NYT slams judge for ordering publication
to remove story about Project Veritas
and to return documents it obtained recording
communications between conservative group
and its lawyers
Daily Mail (UK),
by
Alex Hammer
Original Article
Posted By: Imright,
12/26/2021 1:18:41 AM
The New York Times has blasted a judge who ordered the paper to return documents they obtained from the conservative activist group Project Veritas. Coming in the form of an op-ed piece penned by publication's editorial board, The Times' top brass utilized the power of the printed page to express their distaste towards New York Supreme Court Justice Charles Wood's Friday ruling.
Barred from publishing the legally sensitive papers that potentially contain incriminating communications between the firm's lawyers, the storied news outlet contends the jurist's decision violates the First Amendment.
Reply 1 - Posted by:
DVC 12/26/2021 1:21:31 AM (No. 1018839)
A shame that they can't order the company to give the NYT building to Veritas as payment for pain and suffering caused by the criminals who make up NYT staff.
41 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
Trigger2 12/26/2021 2:21:55 AM (No. 1018848)
About what one could expect from the communist NY Slimes.
28 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
planetgeo 12/26/2021 4:47:21 AM (No. 1018886)
It's hard to believe that anyone still reads, much less actually subscribes, to that pompetous of progressive puffery and propaganda.
44 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
BarryNo 12/26/2021 4:50:24 AM (No. 1018887)
There's a big difference between the publication of documents generated BY government, supposedly in our interest, and the publication of communications between a private citizen and their legal council.
The Bill of Rights was to protect the individual from their government.
38 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
pgsulli1701 12/26/2021 5:55:38 AM (No. 1018895)
Imagine Trump is President. The Times is handed Don Jr.'s diary. They can't verify it, they don't publish it, and they give it to the police. The FBI raids the Times looking for it. Project Veritas publishes communications that could have only been obtained from cell phones seized in the raid. I wonder what the Times would have said about that? Of course, this scenario is too far-fetched as they would have published anything, verified or not, if it helped their agenda.
20 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
Petronius 12/26/2021 6:35:46 AM (No. 1018910)
Veritas should start investigating The New York Times al la CNN. There are plenty of perverts, drug addicts, degenerates and criminals within that organization as well.
21 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
Pucky1 12/26/2021 7:31:13 AM (No. 1018931)
By the Times reasoning, it is just fine to buy stolen property. No doubt those Times execs have closets full of smash-and-grab Gucci handbags.
18 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
Paperpuncher 12/26/2021 7:47:50 AM (No. 1018935)
I hop to see two things here.
1) Contempt of Court against the slimes for not obeying a court order.
2) One, if not more massive lawsuits which will ultimately put the slimes out of business. They have been teetering on the edge for years and deserve to go.
This happens and I will be a happy camper.
18 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
edgar 12/26/2021 7:57:12 AM (No. 1018939)
FTA, "...documents they obtained from the conservative activist group Project Veritas." Uh, sorry, but I think they were documents obtained by the FBI from Project Veritas. Just saying.
14 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
Kafka2 12/26/2021 8:25:52 AM (No. 1018954)
This is how the NYSlimes reacts to being caught obtaining private communications illegally. The sad fact is that the FBI raid seems to be the source of the Project Veritas communications. Giving the FBI the benefit of the doubt that the files they confiscated “hacked” from them, it still shows a sloppy handling of private materials they should have kept secure. Can anybody there do a competent job any more?
7 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
hoopsfan 12/26/2021 9:04:23 AM (No. 1018981)
Boo-hoo, NYT. Evidently you think laws are just for little people.
12 people like this.
Don't do things in the lawful manner Slimes, prepare to be bitten by the Judge. In this case, IMO the Judge didn't go far enough.
9 people like this.
Reply 13 - Posted by:
hershey 12/26/2021 10:23:14 AM (No. 1019059)
Nooo Yaawk Slimes says it all...not even fit to line a birdcage...
6 people like this.
Reply 14 - Posted by:
Strike3 12/26/2021 10:27:09 AM (No. 1019067)
You tell 'em, NYT. Your courage is why the entire country is on your side. /S
4 people like this.
Reply 15 - Posted by:
Zigrid 12/26/2021 10:28:42 AM (No. 1019069)
Great way to start the new year...make the NYSlims adhere to the First Amendment to the letter of the law...if they chose to hide behind the First Amendment...then so be it!!
5 people like this.
Reply 16 - Posted by:
Omen55 12/26/2021 2:30:32 PM (No. 1019240)
Hubris=NYT.
This is what happens when you don't consult with real lawyers.
2 people like this.
Reply 17 - Posted by:
janjan 12/26/2021 3:03:29 PM (No. 1019270)
The NYT is squawking over having to turn over personal documents that they stole and were using to defame the owners. It’s hard to wrap your brain around that.
4 people like this.
Reply 18 - Posted by:
ronniethek 12/26/2021 4:25:25 PM (No. 1019349)
The criminals at he NYT can not hide their illegal conduct behind the 1stA A way needs to be found to bleed these bastards to death financially.
1 person likes this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "Imright"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)