If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my free Email alerts. Thanks for visiting!


by Sharon Rondeau

During the 1730s, the editor of The New York Weekly Journal launched anonymous attacks on New York Governor William Cosby, who had the publisher of the newspaper arrested for seditious libel.

(Feb. 23, 2011) — According to Wikipedia, “defamation of character” is defined as:

Defamation—also called calumny, vilification, slander (for transitory statements), and libel (for written, broadcast, or otherwise published words)—is the communication of a statement that makes a claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government, or nation a negative image. It is usually a requirement that this claim be false and that the publication is communicated to someone other than the person defamed (the claimant).[1]

How to prove Libel

There are several ways a person must go about proving that libel has taken place. For example, in the United States, the person first must prove that the statement was false. Second, that person must prove that the statement caused harm. And, third, they must prove that the statement was made without adequate research into the truthfulness of the statement. These steps are for an ordinary citizen. In the case of a celebrity or public official trying to prove libel, they must prove the first three steps, and must (in the United States) prove the statement was made with the intent to do harm, or with reckless disregard for the truth.[17]

According to the Columbia Encyclopedia:

libel and slander, in law, types of defamation. In common law, written defamation was libel and spoken defamation was slander. Today, however, there are no such clear definitions. Permanent forms of defamation, such as the written or pictorial, are usually called libel, while the spoken or gestured forms are called slander.

The term libel is also often used if a wide audience for the defamation is possible. Courts have split over which category radio and television are in; today’s statutes generally categorize defamation occurring in those media as slander. The offenses are alike in several respects. The defamation-essentially exposure to hatred, contempt, ridicule, or pecuniary loss-must directly affect the reputation of a living person. It must be published, i.e., revealed to someone besides the subject of the attack. It is no defense that the defendant merely repeated but did not originate the defamation.

The following email exchange occurred earlier today in response to a complaint sent to Examiner.com on February 20, 2011:

From: legal@examiner.com
To: Sharon Rondeau
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 15:52:47 -0600

Dear Ms. Rondeau,

If you believe content on our site includes defamatory statements, please send the following information so we may investigate the complaint:

  • The URL of the specific article(s) in which you believe defamatory content exists
  • The statement or statements you believe are defamatory
  • An explanation of why such statements are defamatory

Please send this information to legal@examiner.com.  We will inform the applicable Examiner of any such complaint and request that the Examiner remedy the situation (or we will pull the material from our site if it violates our Terms of Use).

Best regards,


The Post & Email responded:

From:  Sharon Rondeau
Sent:  Wed 2/23/11  7:59 PM
To: legal@examiner.com
Bcc:  Redacted

Hello, Examiner Legal Staff:

The libel/defamation is being written by Bill Bowman against my company, The Post & Email, which is an electronic newspaper incorporated in the state of Wyoming.  I filed a formal complaint with your organization last week which was handled by Ms. Jennifer Osler.

The situation was remedied temporarily, but Mr. Bowman returned to publishing lies, threats and libelous statements on February 18, just two days after his four previous posts were removed.  Evidently Ms. Osler agreed with my claim that they were defamatory.  I have listed two of the removed articles below, but they are still available through Google Cache.

Here is one link to a current defamatory article by Bowman:  http://www.examiner.com/birther-movement-in-national/racism-at-the-post-email

My publication has never said one thing that is racist, so Bowman’s statement is completely false.  You are welcome to read any article at The Post & Email, and you will find that it is a professional publication which allows no libel, disclosure of personal information, obscenities, adult content, or references to vulgarities, unlike the writing of Mr. Bowman on your website.  Our articles are screened very carefully for content in this regard; therefore, Bowman’s libelous claim that my publication is racist is an outright lie and an attempt to defame both the reputation of The Post & Email and me.

Mr. Bowman states in this article:  “Nice, huh? Tell me, Mrs. Rondeau, what part of the U.S. Constitution are you honoring by printing this filth? We all know that “jig” is a pejorative used against blacks, a ready substitute for what is euphemistically known as the “N” word.
And apparently, going by their own policy, this type of racist crap is just fine and dandy with Sharon Rondeau and her friends at the P&E. It’s OK by them to refer to the President of the United States as a “jig.”
Sharon Rondeau, you are disgusting. Only a racist pig would allow this kind of tripe to be publlished on a web site. And sister, that’s not defamation of character, that’s definition of character.”

