Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Sharron Angle: We're going to "pursue" Harry Reid for reposting my Web site -- possibly in court

Now that the Harry Reid campaign has reposted Sharron Angle's previous campaign Web site advertising her Tea Partying positions, Angle may be heading to court to stop him.

That's what Angle said on a Nevada radio station this morning. Asked by her host whether she intends to pursue Reid in court, Angle said: "We are going to pursue it. I don't think that Harry is above the law."

In case you missed the whole backstory, after Angle won the primary she replaced her old campaign Web site with a new one featuring toned-down versions of her previous positions. The Reid campaign, hoping to draw attention to her Tea Partying, posted a reconstituted version of her old site. Angle responded with a cease and desist request, which Reid's camp at first agreed to, before reposting her site last night.

Angle was asked about Reid's latest in an interview with Nevada radio host Heidi Harris.

"Well your website is like you, it's your intellectual property," Angle said. "So they can't use something that's yours, intellectual property, unless they pay you for it or get your permission... And he didn't ask me for it, and he didn't pay me for it. I would have sold it to him."

Angle was asked: "So the latest is that it is up again, and you are just going to have to see as far as pursing this in court? Is that the plan?"

"Well we are going to pursue it," Angle replied. "I don't think that Harry is above the law. He needs to obey the law if you and I need to obey the law. Harry isn't immune. He needs to obey the law as well."

Listen to the exchange. It's unclear precisely how Angle intends to pursue this, but she did seem to answer affirmatively when asked if she was heading to court.

However she decides to pursue this, the upshot is that it could end up drawing even more media attention to her original Web site than it otherwise might have received. It's a curious strategy.

By Greg Sargent  |  July 7, 2010; 1:32 PM ET
Categories:  2010 elections , Senate Dems , Senate Republicans  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The America John Boehner grew up in? Check out the GOP platforms at the time
Next: White House takes ownership of Arizona lawsuit

Comments

Bring it on Sharron!

This is all huff n' puff for the AM wingnuts in Nevada. All she'll end up doing is calling more attention to her old site and then back down when it comes to actually hiring lawyers.

Who is running her campaign?

Posted by: bmcchgo | July 7, 2010 1:38 PM | Report abuse

This reminds me of Fox's suit against Al Franken for his use of the phrase "Fair and Balanced." Harry Reid has to be feeling like Al Franken did: "Yes, please sue me. Make my day."

Posted by: bearclaw1 | July 7, 2010 1:43 PM | Report abuse

First of all Heidi Harris both looks and sounds like a Rottweiler. Like Angle, she's an idiot! I'm guessing Heidi didn't ask Angle why she's changed her positions? It's because this is how the GOP operates. They have tried to scrub this nut job clean but, her past statements and her wingnut website remain available. Only idiots who vote Republican will over look this because they're a party of liars. I hope Reid crushes this crazy old woman. Go home Granny. We're all stocked up on the crazy!

Posted by: roxsteady | July 7, 2010 1:46 PM | Report abuse

Sharron Angle has no "intellect," so we'll just shorten the legal term to "ual property."

Posted by: bearclaw1 | July 7, 2010 1:46 PM | Report abuse

I'm beginning to think the "Chickens for Health Care" lady would have been better.

Posted by: BBear1 | July 7, 2010 1:48 PM | Report abuse

wow. how divorced from reality can a person be?

as others have noted, this is what happens when you restrict yourself to a like minded echo chamber in which no one challenges your assumptions and fabrications.

then, when you are taken out of the partisan green house into the harsh light of the real world, you wilt, not understanding why things are so different out here.

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | July 7, 2010 1:54 PM | Report abuse

Clueless and desperate. Good luck Nevada

Posted by: Lefty_ | July 7, 2010 1:55 PM | Report abuse

That's "Chickens for Check-ups," bbear, coined by our own Mr. Sargent.

If she keeps it up, it could have the same effect.

