Sarah Palin defamation trial: Ex-governor defines ‘don’t retreat, reload’ as trial prepares to close

Sarah Palin was photographed arriving at the Manhattan federal courthouse on Thursday morning with Ron Duguay.

It marked the second day the pair have attended the trial together - after Ms Palin described the NHL star as her “buddy”.

The former Alaska governor is set to resume her testimony against The New York Times this morning as the case is expected to finish by the weekend.

Ms Palin gave the jury a folksy overview of her family life in Alaska and ascent in Republican politics as she took the witness stand in her defamation lawsuit against The New York Times on Wednesday.

She testified for only about 20 minutes at the end of the day at a civil trial in Manhattan federal court after a Times editor named as a defendant in the suit testified at length.

The former governor described herself for jurors as a single mother and grandmother who “holds down the fort” for her family in Alaska when not advising candidates about “the good, bad and ugly” of politics. She also recalled the surprise over her emergence as a vice-presidential candidate in 2008, saying, “I don’t think they were prepared for me.”

She is to return to court Thursday for a chance to get into the crux of the case — her claim that the newspaper damaged her reputation with an editorial linking her campaign rhetoric to a mass shooting. Closing arguments are set for Friday.

The Associated Press has more:

The jury has been called into the Manhattan federal courtroom after lawyers on both sides spent about half an hour grappling over evidence.

As jurors took their seats, Ms Palin settled into the witness stand to answer questions about her life after leaving the governor’s mansion in 2009.

She talked about running her own website, participating in speaking events and rallies, and spending time with her family.

Ms Palin is now recalling how she learned about Times editorial at the heart of her lawsuit.

She claims the newspaper damaged career as a political commentator with the editorial about gun control published after US Rep Steve Scalise, a Louisiana Republican, was wounded when a man with a history of anti-GOP activity opened fire on a Congressional baseball team practice in Washington.

In the editorial, the Times wrote that before the 2011 mass shooting in Arizona that severely wounded former US Rep. Gabby Giffords and killed six others, Palin’s political action committee had contributed to an atmosphere of violence by circulating a map of electoral districts that put Giffords and 19 other Democrats under stylized crosshairs.

In a correction two days later, The Times said the editorial had “incorrectly stated that a link existed between political rhetoric and the 2011 shooting” and that it had “incorrectly described” the map.

Associated Press contributed

Aiming to show how the editorial caused damage, Ms Palin’s attorney asked her about the death threats she’s received online.

She said she got them “every day” prior to the editorial, but they “ramped up” and felt like “orchestrated attacks” afterward.

She attributed the worsened attack to the media “lying” about her.

Palin appeared to suggest that the New York Times linked her to incitement before the 2017 editorial at issue in her case, and broadly suggested, in a comment outside her defamation claim, that the newspaper had “lied.”

“My view was the New York Times took a lot of liberties and wasn’t always truthful,” she said.

“When the New York Times would write with that linkage between Sarah Palin and inciting political violence ... I don’t have the specific articles in front of me,” she said.

The comments prompted a sidebar conversation with Judge Rakoff.

With the judge and attorneys back in the courtroom, Palin is questioned about the 2017 editorial.

She says she doesn’t remember when she first read or was told about the editorial, but she says she remembers “feeling immediately, ‘Oh, no.’”

“First, realizing how significant and horrible the incident was, and then mortified, again, that there would be a linkage in there written by whoever was on the editorial board, that I knew I would have to take issue with,” she said.

Palin is now being asked by her attorney whether any staff contacted her about the 2017 editorial as corrections were made.

“There was no mention of me in what they called a correction,” she said. “Nothing changed. They doubled down.”

Newspaper staff had previously testified that editorial corrections do not highlight previous errors with affected names to not continue to amplify the errors, common across most news organisations.

New York Times attorney David Axelrod asked whether Palin knew, when on the GOP’s 2008 presidential ticket, that “when you go into that level, the very top of the pyramid, a lot of people take shots at you.”

“You become a target, and people take shots,” she said. “I expect a level paying field in that territory, anticipating some shots.”

NYT attorney David Axelrod asked Palin about her resignation from Alaska’s governor’s office in July 2009, which was reportedly over mounting legal bills related to an ethics investigation. The resignation was 18 months before the end of her term.

The judge told the jury to disregard his final line of questioning on the matter (“You resigned 18 months early because of inundations with complaints about lawsuits and ethical violations”).

The questioning so far, from the first questions to questions about her books and speaking engagements, appears to show that she has faced media scrutiny for years before she brought a legal challenge against the newspaper over an editorial that was corrected.