What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

A WIN for the Forces of Goodness

PatriotArmy

Platinum Member
Joined
May 1, 2021
Messages
555
Reaction score
500
Points
483

O'Keefe joins Bartiromo to Discuss HISTORIC Legal Win vs. NYT and Upcoming Twitter / CNN Libel​


This is a must see video


  • The New York Times cited 52 sources including Wikipedia in its motion to dismiss our defamation lawsuit, in an attempt to claim that Project Veritas is “libel proof.”
  • The Gray Lady argued they could print whatever they want about Project Veritas, because Wikipedia and other media outlets said bad things about Veritas first.
  • New York Supreme Court disagreed: “Polling does not decide the truth nor speak to evidence, and Defendants have not met their burden to prove that the reporting by Veritas in the Video is deceptive.”
  • Justice Wood: “There is a substantial basis in law to proceed, to permit the plaintiff [Project Veritas], to conduct discovery, and to then attempt to meet its higher standard of proving liability through clear and convincing evidence of actual malice.”
  • The New York Times is “one of the largest newspapers in the world since Abraham Lincoln,” the ruling stated. And it’s “claiming protections from an upstart competitor [Project Veritas] armed with a cell phone and a web site.”
  • Judicial order denying New York Times’ motion to dismiss: “The [New York Times] Articles could be viewed as exposing Veritas to ridicule and harm… because the reader may read these news Articles… and conclude that Veritas is a partisan zealot group, deceptively editing video, and presenting it as news.”
  • The order continued: “Upon review of the total context and tone of the stories… the court concludes that a reasonable reader could very well believe that the challenged statements were conveying facts about Veritas.”
  • Constitutional Law Professor Jonathan Turley called the decision a “major victory” for Veritas: “I expect to be teaching this case next year in my torts class when we deal with defamation.”
 

CrusaderFrank

Diamond Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
121,504
Reaction score
36,700
Points
2,290

O'Keefe joins Bartiromo to Discuss HISTORIC Legal Win vs. NYT and Upcoming Twitter / CNN Libel​


This is a must see video


  • The New York Times cited 52 sources including Wikipedia in its motion to dismiss our defamation lawsuit, in an attempt to claim that Project Veritas is “libel proof.”
  • The Gray Lady argued they could print whatever they want about Project Veritas, because Wikipedia and other media outlets said bad things about Veritas first.
  • New York Supreme Court disagreed: “Polling does not decide the truth nor speak to evidence, and Defendants have not met their burden to prove that the reporting by Veritas in the Video is deceptive.”
  • Justice Wood: “There is a substantial basis in law to proceed, to permit the plaintiff [Project Veritas], to conduct discovery, and to then attempt to meet its higher standard of proving liability through clear and convincing evidence of actual malice.”
  • The New York Times is “one of the largest newspapers in the world since Abraham Lincoln,” the ruling stated. And it’s “claiming protections from an upstart competitor [Project Veritas] armed with a cell phone and a web site.”
  • Judicial order denying New York Times’ motion to dismiss: “The [New York Times] Articles could be viewed as exposing Veritas to ridicule and harm… because the reader may read these news Articles… and conclude that Veritas is a partisan zealot group, deceptively editing video, and presenting it as news.”
  • The order continued: “Upon review of the total context and tone of the stories… the court concludes that a reasonable reader could very well believe that the challenged statements were conveying facts about Veritas.”
  • Constitutional Law Professor Jonathan Turley called the decision a “major victory” for Veritas: “I expect to be teaching this case next year in my torts class when we deal with defamation.”

Hopefully, the suit will end with O'Keefe taking over ownership of the NY Times
 

WTH_Progs?

Diamond Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2019
Messages
6,746
Reaction score
4,943
Points
1,940
This would hit home for all PROGS if they were just a little bit honest:

  • New York Supreme Court disagreed: “Polling does not decide the truth nor speak to evidence"
 

LA RAM FAN

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2008
Messages
40,921
Reaction score
9,210
Points
2,030
Project Veritas does the work that the news use to do
:yes_text12::thankusmile::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

hey i saw yo mention somewhere about de santis being a good politician,would like yto see you make your way over to this thread of mine here.

 

basquebromance

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2015
Messages
67,214
Reaction score
11,777
Points
2,070
this is what a truly democratic media looks like. the lamestream media used to be able to control the narrative. well, fuck you, motherfuckers! the barbarians are at the gate. everyone has a voice now
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$280.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top