Posted on 01/26/2021 9:21:30 PM PST by bitt
New York Times Reporter Maggie Astor changes her tune, originally said Veritas videos have “solely” unnamed sources but now says they have “many” unnamed sources.
Astor said she labelled the videos “deceptive” because she was unable to corroborate the videos on her own.
Astor: “I know of Project Veritas and, before writing my articles about the Video, I knew that it had a reputation for publishing deceptively-edited videos and had been publicly criticized many times for doing so.”
New York Times legal team cite Wikipedia to justify mischaracterizing Project Veritas.
New York Times legal team excused Astor’s article as an opinion piece: “Unverifiable expressions of opinion are not actionable and cannot be defamatory.”
[WESTCHESTER, N.Y. – Jan. 26, 2021] Project Veritas released a new video today updating the public on the lawsuit against The New York Times for their defamatory article attacking Veritas’ September 2020 videos exposing illegal ballot harvesting in Minnesota.
The New York Times filed a “Motion to Dismiss” request in an attempt to toss out the lawsuit and evade their wrongdoing.
Maggie Astor, The New York Times reporter who wrote the defamatory article, affirmed in her piece that the Veritas videos have “solely” unnamed sources.
“The video then claims that Democratic operatives connected to Ms. [Ilhan] Omar’s campaign paid voters to hand over blank mail-in ballots and filled them out. This would be illegal, but the allegations come solely from unnamed people who speak with Project Veritas operatives in the video and whose faces are not shown,” she said.
(Excerpt) Read more at projectveritas.com ...
Her complaint about anonymous sources is bizarre.
The difference between Vertas’ anonymous sources and the NYT is that Veritas has real sources.
Every word written in that rag is unverifiable expressions of opinion. The problem for the NYT, though, are that they pretend that they produce news. Since they purport to be news, and many fools believe them to be so, they are clearly guilty.
Why settle?
If Veritas has the money and lawyers, why not rake the Old Gray Whore over the coals AND take their money?
I kinda know that once this case doesn’t get tossed the attorneys for The NY Times are going to quickly want to settle or else have their little ring exposed in court
later
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.