This man is purposely provoking a legal showdown, and in one of his previous articles, to that end, he stated, “Bring it on.”  That was one of the articles removed by Ms. Osler.

To bolster my claim, Mr. Bowman’s personal website, which I realize is unaffiliated with Examiner.com, contains a veiled threat to The Post & Email:  http://bbowman.net/

Moreover, I wrote about the initial incident with Bowman here:  http://www.thepostemail.com/2011/02/17/examiner-com-legal-staff-responds-to-the-post-emails-complaint/

In good faith, I removed the statement which said that Examiner.com did not have high standards.  However, since this situation has recurred, I am wondering how high your standards really are.  I would never permit any of my writers to even submit such material, let alone publish it.

Why is Bowman targeting “Post & Email” readers?  Why does he warn them that their IP numbers have been logged?  We do the same thing at The Post & Email, but we do not threaten people with this information.  I have the IP numbers of everyone who has ever left a defamatory, threatening or obscene comment at the site, but I have never found a reason to threaten anyone with that capability.

What kind of vendetta has Bowman launched, and who is behind it?

Here is another post of his that was pulled:  http://www.examiner.com/birther-movement-in-national/sharon-rondeau-at-the-post-and-email-haz-a-mad-about-me?cid=parsely#parsely

However, a pop-up containing the title of that article still appears on the lower right screen when looking at any of Bill Bowman’s current articles.

Here is another defamatory post:  http://www.examiner.com/birther-movement-in-national/pot-meet-kettle

A taunting, insulting paragraph from that reads:  “Do I need to point out to Sharon Rondeau, who has gleefully published and written screeds such as this, that the very foundation of the Birther Movement is to abrogate “the rights and desires of the voters” in the 2008 presidential election? Do I, really?”

Why is this man taking the time and effort to address me personally in his poorly-written, falsified articles?  He has also attacked one of my contributing writers as well as other people with lies, malice, and taunts.

If Bowman disagrees with anyone politically, does that give him the right to spread falsehoods and insults such as “racist pig” about me?  He is entitled to his opinions on all things political, but The Post & Email has never, and will never, denigrate him nor anyone else for holding a different opinion.  However, if he is publishing things under your masthead, he has a responsibility to adhere to your Terms of Use, which is here:  http://www.examiner.com/terms_of_use.html

I call your attention to the portion of the Terms of Use agreement which states:

6. Prohibited Content and Activities

You agree that you will not post to the Site, or use the Site to transmit or make available any Content that:

    • violates any laws or regulations, contains any threats, is abusive, tortious, harassing, vulgar, obscene, indecent, violates any person’s rights of privacy or publicity, is defamatory, libelous, hateful, contains any disparaging statements or opinions regarding racial, gender or ethnic background, or is otherwise objectionable;
    • infringes any intellectual property rights of any party, including, but not limited to any patent, trademark, trade secret, copyright or other proprietary rights;
    • contains any private information about an identifiable person without that person’s permission, or any content soliciting any personal or private information from any individual;
    • you know or have reason to know is false, misleading, or fraudulent;
    • you do not have a right to make available under any law or under contractual or fiduciary relationships (such as inside information or proprietary and confidential information learned or disclosed as part of employment relationships or under nondisclosure agreements);
    • contains any unauthorized advertising, promotional materials, or material which can be characterized as “junk mail,” “spam,” “chain letters,” “pyramid schemes,” “Ponzi schemes” or similar material, any request for or solicitation of money, goods, or services for private gain, or any information (other than advertisements approved by Examiner.com) posted primarily for advertising, promotional, or other commercial purposes;
    • incorporates within it any software viruses or any other computer code, files or programs whose purpose or function is to interrupt, destroy or otherwise impair the operability of any software or hardware or telecommunications equipment;
    • contains links to any websites containing content violating any of the foregoing requirements, or links to any websites for purposes of disrupting the operations of such website, harassing the owners of such website, or other objectionable or illegal purposes.

Bowman previously released personal information about me such as where I work, my profession outside of The Post & Email, and a desire to see that I am deprived of a means of making a living.  He did not have my permission to do this, so that clearly violates bullet point #3.  Bullet point #1 has been violated by everything he has written about my publication or me.

I trust that this answers your questions.  I will be awaiting your prompt action on this matter which has also been reported to the FBI.

Sharon Rondeau
The Post & Email, Inc.

The Post & Email’s previous coverage of Examiner.com is here.  Examiner’s Terms of Use are here.

