Skank Forces Google to Spit Out Blogger

Liskula Cohen, model person (and that makes her better than you and me), was described by an anonymous blogger as “an aging skank.”
Liskula was not impressed and sued Google to get the name of the person she really, really wanted to sue for defamation. She won, forcing Google to regurgitate the identifying info, including email address, of the poster.
Now, as a result of the attendant publicity, the name Liskula Cohen will forever be tied to the pejorative noun “Skank,” (adjective “Skanky”) whether she is or not. Turns out the no longer anonymous blogger is a social acquaintance of Ms. Cohen (read “one of those wannabe social gadflies that hang around models and are bitter and jealous that rich men don’t give them cocaine for blowjobs).
In any event, the story goes that a defamation suit will proceed, which raises some interesting legal questions. It is a full defense against defamation to demonstrate that what was said about the plaintiff is, in fact, true. Thus, it will fall to the presiding judge, as a matter of mixed law and fact, to decide whether or not Liskula Cohen is or is not, in fact, “a skank.”

How many one-night stands with men whose names she can’t remember?
How many with men whose names have been tattooed on her lower back or hip and then later removed by laser?
Did she ever give head in the bathroom of a nightclub? The backseat of a taxi? The middle of the infield at the Indy 500? (As if a model would ever attend a NASCAR race!)
Has she ever had sex in exchange for cash, gifts or trips to the Bahamas aboard a private yacht?
What constitutes being a skank?
If I promise to keep most of my clothes on, can I handle the depositions?

Liskula better hope this matter doesn’t wind up before Judge Judy. Anyone who stays out after dark and drinks more than a social glass of sherry is a dirty fucking WHORE in Sheindlin’s world.

There are, of course, some pretty serious implications here for the blogosphere. I have no worries – poverty renders me judgment proof. Go ahead, sue me, ya dirty skank (that’s directed at Sarah Palin. I think Liskula’s hot and would definitely give her cocaine for a blowjob).

Alleged skank


8 Responses

  1. I have some sympathy for Ms Cohen here… Sounds like the anonymous blogger was being a real asshole, and setting out to be a twunt…

  2. Watch this….

    I personally have slept with this 53 year old cum bucket. Quite honestly, it was the worst sex of my life. She was more interested in injecting heroin into her veins and looking at lesbian kiddie porn than munching down on my preposterously large man meat.

    When we finally got down to it, she had more make-up and plastic surgery scars than Micheal Jackson. Trust me. Not one bit of the woman is original equipment. The lips. The nose. The tits. The bleached asshole. For all I know, she was born black and had a dick!

    Her “beauty” is all smoke, mirrors, makeup and airbrushing. Without it, she looks more like “Mama” from the movie, Throw Mama From The Train, than she looks like the woman in her pictures.

    She was disgusting, but I was really drunk and horny when she picked me up from the biker bar where I was shooting pool. When she approached me, I thought she was drunk too, but it turns out she was totally sober and she just talks with a lisp and is naturally 12 pack stupid. By the time she got me up to her room, there was no going back, especially since she threatened to shoot me if I tried to leave.

    Her dried out old vagina was so battered from overuse and was so big and floppy, I wasn’t sure if I was fucking it, her sizable muffin top, or her jeans that she left on her bed in this $15 a night flophouse.

    Even though she preformed a rusty trombone on me, she couldn’t even get me to cum. Afterwards, she had the nerve to demand her usual $23.50 fee, but “only in Euros”. So, while she was taking a toot of coke and looking up an abortion Doc’s phone number, I made a run for it and got away before she could start shooting.

    And, for my troubles, I still got 3 different STDs off her, even though I used a condom.

    Suck on that, you ego-maniacal, thin skinned, skanky assed, cunt!

  3. Sorry. That wasn’t a quote, I just fucked up the HTML yet again.

    That was just me looking to “slander” this ageing skank. If you can’t anonymously say nasty, untrue, stuff about people on the Internet, then (apart from free porn) what the fuck good is it?

    I worry this might be the start of a rights-eroding trend. It sets a bad precedent to allow for punishing people for “mean things” they say about people, especially purely personal OPINIONS of public figures, who as I understand it, have a higher slander threshold than your average Joe anyway. (Not that I ever had heard of or seen this ageing skank before this.)

    The idea that I may have to take into account the feelings of some poor, hard-done-by, cracked up, emotionally insecure, model who’s brain has been stunted by years of caloric deprivation every time I write anything burns my ass. (Creepy picture by the way. I’ve actually seen more realistic sex-dolls.) The idea that the guy’s comment rises to a level that could justify public identification…or anything in a court of law…is a complete fucking joke.

    “Ageing skank”? Boo fucking hoo! Suck it up Princess! No, not that way. Well, OK, maybe just this one time.

    • The blogger was a chick (and rather a hottie, too – her pick is on HuffPo).

      I agree with you. Anonymous slagging needs to be permitted, generally…but there also needs to be some sort of limit…same sort of limits that apply to free speech – not yelling theater in a crowded fire; not inciting riot, mayhem or treason or murder.
      There’s a difference between, “Liskula LOOKS LIKE an aging coke whore skank who sucks dick to pay the rent,” and “Liskula sucks dick to pay the rent!” One is opinion, the other is an assertion of fact that, whether true or not, might damage one’s reputation.
      I dunno where to draw the line, precisely, which is what we have courts for. You sue, you argue, you win or lose. It’s always these pathetic little squabbles on which larger principles get sorted out. Nothing to be done for that. It took Larry Flynt and Hustler to advance Freedom of Speech last time, and no doubt everyone would have preferred a less greasy appellant.

  4. Larry Flynt is fine by me. If it wasn’t for him, Bob Guccione and the guys who published Swank, I might not have made it through my teenage years without exploding in the subway like a suicide cum-bomber.

    And I did read most of the articles, too.

  5. It’s been a long time since my last post here, but I did a lot of research on the topic shortly afterwards. I also know that this topic still gets a lot of hits, so it’s probably worthwhile to post something new

    There was no need to publicly unmask the (hottie) blogger before the actual lawsuit. If the judge thought it was actionable, she could have handed that Liskula Cohen slut’s legal team the name on the condition they actually go through with the lawsuit…WHICH THEY NEVER HAD ANY INTENTION OF DOING. The entire point of the case was to unmask the blogger, embarass her and put her through a model-fuelled, media shit-storm that the blogger couldn’t withstand. It also gave that skanky Liskula Cohen some gratuitous airtime that might boost her sagging career and make her look like a magnanimous victim, when she was actually the exact opposite.

    They never had ANY intention of suing, probably because that slut, Liskula Cohen, knows exactly what a dirty, whoring, skank she really is. I’m sure she’s far, far, worse than the website claimed. Indeed, my research uncovered that she was involved in a glass throwing hissy-fit with a hotel bar employee. I also found numerous pictures of Cohen acting pretty slutty on her personal time. Considering her profession is arguably the skankiest there is (outside of lawyers), it’s a very, very, safe bet Liskula Cohen is a skank.

    And she’s suing for what? Accusations of being an “ageing skank” who tries to steal other girls’ boyfriends? Just what is legal definition of those very subjective words? And, in today’s sleazy society, how does a term like skank cause (legally actionable) damages? Especially when it’s an anonymous blog that less than 6 people saw before the lawsuit. If anything, the lawsuit itself caused a 100,000 times the damage. But that Cohen skank acted like the blog was the front page of the NY Times! I remember visiting the blogger’s website, reading all those comments and thinking that the most hurtful comment was the one believed to have been written by that Cohen skank herself. The blogger’s comments were actually pretty vague. Bitter & petty, maybe, but if they meet the standard of legally actionable, every single coffee shop conversation between 2 or more women would produce at least 10 lawsuits.

    This was purely the act of a disgruntled, ageing, skank, Liskula Cohen, in her quest for revenge. She used her “fame”, fading looks, money and the legal system to strike back against a total nobody she had already stepped on. (The blog was a response to Cohen moving in on her boyfriend.) It was a complete 100% waste of court time and that skank Liskula Cohen should not just have lost, but should have been billed for wasting court time. Making it worse, Judge Clusterfuck blew this one big-time by giving that Liskula Cohen skank exactly what she wanted. In the process, the judge made the legal system a bigger joke than it already is and further eroded on-line privacy and Free Speech.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: