James O'Keefe III vs Twitter (2021) -

[Stoneheart]

Also what is it with the Supreme Court in NYC and lolsuits? I'm pretty sure this is the same court that heard the Maddox case.

Its a stupid name for a lower court.

 

[kcbbq]

Its a stupid name for a lower court.

It's very Canada like, and that's justification for using nukes in international law.

 

[mindlessobserver]

Honestly having looked through this I would say O'Keefe does have a meritorious claim. Saying a journalist spreads disinformation and so on can be viewed as per se defamation. Of course the bar O'Keefe has to hit is to prove he does no such thing. He most definitely edits things in a way that best supports his position. Which, while not outright lying could be enough for CNN, Twitter et al to convince a judge he does "selectively edit" with an intent to misinform people. His constant sperging about getting public depositions will also create issues as all the defendants are going to argue he just wants to use the power of the courts discovery process to run a witch hunt and that he is not actually attempting to redress some injury he has taken. Which is the POINT of civil actions. The POINT is to make whole someone who was injured. Not to put on a three ring circus and use it for fundraising.

That said, fuck CNN, Twitter and the New York times. Everyone knows they lie constantly and continually. They get away with it too because nobody tries to call them on their shit. Lawsuits are expensive and time consuming, with a low chance of success. Especially in defamation cases. Its why people like Sandmann who were very clearly defamed quietly take the "fuck off" money.

That's based though, fuck the senate.

I am the Senate. sorry not sorry

 

[Dyn]

Honestly having looked through this I would say O'Keefe does have a meritorious claim. Saying a journalist spreads disinformation and so on can be viewed as per se defamation.

The defamatory statement he's claiming is that they said he 'operated fake accounts'. I'm very doubtful that would qualify as per se.

 

[Terrifik]

The defamatory statement he's claiming is that they said he 'operated fake accounts'. I'm very doubtful that would qualify as per se.

i agree with on this statement of vague & condescending semantics.

up to okeeth to explain if he is a valid source & how the twitter check mark is used as valid identifier & target show that this is the real james okeeth account .
That if okeetha would made one wrong op ed targeted by the mob would the mob determined that account is the correct okeeth account & not sum 13 year old fig on the internet.

 

[WhatAmIDoing]

The defamatory statement he's claiming is that they said he 'operated fake accounts'. I'm very doubtful that would qualify as per se.

Its very borderline IMO.

• Indications that a person was involved in behavior incompatible with the proper conduct of his business, trade or profession

IMO it would depend if he's able to prove his business/trade/profession as legitimate or not? CNN will want him to be a tabloid, and fake accounts and tabloids I can see. Fake accounts and legitimate sources? No

 

[Dyn]

Its very borderline IMO.

• Indications that a person was involved in behavior incompatible with the proper conduct of his business, trade or profession

IMO it would depend if he's able to prove his business/trade/profession as legitimate or not? CNN will want him to be a tabloid, and fake accounts and tabloids I can see. Fake accounts and legitimate sources? No

I think they're gonna argue that having bot followers is operating fake accounts, which is something so extremely common that we more or less expect it from checkmarks.

 

[OneHandClapping]

I think they're gonna argue that having bot followers is operating fake accounts, which is something so extremely common that we more or less expect it from checkmarks.

That'd probably be something for trial.

Dunno how strong NY Anti-SLAPP is, but I think he can at least survive an anti-SLAPP

 

[mindlessobserver]

That'd probably be something for trial.

Dunno how strong NY Anti-SLAPP is, but I think he can at least survive an anti-SLAPP

Yeah, but then comes Jurisdiction. New York Times can obviously be sued in New York State court, but I have a serious question about twitter. Twitter is going to argue this is Federal Jurisdiction. Sure they do business in New York, but I bet big money everything from the tweet origination, to the people involved are in California. CNN also offers jurisdictional issues too. It may be moot though, since they decided to use New York States Anti SLAAP law they waived any jurisdictional arguments. I could see them circling back and making a jurisdictional argument anyway though just to make this more expensive.