Needs a clever name, Greg.

Posted by: converse | July 7, 2010 1:57 PM | Report abuse

Angle is insane.

Want some more insanity? Check this out, former GOP Representative guilty of scamming US AID!

"""A former U.S. congressman accused of accepting stolen funds to lobby on behalf of an alleged terrorist fund-raising ring has pleaded guilty to obstruction of justice and acting as an unregistered foreign agent.

Former Republican Rep. Mark Deli Siljander of Michigan entered his guilty plea in federal court in Kansas City on Wednesday. Charges of money laundering and conspiracy will likely be dropped under terms of the plea deal.

Mr. Siljander served in the House from 1981 until 1987 and later started a lobbying firm. He was charged in 2008 with accepting $50,000 from the Missouri-based charity, the Islamic American Relief Agency, to push for its removal from a list of groups that finance terrorism.

Prosecutors said the group stole the money from the U.S. Agency for International Development."""

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703636404575353092900003352.html

WTF is UP with these people?!?!

Posted by: Ethan2010 | July 7, 2010 1:57 PM | Report abuse

fun stuff... she is a contradiction wrapped in a riddle and folded into a chimichonga.

Posted by: Geopolitics101 | July 7, 2010 2:04 PM | Report abuse

what is the basis of her claim that her public website is her intellectual property that can only be reproduced with her permission?

besides being extremely legally dubious, it's also very bad for a politician to take this position. she published the site in a public venue -- the web. there could be fair use questions about how much can be reproduced by others in another venue, but most politicians would understand the inadvisability of resorting to legal action to prevent the dissemination of your previously publicly aired views secret.

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | July 7, 2010 2:07 PM | Report abuse

You gotta love "Right" Angle.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | July 7, 2010 2:10 PM | Report abuse

120° and becoming more obtuse every day.

Posted by: jzap | July 7, 2010 2:12 PM | Report abuse

Don't back down Harry. Call her bluffs.

The voters of Nevada have a right to know what this woman really thinks. And she clearly has no idea what she is getting into if she thinks her publically posted positions are off-limits.

Wait until they start digging through her kindergarten papers.

Posted by: VAreader | July 7, 2010 2:16 PM | Report abuse

Sharron "Obtuse" Angle. Has a ring to it.

Posted by: converse | July 7, 2010 2:18 PM | Report abuse

She has no legal argument, period. A court with guts would sanction her for filing a suit on this. It's just posturing, to sound tough, to fool some ignorant types into just believing the charge that Reid has done something underhanded because they want to, probably knowing full well that she is blowing smoke up the interviewer's skirt.

Posted by: JoeT1 | July 7, 2010 2:32 PM | Report abuse

So Tea Partiers aren't only ignorant about government, they're ignorant about the law as well. Wow we're doomed if these nitwits gain power outside of their redneck enclaves.

Posted by: madest | July 7, 2010 2:40 PM | Report abuse

I didn't coin this, but I sure like it:

When conservatives speak, it's the honest truth.

When liberals record conservatives' speech and play it back, it's liberal propaganda.

Posted by: hitpoints | July 7, 2010 2:40 PM | Report abuse

I don't get this strategy at all.

I didn't get Reid backing down in the first place, either.

She's given every interviewer the opportunity to continue to ask if she's going to pursue a legal remedy. And if she does, an opportunity to ask how that legal remedy is progressing. This would just reinforce in people's minds the idea to check this whole web site out.

And finally, what if someone asks her whether there's a "Second Amendment remedy" for Reid not pulling the web site???

Posted by: CTVoter | July 7, 2010 2:47 PM | Report abuse

@Ethan2010 - The Siljander story is not so simple. The charges have shifted a number of times since the Bush DOJ first set its sights on him a few years ago, and it's not clear he knew about the USAID scam the IARA was running when he agreed to work on getting them removed from the terrorist-linked organizations list.

