Rush Limbaugh has a massive national radio audience five days a week, three hours a day.
On Saturday, Limbaugh also got a piece of the print media audience. He wrote an op-ed piece that appeared in the Wall Street Journal, "The Race Card, Football and Me."
Of course, Limbaugh couldn't discuss his experience without mentioning race baiter Al Sharpton and the role he played in the high-tech lynching.
David Checketts, an investor and owner of sports teams, approached me in late May about investing in the St. Louis Rams football franchise. As a football fan, I was intrigued. I invited him to my home where we discussed it further. Even after informing him that some people might try to make an issue of my participation, Mr. Checketts said he didn't much care. I accepted his offer.
It didn't take long before my name was selectively leaked to the media as part of the Checketts investment group. Shortly thereafter, the media elicited comments from the likes of Al Sharpton. In 1998 Mr. Sharpton was found guilty of defamation and ordered to pay $65,000 for falsely accusing a New York prosecutor of rape in the 1987 Tawana Brawley case. He also played a leading role in the 1991 Crown Heights riot (he called neighborhood Jews "diamond merchants") and 1995 Freddie's Fashion Mart riot.
Sharpton didn't like that. He's threatening to sue Limbaugh because of the op-ed.
The Rev. Al Sharpton on Saturday threatened to sue conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh for writing in a column that the civil rights leader played a role in two New York race riots.
In a column published by the Wall Street Journal on Saturday about his derailed bid to become part-owner of the St. Louis Rams, he accuses Sharpton and the Rev. Jesse Jackson of making comments that helped get him booted from a group that was trying to buy the NFL team.
Limbaugh derided Sharpton as having played "a leading role in the 1991 Crown Heights riot" and the "1995 Freddie's Fashion Mart riot."
Those comments prompted a quick retort from Sharpton, who called both allegations false.
Sharpton was not present for or involved in the rioting in Brooklyn's Crown Heights section in August 1991, during which hundreds of blacks were involved in attacks on the neighborhood's Jewish residents. He did deliver a eulogy at the funeral of the youth whose death in a traffic accident triggered the violence, but that didn't happen until the violence ended.
Sharpton also wasn't present on Dec. 8, 1995, when a lone, black gunman burst into Freddie's Fashion Mart, a Jewish-owned business in Harlem, started shooting and set the building on fire. Seven people died. There was no riot.
Sharpton's organization had, like other black groups, been involved in picketing the business over its plans to expand into space occupied by a black-owned business, but he said he couldn't be blamed for the madman's rampage.
"Unless Mr. Limbaugh apologizes and clarifies his statements, attorneys for Rev. Sharpton will move forward with a lawsuit," said a written statement released Saturday by Sharpton's spokeswoman. "He has the right to criticize Rev. Sharpton, but he does not have the right to accuse him of criminal activity, and riots and murders are criminal."
Clearly, this Associated Press account takes Sharpton's side, arguing in his favor and treating him sympathetically.
I don't think Limbaugh accused Sharpton of committing murder or rioting. Words have meaning. Read what Limbaugh wrote in the op-ed.
Limbaugh saying that Sharpton played a role in the Crown Heights riot and the Freddie's Fashion Mart violence isn't the same as accusing him of criminal activity.
Limbaugh doesn't define the role at all. He doesn't get into specifics.
Sharpton didn't have to be there during the rioting to have played a role in the events. Making inflammatory statements can incite others to act out violently and there's no question that he did make statements that were incendiary.
Did Sharpton's commentary increase tensions and prompt people to riot? Perhaps. Perhaps not. In either case, his public statements are undeniable.
Sharpton's remarks, "diamond merchants" and "white interloper," aren't debatable. He said those things. Sharpton can't rewrite history nor can he deny his involvement in those disturbances.
I think Sharpton is threatening to sue Limbaugh just to change the subject. Sharpton can't be too comfortable with having Limbaugh detail his inglorious history.
It's funny that Sharpton is making threats because he claims Limbaugh made false statements about him.
Sharpton is painting himself as the victim in this saga.
Priceless.
No comments:
Post a Comment