Discover more from Steve Kirsch's newsletter
My email to the CEO of Media Matters
I offered to reconsider my decision to sue them for defamation if the CEO answers a few questions. How do you think he will respond?
Update: Aug 18, 2022
Angelo Carusone, CEO of Media Matters, refused to answer any of my questions (listed below).
Instead, they quietly revised their original hit piece to remove the accusation that I lied and reflect the fact that they were wrong. To get even, they replaced their headline calling me a liar to a story with links to multiple “hit pieces” on me. How thoughtful of them.
They refuse to speak with me about the allegations on a recorded video. That’s because they aren't interested in finding the truth or being challenged on what they wrote. None of them has the courage to debate me on camera.
Angelo flatly refused to answer the question "If the truth conflicts with the government narrative, which one takes priority?” So that’s a tacit admission that Media Matters is not about truth, but advocacy of the mainstream narrative.
To not correct their story would be actual malice. This now makes a defamation case much more difficult to win. <sarcasm on> But I’m sure they corrected their story because it was the right thing to do. <sarcasm off>
Unfortunately, according to the defamation attorneys I spoke with, the law currently reflects “lied” as an opinion, rather than a statement of fact. So it’s unlikely I would have prevailed. So Media Matters can say that I lied and have no basis at all to make that claim, and they are untouchable. I wouldn’t make it past the anti-SLAPP motion so I wouldn’t even get discovery.
I really think they should change the name of the organization to “Truth Doesn’t Matter” to better reflect their core values. Or maybe “Facts Don’t Matter.”
What do you think?
I just put the CEO of Media Matters into a “no win” situation.
If he refuses to answer my email, I will sue them using the fact that they wouldn’t respond to simple questions against them.
If he does answer, I believe they will admit that they have no proof that I made false claims and had reasonable doubt that I could be right.
Either way, they are in deep shit and they know it.
Media Matters wrote an article calling me a liar.
That was a big mistake.
I wrote them back saying I was going to sue them for defamation.
The CEO of Media Matters responded to my email and offered to change “lied” to “falsely claimed.” I didn’t accept. Instead, I wrote this:
Here’s the full email
Thanks for your offer.
I’m very well aware of the “actual malice” standard for defamation of public figures, but I think you are skating on very thin ice here.
We’ve all been around the block here… I know such cases rarely succeed, you know it too, but we both know that nothing is a sure thing in law.
And I’m sure you are aware of this recent case: https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2022-08-12/jury-democratic-pac-defamed-moore-awards-him-8-2-million
Litigation is expensive for both parties and if you look at my history, I’ve never lost in court. I pick my fights. This one looks very winnable to me, even with the high standards of proof.
Because I’m a nice guy, I’m going to give you the chance to save us both time and money.
You could dissuade me from filing my lawsuit if you would simply answer a few questions for me:
Precisely how many people have been killed by the COVID19 vaccine ?
How does the entire staff KNOW that? What is their source?
How can the entire staff be ABSOLUTELY confident that their number is correct? How could they possibly not have any reasonable doubt? I’ve talked to experts in the field who threw up their hands and said they have no idea how many people have been killed by the vaccine. So how can your staff people be more confident than people like U Penn Professor Jeffrey Morris who admitted to me he had no clue. He’s a professional who is focused on that data and he doesn’t know. So how can your staff be more confident that Professor Morris? That’s what I don’t understand. Please explain.
The name of the most dangerous vaccine and how the entire staff could be ABSOLUTELY sure it is more dangerous than the COVID vaccine. What proof did they have at the time they made the statement? I’m happy to issue a retraction if you can just name the mystery vaccine showing I’m wrong.
How many people on the Media Matters staff were responsible for that article?
If you provide satisfactory answers to all 5 questions, I will seriously consider dropping my case. That will save us all time and money.
Conversely, if you are unable to answer my questions, then I think you’ve demonstrated for me the “actual malice” standard for defamation has been met.
I really look forward to hearing from you.
Here is the article
My next question to them
They said I lied. That means I made an intentionally false statement.
But all my statements are made based on data. I didn’t lie. I reported exactly what the data showed. See this comment.
How does the staff know I lied?
The staff may disagree with me. But they said I “lied.”
There is no possible way they can know I lied. I didn’t lie at all.
That is defamation and actual malice. They made it up out of thin air with no evidence at all.
If they think I’m going to back down, they are badly miscalculating.
They are in a heap of trouble. And they know it.
And they will pay for it.
I’m going to depose the entire staff to prove I didn’t lie and that they are all guilty of defamation. They will be named individually and I will sue Media Matters as well.
This is not going to go well for them. Trust me.
For more information
Defamation law says I need to show “actual malice” to win:
“To show actual malice, plaintiffs must demonstrate [that the defendant] either knew his statement was false or subjectively entertained serious doubt his statement was truthful.”
I think Media Matters is skating on thin ice here. Even if they were absolutely confident that what I said was wrong, that’s not what they wrote. They said I deliberately lied to the American people. They basically said I got up in front of the camera and said things that I knew were not true. That is false and there is not a shred of evidence to support their statement.
How do you think Angelo will respond to my offer to drop the case in return for a few answers?
I think he won’t respond.