Disclaimer - I'm a fan of his book "A Deadly Misunderstanding" describing his work bringing Muslims and Christians together to understand how much the two traditions have in common and how unnecessary the conflict certain people on both sides have invested so much in inflaming really is.

Posted by: zimbar | July 7, 2010 2:53 PM | Report abuse

All, the White House took strong ownership of the lawsuit against Arizona just now:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/07/white_house_takes_ownership_of.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | July 7, 2010 2:57 PM | Report abuse

Reid is more effeminate in his mannerisms then Angle!

So we really in affect, have a TWO women race here!

Posted by: theaz | July 7, 2010 2:59 PM | Report abuse

There is nothing that Angle has to hide about her old website. Her only error would be to keep talking about the latest Reid chicanery - stealing her website.

There are really only 2 things nevada voters have to decide upon this November:

1. Do we want Socialism (Reid) or free market capitalism (Angle)?

2. Do we want an honest person representing us (Angle) or a bonafide crook (Reid)?

It's really that simple of a decision. All the rest of the issues pale in comparison to these two very basic choices.

Posted by: hangtown1 | July 7, 2010 3:05 PM | Report abuse

@hangtown,

What exactly is a "good faith crook"? Is that Tea Bagger code?

Posted by: bearclaw1 | July 7, 2010 3:10 PM | Report abuse

I wonder if Angle could be sue for the unsubstantiated claim of "intellectual?"

Posted by: kishorgala | July 7, 2010 3:10 PM | Report abuse

Hence, the reason Prince Harry is also known as "Dirty Harry". Remember, he called many of us "evil-mongers". Prince Harry, sitting on 25 million, needs Obama to raise more? What's he afraid of?

Posted by: MRGB | July 7, 2010 3:16 PM | Report abuse

Hence, the reason Prince Harry is also known as "Dirty Harry". Remember, he called many of us "evil-mongers". Prince Harry, sitting on 25 million, needs Obama to raise more? What's he afraid of?

Posted by: MRGB | July 7, 2010 3:17 PM | Report abuse

On her original web site Angle indicates that she will assassinate Reid if Reid beats her in the election. Reid then uses Angle's statement to demonstrate that Angle is a typical Republican crazy. Angle then rushes into court to sue Reid to stop Reid from telling people what she said on her website.

And the teabaggers tell us that Angle is a sophisticated candidate worthy of the Senate.

Posted by: ravenmocker | July 7, 2010 3:18 PM | Report abuse

All, new thread:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/07/white_house_takes_ownership_of.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | July 7, 2010 3:19 PM | Report abuse

I don't think there's anything wrong with Sharron Angle's views or original website.

Maybe she's doing the ultimate switcheroo - huffing and puffing so people WILL read her original website.

I can't believe Obama supporters still think he's doing fine. What solar system are you on?

Posted by: Fazsha | July 7, 2010 3:19 PM | Report abuse

@CTVoter

"I didn't get Reid backing down in the first place, either."

I think it was a matter of being cautious. They wanted to make sure they were covered legally before moving forward. Also, there was something about an email fill-in that was argued could be confusing to voters (they might sign up thinking it was Angle's site). That one might have appeared to be a legit concern, since Reid's camp took it out of the website before they put it back up.

I'm ok with it going down for a day to be sure. Now it's back up, and Angle is flipping out. Hilarious.

Posted by: TheBBQChickenMadness | July 7, 2010 3:27 PM | Report abuse

I'd be curious to know why Sharron Angle thinks that public statements on her political positions made while she is a candidate for the Senate are her own personal property - and why people should not be allowed to use these public statements to judge her.

Must be some pretty convoluted teabagger logic at the bottom of this.

Posted by: ravenmocker | July 7, 2010 3:30 PM | Report abuse

Angle should take herself to court, sue herself for saying what she said on her website. But she could lose..

