You have to LOVE Nevada Politics... Governor Jim Gibbons, Hanky Panky?

A very good colleague and friend of this site, George Knapp, has broken a story about Nevada Governor Jim Gibbons allegedly involved with some hanky panky and "bags of money" from a developer...

While it never really surprises me to see stories like this ( a sad comment about our government as a whole), this story has the added "feature" of the Governor, himself, calling the news station and threatening to sue George and his producer personally, and their station KLAS TV in Las Vegas, if they run with it.

What's stunning about that is the "story" comes from a sworn deposition in the Nevada Courts.

It's PUBLIC RECORD.

Now the reality is this is the testimony of one woman, there hasn't been any corroboration of her claims that I know of and it may all be hog wash like the Governor says it is.

But to threaten to SUE a reporter, personally, and a news station for reporting the sworn testimony of another person is absolutely laughable and STUPID IMHO.

Anyway, here's a link to the report from George, make of it what you will...

www.lasvegasnow.com...

This is TRUE "US Political MADNESS"!

Springer...

Just remember all the stories we see about politicians are only about the ones that got caught in the act.

Sounds like the 'one law for them and one for us" syndrome rearing its ugly head.

How viable would a lawsuit be in this case I wonder. Not very, unless I'm totally ignorant about Nevada's civil law.

reply to post by Springer


we have a little of that US political madness going on over here on the east coast with Hiram Monserrate. ( he was acquitted of slashing his girlfriends face, which there was no dispute it happened not to mention video footage of him dragging her violently around).

nydailynews.c om

[edit on 2/11/2010 by homeskillet]


mod edit, attempt to fix link

[edit on Thu Feb 11 2010 by DontTreadOnMe]

Did you ever consider that he plans to sue because the claim is false and is slanderous. Not because he's trying to cover his ass?

Goofy

Gonna go out on a limb, here and say, although I don't know George Knapp, I listen to him often on coast to coast. guy always struck me as a straight shooter. I doubt he would have run the story if he didn't "have it".

Originally posted by Maxmars
Sounds like the 'one law for them and one for us" syndrome rearing its ugly head.

I am not sure if that is the case but this guy clearly does not want this info to get out there... Even though it is already in the public domain where anyone can see it...

Why would he not want this to get out? Because it could ruin his career as a politician.... I must admit, that if the allegations were untrue, he would be busy saying that rather than, " I am going to sue"....

I cannot see any judge being willing to hear this case, if the info was already public domain though.... So I don't think our friend has ANYTHING to worry about.

Besides, he has the support of the people... The cheating politicians we hear about every other day? Not so much.

When it comes to Public Figures, the first amendment prevents a successful defamation suit unless the speaker intentionally or recklessly made false statements. Here, the governor is clearly a public figure. His defamation suit will be thrown out unless he can prove the news station made false statements about him knowing the statements were false or having a reckless disregard for the truth. This is unlikely because the news station will probably have some evidence which suggests the governor did all the things they said he did.

Originally posted by liketheplague

Did you ever consider that he plans to sue because the claim is false and is slanderous. Not because he's trying to cover his ass?

That is what Gibbons is claiming. From the article :

And I want to tell you that every statement in that deposition, that you must have possession of, is an absolute lie and I plan to litigate for slander and libel against you personally, George Knapp personally and your station if you put it out there," he said on a voicemail message.

Now why he thinks he can sue napp and the station for reporting what some one else said is what I do not get... The claim is public domain and Napp has every right in the world to report it.

If he is to sue someone for slander it needs to be the ones who are making the claims, not the ones reporting them.

Goofy

Are you calling another member goofy? Or are you saying that the idea that he is suing to cover it up, is goofy? I ask because I have a problem with one of those...


[edit on 11-2-2010 by gimme_some_truth]

reply to post by homeskillet


a little?

this is tame compared to what we have in NY.

it is, sadly, politics as usual. for all nations.

politicians are power seekers, they are ego driven. they reach an office and they think they are above the law.

reply to post by Springer


Well this witness didnt have much to back out her claim. Maybe, just maybe Gibbons doesnt want disinformation to get out there, he may be innocent..... although to sue a station for merely reporting what was probably already public makes me wonder why his jumping around? If he is innocent, why act as if he has something to hide?

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
If he is innocent, why act as if he has something to hide?

I find myself pondering that exact question... Why is he behaving as a guilty party (IMO) if he is innocent...?

Originally posted by Crakeur
reply to post by homeskillet

 

a little?

this is tame compared to what we have in NY.

it is, sadly, politics as usual. for all nations.

politicians are power seekers, they are ego driven. they reach an office and they think they are above the law.

well, yeah agreed. for us here in Jersey we just had a little bit of vindication with the guilty verdict for Leona Beldini(Jersey City's deputy mayor busted in a big crack down on corruption in nj for those not from around here) on her bribery charges.

www.nj.com... al_dw_2.html.

i also agree that the egomania of politicians is way out of control but alas i fear that you may actually require a huge ego just to get anywhere in that profession. its a catch 22

The story may be hokey but you're right. The threat to sue is stupid and I hope they take him up on it. Gibbons is most likely an adulterer and was definitely involved with another man's wife. His conduct was like President Clinton and he should have resigned. How disgusting so nothing about him surprises me.

Originally posted by gimme_some_truth

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
If he is innocent, why act as if he has something to hide?

I find myself pondering that exact question... Why is he behaving as a guilty party (IMO) if he is innocent...?

because slander can ruin your reputation and destroy your career and or life. whether its true or not its still damaging either way. imagine trying to erase the negative opinions of people who have already made up their mind after youve been vindicated. you know how it is, we have short attention spans so we'll read the first headline but barely take the time to read the follow up stories down the road so its the initial story that sticks.


anyway, the big question is will we ever get anymore news reports on UFO's from George Knapp again?

[edit on 2/11/2010 by homeskillet]

reply to post by Southern Guardian


That leads me to think that it may be one of those "even bad publicity is better than none" moments... but it does seem that his legal action indicates what would appear to be a reckless one.

I suppose we are to assume that justice will be done; I am inclined to think Mr. Knapp knows what he's doing.

Originally posted by homeskillet
because slander can ruin your reputation and destroy your career and or life.

But then why target the station for merely reporting over this womans accusation? Why doesnt he simply go out there and take this with those spreading these accusations so in that way he can clarify his innocence and the media can get it right.

imagine trying to erase the negative opinions of people who have already made up their mind after youve been vindicated.

Well then I'd target those people specifically, not necessarily those spreading the rumors as they are not the core to the problem. By not doing this I make myself appear as though I am hiding something.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

Originally posted by homeskillet

imagine trying to erase the negative opinions of people who have already made up their mind after youve been vindicated.

Well then I'd target those people specifically, not necessarily those spreading the rumors as they are not the core to the problem. By not doing this I make myself appear as though I am hiding something.

i meant more the court of public opinion so im not sure how you would go about repairing your credibility.


on another note, from a legal standpoint would the fact that he will be going through a lawsuit involving the station keep them from discussing details involving the stories? i know when youre going through a suit you arent supposed to go around talking about it so im curious if this would put a hold on their ability to talk about it at least temporarily