Lawyers Say the Darndest, Postmodern, Deconstructive Things! By Charles Taylor (Florida)

I have been around lawyers long enough to know that they will say … anything … much worse than even philosophers, who nobody takes any notice of any way. Thus, in the on-going defamation case made by Project Veritas against The New York Times, the defendant lawyers for the paper have argued that words such as “deceptive” and “verifiable” do not have a precise meaning! It seems to be drawing on postmodernist trends in law here, or maybe there is nothing sophisticated, just pulling any old argument out of thin air, or hot smelly air. Talk about “post truth,” literally.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zwvPbqmQh_o&t=3s

“Project Veritas has revealed notable filings in their ongoing defamation suit with the New York Times which should raise some eyebrows including the argument that neither the words “deceptive” nor “verifiable” have a “precise meaning that is readily understood.” In the aftermath of a September 2020 Project Veritas report which showed footage of illegal ballot harvesting in Minnesota, the New York Times wrote five articles saying the report was “deceptive” and not “verifiable.” Because you can see countless ballots on video and subjects of the investigation are heard expressing indifference to violating laws with respect to ballot harvesting, Project Veritas asked the New York Times to correct the articles, but the Times refused. This resulted in a lawsuit which successfully survived a motion to dismiss causing the NYT to appeal.”