Join the Conversation


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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  1. Fantastic work Ms. Rondeau! Keep the pressure on them until that misguided (putting it mildly) jerk is forced to retract his article(s)! Bet an orange jumpsuit would look good on him. lol ;)

  2. Very good response, Sharon! This Bowman character comes off as another frothing lib who is taking advantage of the lawlessness that obama & holder have apparently established to satisfy their grudges against caucasian Americans and the rule of law in this country. I cannot imagine the extreme angst that FBI and other government employees, who believe in our Constitution and the rule of law, feel working under the corrupt and unconstitutional regime currently draining the life out of this country!

    I just hope and pray that those uninformed, and willfully ignorant voters who voted for obama have had a wake-up call sufficient to either keep them from the polling booths in 2012, or to vote with informed knowledge of the experience, eligibility and character of the next candidates.

  3. Mrs. Rondeau,

    I had the distinct displeasure of confronting Mr. Bowman on a left wing radio show recently about his savage attacks on the P&E. Undoubtedly, Mr. Bowman is a cog in a coordinated attack by the Fogbowers against the unleavened bread you publish daily. The vitriol with which they diminish you only goes to show they are shaking in their boots. The Usurper will soon fall.

    Tell me this: Why don’t you get together as the publishing arm of Atlah Ministries? With your dominance of the web media and Rev. Manning’s dominance of video media, we can put together a two-punch package that the lame stream media can never ignore.

    The Fogbowers tricked Rev. Manning into their den last May inundated him with derision and calumny before he realized his mistake. Perhaps the two of you can team up and take on those purveyors of pultritude.

    What say you?

  4. Good luck Sharon. We live under the Holder version of justice now. The FBI undoubtedly knows this as well. The left is just beginning to test the level of illegal acts it can get away with when tacitly approved by Obama and Holder. This is going to be a very long and dangerous election cycle.

    1. Exactly. Under Obama-Holder we are not longer a nation of laws but, rather, of two people who have had a racist chip on their shoulder ever since their childhood years.

  5. I tried posting on their site for a couple days. I first thought it was amusing how I was
    responded to with such total disdain.

    I was accused of not offer any facts, but since it was already apparent they were accessing and reading from the same sites as the contributors here, and specifically this
    very site, I felt they knew the facts as well as anyone.

    I thought it inconceivable that supposedly intelligent people could be reading from these
    sites and not at least question what they think they know about obama. I was amazed
    that they actually believe one can be born with dual citizenship, adopt another citizenship,
    then decide to convert to natural born American citizen.

    These people are not going to allow themselves to be swayed by any truth. Perhaps
    they themselves have converted to islum, that would make their lies justified in their
    little minds.

  6. To what is he referring in his allegation that you used the word “jig”?

    I have never seen a word like that on this site. In fact I cannot recall ever seeing anything published on Post&Email that could be remotely characterized as racist.

    You are right to take strong action against such scurrilous attacks.
    Mrs. Rondeau replies: Bowman claimed that one of our political placards which showed Obama dancing a jig was racist. Apparently at one time, the word “jig” was slang for a black person, but that was before our time. I have never heard nor seen the word used that way, and the placard refers to dancing and the fact that it is suspected that he is from Kenya.

    1. Actually the term is jigaboo, which referred to a negro dancing. This I remember from the 1950’s when I was growing up.

      A jig, if I remember correctly is a Irish dance

      1. Crazy old coot:

        Quite so and even the term “jigaboo” has’t been widely used since about the era of Mark Twain and Huckleberry Finn (if then). There are far more people around that do the jig which is a very entertaining dance to watch … unlike Flying Monkey Bowman’s racial attack on Mrs. Rondeau.

      2. A picture of “a Negro dancing”, with the word jig used to describe it, just means the dance he’s doing, and not the Negro dancing.

        How could anyone possibly misunderstand?

  7. Billie’s argument about the Birther Movement is to abrogate “the rights and desires of the voters” in the 2008 presidential election, is completely disregarding the fact that an ineligible candidate was allowed to compete when it was in direct violation of the United States Constitution and the electorate was denied a fair election. But what can you expect from a ‘progressive’ who thinks that mob rule equates to the ‘rule of law in a Constitutional Republic’. Billie is just showing his lack of education and the results of a public school system that has failed. Maybe Billie should change careers and go to work in Wisconsin and work as a teacher so he can peddle his ideological shortcomings on a more willing bunch of sheep.