 

[HumanHive]

Defamation is the stupidest thing to sue a company for, especially in the United States.

 

[Not Really Here]

Defamation is the stupidest thing to sue a company for, especially in the United States.

Not when your goal is to enter discovery and get the power of subpoena to find out their internal discussions, processes and standards for(off the top of my head)
1. What is a "bot account".
2. How they decide a user is running a network of such accounts.
3. What if any discussions occurred between any Twitter staff and any reporters about PV or O'Keefe.

Those three alone will open at least a dozen more questions.

 

[MirrorNoir]

Should be noted that the taking down of ACORN pissed off a LOT of people on the left, and was a MASSIVE black eye towards the obama death kult in Washington. Hence them putting pressure on the media to either blanket embargos outlets from covering any scandal or corruption O'Keefe uncovers or to only cover them under the bullshit means where they repeatedly attack O'Keefe's character and claim that anything he exposes is fake news simply because the media says O'Keefe "is a fraudster" with no real rebuttal of what is being exposed, just "We call O'Keefe a bad actor so anything he says is a lie and no, we aren't going to say anything else except that so stop bothering us about covering what O'Keefe exposed corruption-wise on the left!".

I'm kind of shocked that Obama didn't straight up kill O'Keefe ala Breitbart, but I suppose Obama thought he could send him to jail and condemn him to death by prison rape.

 

[AnOminous]

Dunno how strong NY Anti-SLAPP is, but I think he can at least survive an anti-SLAPP

I was going to say NY's anti-SLAPP law is a complete joke, and it was. Good thing I checked. They have a new upgraded version so it now protects First Amendment activities (it previously only protected a very limited class of things related to contact with the government). It can be tricky to litigate a new law, but at least they have a real anti-SLAPP statute now.

Here's a brief rundown from New York law firm Arnold Porter.

It also has mandatory fee shifting and I doubt these parties hire cheap counsel. Hope O'Queefe is ready to break out the checkbook if he loses, which is likely.

I'm kind of shocked that Obama didn't straight up kill O'Keefe ala Breitbart, but I suppose Obama thought he could send him to jail and condemn him to death by prison rape.

He died of being a fat fuck with nearly entirely occluded coronary arteries.

 

[Dyn]

I was going to say NY's anti-SLAPP law is a complete joke, and it was. Good thing I checked. They have a new upgraded version so it now protects First Amendment activities (it previously only protected a very limited class of things related to contact with the government). It can be tricky to litigate a new law, but at least they have a real anti-SLAPP statute now.

It also stays discovery so if his goal was just fishing for dirt he's fucked.

 

[AnOminous]

It also stays discovery so if his goal was just fishing for dirt he's fucked.

This actually looks a lot like the Texas anti-SLAPP law Weeb Wars are familiar with in Mignogna's case. If it's interpreted similarly this could really end poorly for the plaintiff.

 

[Techpriest]

It also stays discovery so if his goal was just fishing for dirt he's fucked.

Oh, he's almost certainly trying to fish for dirt here, that's his entire MO.

 

[WhatAmIDoing]

I think they're gonna argue that having bot followers is operating fake accounts, which is something so extremely common that we more or less expect it from checkmarks.

That sounds like a terrible, terrible argument. God I hope its their argument.

 

[DragoonSierra]

That sounds like a terrible, terrible argument. God I hope its their argument.

Even if he has bot followers how exactly do they prove hes the one "operating" them or even paid for them. Or that thier bots to begin with?

 

[mindlessobserver]

Oh, he's almost certainly trying to fish for dirt here, that's his entire MO.

It's made all the worse by him pretty much saying he's on a fishing expedition in all his media appearances. As in all things related to the law, the wisest course of action is to shut the fuck up. O'Keefe cant help himself though and its going to cost him.

 

[Dyn]

It's made all the worse by him pretty much saying he's on a fishing expedition in all his media appearances.

Oh this is gonna get anti-slapped for sure then.