The New York Times, whose motto should be “All the news that’s s*^t to print” attempted to get the Project Veritas defamation case dismissed.
Not only did the judge rule that the case could proceed on the merits, but he also lectured the NYT’s lawyers on why the article was inflammatory.
They argued that the offending paragraph was merely opinion.
The judge said if it indeed was opinion, the author or the editor had the responsibility to label it as such.
The case will now go into the discovery phase.
Project Veritas will be able to question New York Times reporter Maggie Astor and New York Times executive editor Dean Baquet under oath.
They will have to answer every pertinent question. There is no taking the Fifth, although they can refuse to answer questions. The Times is scared. And rightfully so, Project Veritas hasn’t lost a court case yet.
- Justice Charles D. Wood of the Supreme Court of New York in Westchester County denied The New York Times’ Motion to Dismiss in the defamation lawsuit brought forward by Project Veritas.
- Project Veritas v. New York Times lawsuit originated due to The Times’ defamatory attacks on Project Veritas’ investigation into illegal ballot harvesting in Minnesota during the 2020 election cycle.
- The Court found Project Veritas demonstrated “a substantial basis in law and fact that the Defendants [The New York Times] acted with actual malice, that is, with knowledge that the statements in the Articles were false or made with reckless disregard of whether they were false or not” and Project Veritas should be permitted to “conduct discovery.”
The finding that the Times demonstrated malice is a great indicator of where the judge stands in this matter.
Project Veritas could be looking at an enormous settlement or an award from the Times and it could be just the beginning. Other offended parties could see that legal action could be the way for them to go.
If they did, they could force the newspaper to print the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth…