[Peace-discuss] Project Veritas allowed to continue defamation suit against New York Times, promises informative discovery & a means of interpreting Russiagate claims

[J.B. Nicholson]

Quoting https://on.rt.com/b48l

> New York Times used ‘deceptive disinformation’ to smear Project Veritas, acted
> with ‘reckless disregard’ and ‘malice’, judge rules
> 
> New York Times used ‘deceptive disinformation’ to smear Project Veritas, acted
> with ‘reckless disregard’ and ‘malice’, judge rulesNew York Times used ‘deceptive
> disinformation’ to smear Project Veritas, acted with ‘reckless disregard’ and
> ‘malice’, judge rules Project Veritas founder James O'Keefe speaks at the 2021
> Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) ©  REUTERS/Octavio Jones A
> defamation suit from Project Veritas against the New York Times is moving forward,
> as a judge has ruled the newspaper posed opinion as fact in their coverage of the
> conservative news outlet.
> 
> A New York Supreme Court judge handed Veritas, known for its undercover and
> whistleblowing videos, a big “win” this week, allowing a defamation suit against
> the paper and two reporters to proceed forward.
> 
> In the ruling denying a motion to dismiss the suit, the Times was accused of
> acting with “actual malice” and “reckless disregard” in multiple articles covering
> a 2020 video report from Veritas on alleged illegal voting practices taking place
> in Minnesota. It was not the only voter fraud allegation Veritas covered in 2020,
> with one video expose actually leading to the arrest of a Texas political
> consultant on charges of election fraud and illegal voting.
> 
> In the Minnesota video, multiple people are seen taking part in or discussing
> ballot harvesting and linking the act to Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minnesota). The report
> alleged ballots were being paid for and even filled out for voters to favor
> certain candidates. One ballot harvester featured in the video, Liban Osman, has
> since claimed[1] footage of him was heavily edited and that he was offered money to
> connect the alleged fraud to Omar – an allegation Project Veritas denied.
> 
> The five Times articles in question called Veritas’ Minnesota videos deceptive,
> but Justice Charles Wood determined this was not fact, but rather opinion from
> reporters Maggie Astor and Tiffany Hsu.
> 
> “The Articles that are the subject of this action called the Video ‘deceptive,’
> but the dictionary definitions of ‘disinformation’ and ‘deceptive’ provided by
> defendants’ counsel certainly apply to Astor’s and Hsu’s failure to note that they
> injected their opinions in news articles, as they now claim,” he wrote in his
> decision[2].
> 
> Astor referred to a “long history” of releasing “manipulated or selectively edited
> footage” on the part of Veritas in an article, while Hsu called the video
> “deceptive” in coverage.
> 
> Wood said this sort of vague coverage “could be viewed as exposing Veritas to
> ridicule and harm to its reputation as a media source because the reader may read
> these news Articles, expecting facts, not opinion, and conclude that Veritas is a
> partisan zealot group, deceptively editing video, and presenting it as news.” Also
> on rt.com ‘He was setting me up’: Project Veritas accused of offering $10,000 for
> activist to say Ilhan Omar involved in voter fraud scheme
> 
> Lawyers for the Times argued that a reader could determine that specific wording
> such as “deceptive” is opinion-based and cited other news outlets that used
> similar language, but Wood said the paper did not meet “their burden to prove that
> the reporting by Veritas in the Video is deceptive.”
> 
> Project Veritas founder James O’Keefe has celebrated the court victory as a “win”
> for his news outlet and promised that Astor and even New York Times executive
> editor Dean Baquet will now be put under oath “where they will be forced to answer
> our questions.”
> 
> “Project Veritas will record these depositions and expose them for the world to
> see,” he said.

[1] https://on.rt.com/arwc
[2] https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20518694-order_denying_motion_to_dismiss



Also discussed in https://youtube.com/watch?v=xGqClalrbz8 -- (24m 37s) The Gaggle 
with Peter and George -- "TG 295: New York Times Suffers Major Legal Setback". As 
this discussion says, discovery (where evidence is handed over to opposing parties) 
should be very interesting. This case also promises to have something interesting to 
say regarding interpreting Russiagate, the ongoing baseless conspiracy theory that 
started as a way to provide an excuse for Mrs. Clinton's loss to a TV game show host 
for POTUS and became a lot more over the past 5 years including a basis for war in 
the form of anti-Russian sanctions.

-J