Updated: Hinderaker is apparently unaware that Palin had to sue somewhere where she could get personal jurisdiction over the editorial’s actual author, as she insisted on pursuing a personal liability theory; not just a corporate one (NYT). She wanted to punish the actual author of an OPINION piece. That’s why she lost twice, John. Not because it was a “Democrat” jury — but because she’s an odious… witch. The author would never have a need to set foot in Alaska — see, John? Her own bitter need for vengeance did her in, man. End, update.

Late last year, she was granted a new trial on limited issues by the Second Circuit. Before the capable USDC Judge Jed Rakoff, she has had yet another jury empaneled, in Manhattan. And… this afternoon — they came back with ANOTHER verdict exonerating the NYT.

That’s oh-for-three for old Sarah “I can see Russia from my font yard” Palin. And I love it. Here’s the bit from InnerCityPress, live, in the courtroom:

…All rise! Judge Rakoff: We have a verdict. File it as Court Exhibit 1. Jury entering!

Judge Rakoff: I will not comment on the verdict — but on what a good jury you have been. I will open the verdict envelope….

Foreperson: Defendants not liable….

This was an editorial — an OPINION piece. It suggested that Palin’s 2017 rhetoric was causing violence. That is an opinion — not a false statement. So, she lost. Afterall, you cannot libel garbage… by saying it stinks. Truth is an absolute defense. Onward — again!

नमस्ते