Leftist TV News Host Rachel Maddow Argues that Her Words Are Not Facts As Her Defense in a Lawsuit Accusing Her of Defamation

image_pdf
  • Save
image_print
  • Save
OAN, One America News Network, a small conservative media outlet in San Diego, sued Rachel Maddow, the prime time star of MSNBC news, for $10 million after she falsely claimed on air, “In this case, the most obsequiously pro-Trump right-wing news outlet (OAN) in America really literally is paid Russian propaganda. Their on-air U.S. politics reporter is paid by the Russian government to produce propaganda for that government.” Maddow based her claim on the the fact that before the staffer was employed by OAN, she had done some freelance work for Sputnik News, and did not do any work for Sputnik after she was hired by OAN. Maddow’s lawyers argued that the news star’s statement was “rhetorical hyperbole, incapable of being proved true or false.” But, it can be proven false. UC Santa Barbara linguist professor, Stefan Thomas Gries, said that Maddow’s statement was unlikely to to be considered an opinion, and that Maddow, a graduate of Stanford and Oxford Universities and a Rhodes Scholar, is not the sort of person an audience would expect to misuse the word “literally.”

Back in September, we reported that TV network OAN had filed a lawsuit against Rachel Maddow for the time the host said that OAN “really, literally is paid Russian propaganda.”

Now, Maddow finds herself having to come up with a defense for her statement in court. And she has also apparently hired Lionel Hutz as her legal adviser.

According to Culttture, her lawyers argued in a recent motion that “…the liberal host was clearly offering up her ‘own unique expression’ of her views to capture what she saw as the ‘ridiculous’ nature of the undisputed facts. Her comment, therefore, is a quintessential statement ‘of rhetorical hyperbole, incapable of being proved true or false.”

Oh, it’s capable of being proved false, alright. Maddow had previously claimed, on air, about one of OAN’s reporters:

“In this case, the most obsequiously pro-Trump right wing news outlet in America is really literally is paid Russian propaganda,” and added, “Their on-air politics reporter (Kristian Rouz) is paid by the Russian government to produce propaganda for that government.”

The testimony of UC Santa Barbara linguistics professor Stefan Thomas Gries, however, stands at odds with Maddow’s defense. Gries said: “It is very unlikely that an average or reasonable/ordinary viewer would consider the sentence in question to be a statement of opinion.”

Read full article here…

Additional source:

https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2019/12/05/nolte-rachel-maddows-lawyer-responds-to-oan-lawsuit-with-alex-jones-defense/

Visit our Classified ads.

Check out our Classified ads at the bottom of this page.

Recent stories & commentary

Classifieds

For classified advertising rates and terms, click here. The appearance of ads on this site does not signify endorsement by the publisher. We do not attempt to verify the accuracy of statements made therein or vouch for the integrity of advertisers. However, we will investigate complaints from readers and remove any message we find to be misleading or that promotes anything fraudulent, illegal, or unethical.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments