October 27th, 2010
02:40 PM ET
4 years ago

O'Donnell threatened to sue radio station

(Updated 4:47 p.m. ET with O'Donnell campaign response)

(CNN) - Christine O'Donnell, the surprise Tea Party-backed Senate candidate in Delaware, threatened to sue a local radio station if it did not turn over a videotape of an interview it conducted with her.

O'Donnell's campaign later apologized to the station for the threat, WDEL reports.

O'Donnell appeared on WDEL's "The Rick Jensen Show" Tuesday, during which she fielded several questions from listeners and the host. Upon the conclusion of the interview, an O'Donnell aide demanded video of the interview be turned over to the campaign and destroyed because such videotaping had not been previously approved.

It was then, according to WDEL, that O'Donnell herself threatened to sue the station if it did not comply with the request. WDEL also says it later fielded a phone call from O'Donnell campaign manager Matt Moran, who threatened to "crush" the station with a lawsuit if it did not agree to turn over the tape.

WDEL's attorney was soon involved and told the campaign there was nothing illegal about videotaping the interview for later use on the station's website and added that such action is protected by the First Amendment.

Upon further investigation, WDEL says O'Donnell's attorney called the station to apologize for the uproar and threat of litigation.

Doug Sachtleben, O'Donnell's campaign spokesman responded Wednesday.

"Prior to the WDEL interview, we asked the show's host if the video camera would be in use," Sachtleben said in an email. "The host never gave a straight answer and due to the constraints of live radio, the interview began without the campaign getting a straight answer or granting permission for the use of the camera. That's what we talked about after the interview."


Filed under: 2010 • Christine O'Donnell • Delaware
soundoff (197 Responses)
  1. Preston

    That woman really does have a problem with the First Amendment, doesn't she? I'm just guessing here, but I suspect she's a lot more comfortable with the Second. Fortunately, if the current polls are indication, she's the one who is going to be crushed, and most deservedly so.

    October 27, 2010 03:21 pm at 3:21 pm |
  2. sesiente

    Don't you love those who proclaim that the Gov't is treading all over our rights, but when it is inconvenient for them for those right to be excercised, they are the first ones to trounce all over them.

    October 27, 2010 03:21 pm at 3:21 pm |
  3. terry the democrat

    None of this really matters, because let's face it, we are gonna get crushed on Nov 2.

    October 27, 2010 03:22 pm at 3:22 pm |
  4. M Eason

    Good for you Christine! If you don't get what you want, then threaten to sue!! That's a tried and true American response to situations such as this. I hope that is one of the values that you plan to take to Washington if elected. You go girl!

    October 27, 2010 03:22 pm at 3:22 pm |
  5. Dennis F

    O'Donnell keeps showing her utter ignorance of the Law. A case in point....

    In the TV debate, she seemed completely out of touch with the concept of 'Separation of Church and State". It would seem that, as far as she is concerned, if those exact words are not in the Constitution, there can be no constitutional reference made for such separation. I have seen many posts concerning this that make the assertion that the first such use of this term was contained in a letter from Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802.

    The object of that claim is to attempt to undermine the truth by asserting that the phrase ‘Separation of Church and State’ came AFTER the First Amendment of the Constitution was proposed and ratified. If they can make you believe that the phrase came after the Amendment, they can alter the meaning of the Amendment itself. The fact is that that phrase predated the Constitution itself by more than one hundred and forty years.

    In 1644, Roger Williams wrote ‘The Bloody tenant of Persecution, for cause of conscience.’ At the time he wrote it, he was resident of the English colonies in America. On page 261 of that book you will find the sentence “me thinks I see before mine eyes a wall daubed up (of which Ezekiel speaks) with untempered mortar: Here they restrain the Magistrate from making Laws either concerning the substance or ceremony of Religion”.

    That entire book dealt with the reasons that there should be a separation of Church and State. It was known to almost everyone in the Americas by the time of the Declaration of Independence in 1776. The ideals expressed by Roger Williams (who founded the Baptist Church in America) were known by all the founding fathers, and the words that begin the First Amendment reflect that knowledge:

    “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”

    O’Donnell should pull her head out of her cauldron and start reading some of the works that we base our liberty on.

    October 27, 2010 03:22 pm at 3:22 pm |
  6. Irma in North Carolina

    Where is she going to get the money? Most likely from the campaign money. Poor teabaggers are stuck paying for it.