Posted by: dudh | July 7, 2010 3:34 PM | Report abuse

Yea Greg, more media attention. I'm sure the nightly news will lead with it on all the networks: "First candidate ever to update/modify their website" Stop the presses!

Posted by: Truthteller12 | July 7, 2010 3:34 PM | Report abuse

Angle is a world class idiot. She totally fell into the Reid trap. By suing him she is creating the illusion that she has something to hide. Most people will not even go to her "old website" and read it, they will simply assume the worse. If she had let it go it would have been a blip in the news (if anything). Now she has made a national news story out of it. Again, what an idiot.

It looks like she is trying to hide her past. LOL, honestly, I just have to say, she is a moron. The Tea Klan really knows how to screw things up (once upon a time, in the begining, they were the tea party, but they let the KKK types in and they took over).

Angle is WAY out of her league.

BTW the older versions of her website (and pretty much all websites) can be found at wayback machine.

Posted by: rcc_2000 | July 7, 2010 3:36 PM | Report abuse

The link to Angle's website is back up on Reid's website. There is a blurb saying that the Nevada Democrats are not going to let "Sharron Angle retroactively censor Sharron Angle.”

Here's the website:

http://www.harryreid.com/index.php/news/article/reid_claims_first_amendment_protection_re-launches_old_angle_website/

Posted by: ravenmocker | July 7, 2010 3:39 PM | Report abuse

I bet if last year Harry Reid had posted on his website that he wanted to socialize all privately owned business in this country and raise taxes that Angle would have that all over her web page and on the airwaves as well. All this reminds me when a Not-Picked-By-Fox-News reporter as her questions about her views she got all agitated about why the reporter wasn't asking Reid these questions. Just how naive is this woman? Does she not realize that an election is not just about what is wrong with your opponent but also what is your positions as well. Angle here is a clue - this election is now just as much about you as it is for Reid. Grow up or get out of the race. I really do believe that at the end of the day a voter has to find some reason to vote for a candidate and if they dislike both candidates they just don't bother to vote.

Posted by: dre7861 | July 7, 2010 3:42 PM | Report abuse

"Well your website is like you, it's your intellectual property," Angle said.

Duh, the Internet is public domain. Who is this woman and more importantly who are her advisors....all completely out of touch. I smell John Coryn here...LOL

Posted by: NativeSonofTexas | July 7, 2010 3:46 PM | Report abuse

Not only is she completely nuts, but she's really homely. I thought you rightwingnuts liked your women fairly dumb yet attractive?

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | July 7, 2010 3:46 PM | Report abuse

I think Sharron Angle is in really bad shape on this one.

The only reason I'd think she might have a leg to stand on is if a reasonable person could confuse this archived site with her live site. I mean, they probably look a lot alike, and I can see where there would be a problem if you suggested an old site run by her political opponent was her live, official, current site.

But that's not happening.

If you actually go to therealsharronangle.com, it's all outlined in black, there's this 50-point disclaimer taking up half the opening screen that makes it perfectly clear this is her OLD website. And again at the bottom there's a piece that it comes from the state Democratic Party.

It's very clear that someone other than Sharron Angle's campaign is putting this up, so I don't see where she has a leg to stand on. IANAL, but this seems like a clear cut fair-use case to me (though I understand why politically one might say it's a first amendment issue. That sounds better, and it's perfectly in keeping with the layman's "no one can stop you from telling the truth" understanding of the First Amendment.)

Posted by: theorajones1 | July 7, 2010 3:47 PM | Report abuse

@Fazsha : I don't think there's anything wrong with Sharron Angle's views or original website.

End medicare and social security (personalize is just rovespeak for ending SS as we know it and substitute a much less valuable "private" account and a voucher system (which doesn't take inflation into account for medicare). She often references Paul Ryan's plan, which has higher taxes on the bottom 90% and radically lower taxes for the top 10%. Sounds about right.
Eliminate the dept of education
Explode the deficit by making the bush tax cuts for