was innocent. http://youtu.be/4OhMxPFaZVM
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
And plenty of evidence he was not, including the findings of a court of law:

Despite Kairys' protests, the record supports the district court's findings.10 There is sufficient testimony and other evidence for the trial court to have found that the Personalbogen correctly identified the defendant as a Nazi labor camp guard at Treblinka. The district court relied primarily on the fact that defendant's thumbprint appears on the identity card, supported by expert testimony that the signature on the card was the defendant's. 600 F.Supp. at 1262. In addition, other camp guards placed a Kairys at Treblinka, some of whom identified the defendant's picture. A witness testified that he observed Kairys in a German SS uniform in late 1943 or early 1944. Promotion and other personnel records indicate that a Kairys trained at Trawniki, was transferred to Treblinka, and was promoted to Oberwachmann. Finally, personal records, such as a baptismal certificate and a newspaper citizenship notice, fix the defendant's birth date as December 24, 1920, and birthplace as Svilionys (then under Polish sovereignty), rather than December 20, 1924, in Kuanas, Lithuania. These were all credibility determinations for the trier of fact to make. We cannot say that the district court was clearly erroneous in deciding the facts as it did.
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
I highly recommend reading the entire response letter at the link Mr Adams provided. Truly, it is a gem.

I had to deal with some response to Discovery several times over the years due to the obsession that my wife’s ex-husband has for her, and his seven year running use of lawfare to harass her. We won some and lost some, and once after we lost big we figured we could lose big for free, and started handling lesser complexity motions In Pro Per. I believe that is an abbreviation for the Latin In propria persona,, which when translated means “we don’t have no lawyer.”

I would have loved to have written a response to Discovery letter such as the one Mr Driscoll wrote, such as when they demanded 20 years of all bank statements, etc... The best I got to do was to respond, line by line, “Unable to comply because the request is ambiguous, incomprehensible and/or unintelligible.” The knuckleheads had copied and pasted their verbiage from the dissolution proceedings and had not bothered to update the language. We didn’t get any further Discovery after that.

Back to the issue at hand, I believe Mr Adams has it right, to publicize and personalize the thuggish actions of the leftist tyrants. We may not win every battle, but like the old fighter pilot mantra we can make sure they work damn hard for it. And if we fight back, rather than complaining about their bullying tactics, we will start winning.
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
We've missed your posts. Are there any updates on the situation in Mississippi?
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
"Now, Shirley Sherrod has served a subpoena on me, your author, to testify in a deposition in the litigation and turn over documents and emails between Andrew Brietbart and me. We’ll return to my subpoena in a moment."

Wasn't your computer manufactured by the same company as Lois Lerner's computer? Problem solved.
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
Poster child for gaming the system, hypocrisy, and accepted forms of racism.

And a parasitical ingrate of the highest order.
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
she will serve as a "model" to blacks everywhere...
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
It's very nice to see you joining Mark Steyn in active resistance to this disgusting type of lawfare.
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
Tell them your hard drive crashed and all the emails they want have been lost.
24 weeks ago
24 weeks ago Link To Comment
1 2 3 Next View All