Blog Posts Dan Snyder Could Sue Us For

The funny thing about Snyder threatening to sue the City Paper is that more people than ever will now read the piece he’s so upset about. Also funny? The next time someone writes that sort of piece they’ll be sure to include Snyder’s threat to sue the City Paper.

bingo-440.jpg

The scary thing is that, if Snyder is willing to sue the City Paper, call for Dave McKenna’s firing and charge Dan Steinberg with conspiracy (for linking?), he could come after anyone not conforming to his Ministry of Truthiness. He could come after us. And we don’t have any money.

So, if you happen to be a media law expert, please peruse this sampling of the 45 posts we’ve tagged with our Snyder Sucks category and make sure we’re in the clear. Because we don’t want Snyder suing us for:

Being the top result for “dan snyder we play physical we win”.

Having the audacity to google “dan snyder”.

Telling the story of fans getting kicked out of FedEx.

Having Carlos Rogers pose with a “Snyder Sucks” shirt.

Casting him and Vinny Cerrato in Dumb and Dumber.

Saying he treated Jason Campbell like shit.

Panning his commercial with Jerry Jones.

Calling him creepy for vacationing with Jones.

Listing his top 10 “Offseason Champs”.

Linking to the City Paper story to begin with.

12 thoughts on “Blog Posts Dan Snyder Could Sue Us For”

  1. This lawsuit idea is retarded on so many levels. Not the least of which is that there is no valid legal claim unless Snyder can prove that McKenna or the Examiner lied on purpose, an absolutely impossible task. In fact the suit would be so groundless and frivolous that Snyder’s lawyers would be sanctioned and Snyder would be forced to pay the Examiner’s legal fees. Any 2-bit ambulance chasing dipshit knows this very well.

    So it has to be either a PR move or an attempt to wear down the Examiner and/or McKenna. That Snyder thinks he can accomplish either of these goals tells us all we already know about the man in charge of our football team. What a stupid jack-ass.

  2. Off topic, but gotta vent. The latest from the asshole who came from the NY Times, you know, that powerhouse of sports reporting, presumably for scooping all DC reporters on MJ’s 43rd retirement announcement, and who promptly wrote one of his first pieces telling all of us how our support for our football team is tantamount to perpetuating a modern-day trail of tears, now furthers his hate for all things Washington sports in his newest article entitled “Coach Mike Krzyzewski, Duke basketball deserve respect, not hate” (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/01/AR2011020105950.html).

    Fuck you, you fucking fuck, Mike Wise. Your paper is over. You’re a hack. You’re now filling the role of Wilbon– self-inflated, know-nothing, opiniated fucktard par excellence. You carpet-bagging Yankee (that’s right, just 19th-centuried your ass). Eat shit. Write about that. Motherfucker.

  3. That wise article genuinely pissed me off. If I’m remembering correctly, I hate America..because I hate the coach K. What a fucking idiot.

  4. Oh yeah, and fuck the City Paper too. I stopped reading that hippie shit after they continued to publish anti-baseball in DC articles in 04′-05′ that were filled with lies, and quotes from dumb fucks who don’t matter/know shit. I haven’t read the Snyder article, but he’s probably right. That said, fuck Dan Snyder too.

  5. “So, if you happen to be a media law expert, please peruse this sampling of the 45 posts we’ve tagged with our Snyder Sucks category and make sure we’re in the clear. Because we don’t want Snyder suing us”

    I’m not a media law expert, but I’m a licensed attorney and basic libel law is on the bar exam. When it comes to libeling a public figure, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant acted with “actual malice.” This is extremely hard to prove in court and is one of the many reasons why these cases are relatively rare. Basically, acting with “actual malice” means that the person making the statement knew the statement to be false, or issued the statement with reckless disregard as to its truth.

    So, unless you guys were publishing a bunch of lies in an attempt to ruin Dan Snyder, you’re in the clear. Even if you published something that was obviously mean-spirited and fabricated, most of the time those sorts of articles are construed as parodies, which are perfectly legal.

    Long story short, you guys are good to go. I’m sure you already knew that and don’t really care, but I’m bored and hate Dan Snyder. Soooo, there’s some free legal advice.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>