    October 27, 2010 03:22 pm at 3:22 pm |
  7. Wacko time in America, starring the Witch

    Gee, what a shock. The nutcase teabaggers are at it again. Arrest opponents, threaten to sue, step on their heads. Do whatever needs to be done. Take back our country from those different colored people. The white trash have found their saviors.

    October 27, 2010 03:23 pm at 3:23 pm |
  8. Rush

    Yep, she's a Constitutional Scholar all right

    October 27, 2010 03:23 pm at 3:23 pm |
  9. John

    Christine O'Donnell most likely said something dumb again,after all she is as dumb as a box of rocks. She after all very UNQUALIFIED to run for the U.S.Senate or any other PUBLIC OFFICE. Want she need to do is go back to school or get a real JOB. And trying to look like SARAN PALIN is really making you look even dumber than what you are. SARAN PALIN and you look like that MOVIE DUMB AND DUMBER.

    October 27, 2010 03:23 pm at 3:23 pm |
  10. Big_D

    This evil station did the unthinkable by showing O’Donnell is incompetent with the most damming evidence of all: they rebroadcast her own words. Maybe she should shut up if she doesn’t want to sound stupid.

    October 27, 2010 03:24 pm at 3:24 pm |
  11. Mitch H

    Can this woman do anything right??

    October 27, 2010 03:24 pm at 3:24 pm |
  12. Dianne

    Scary, Scary, Scary!!!! All these tea party candidates carry that same scary personna and way of thinking. We as a country are in for some strange and scary rulings if these candidates get their way.

    October 27, 2010 03:25 pm at 3:25 pm |
  13. Big_D

    Freedom of the press will kick her sorry lawyer’s butt.

    October 27, 2010 03:25 pm at 3:25 pm |
  14. CC

    Why get mad if your ducks are in a row and you have nothing to hide (threat even), an intv is an interview; radio or video. Unless of course she had cheat notes and the visual would give her away ;-D

    October 27, 2010 03:25 pm at 3:25 pm |
  15. Gloria

    Christine O'Dumb Bell ...that says it all!

    October 27, 2010 03:26 pm at 3:26 pm |
  16. Scott

    Maybe she can use some of that witchcraft she has and make the video tape disappear...

    October 27, 2010 03:27 pm at 3:27 pm |
  17. Insane in the membrane

    She just gets better and better!

    October 27, 2010 03:27 pm at 3:27 pm |
  18. Bob from Pittsburgh

    I guess Mrs OH Donal!!! forgot the constitution First Amendment.

    Ha H a Ha...!!

    I can't imagine a constitutional scholar such as Oh.. Donal!! forgeting such an important amedment..

    October 27, 2010 03:27 pm at 3:27 pm |
  19. Conny

    The Republican party is at its worst. A bunch of "witches" and Steele. Next time McCain gets a twinkle in his eye, he might stay away fro the ladies! Now look at the mess you got us into, you two timing goofball!

    October 27, 2010 03:28 pm at 3:28 pm |
  20. Canuck

    WDEL's attorney "added that such action is protected by the First Amendment." Well...duh... how is Christine O'Donnell supposed to know that???

    October 27, 2010 03:29 pm at 3:29 pm |
  21. Conny

    Bristol Palin fallin in the footsteps of her mother. Lets look back in time to that elopement. HMMMM!

    October 27, 2010 03:29 pm at 3:29 pm |
  22. Griswold

    Isn't this the absolutely BEST way to ensure that this radio station's interview video will have the maximum number of viewers? Is this reverse psychology at its best or rational thinking at its worst?

    October 27, 2010 03:29 pm at 3:29 pm |
  23. Alex

    that lady is so funny!

    October 27, 2010 03:29 pm at 3:29 pm |
  24. dwayne

    Crazy; just crazy.

    October 27, 2010 03:30 pm at 3:30 pm |
  25. Anonymous

    So much like Palin with her blustering at the media... What we see over time is that the people who are the most insecure about what they say, are the same people who will most tightly control their contact with the public. Either by refusing to debate an opposing candidate, or refusing to interview with the national media, or by only allowing pre-approved questions into a news conference.

    It all points to one thing: O'Donnell (and others who engage in this same sort of media paranoia) is completely insecure about her positions. She's afraid she might have said the wrong thing, or let something slip out that wasnt pre-approved by her handlers, and doesnt want it open for public scrutiny.

    Now i've said my piece – enter the tea-party apologists with their accusations of biased media and (no pun intended) a witch-hunt against O'Donnell.

    October 27, 2010 03:30 pm at 3:30 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8