John Hoge was the subject of an article in Breitbart Unmasked in March 2015. This particular article contains certain allegations. Since they’re not true, I’ll go ahead and leave them off this article.
John is suing the author of the article Matt Osborne, and Bill Schmalfeldt. Bill commented on the article, and this snippet of Bill Schmalfeldt’s recent court filing quotes the comment:
This sentence stands out:
He indicates in his complaint that this single sentence endorses the entire article as truthful and is a restatement of the alleged defamatory remarks contained in the article.
Bill Schmalfeldt hopes by some miracle that a judge or jury will determine that by writing the phrase “Matt, that was an appropriately brutal and true depiction of events…” he was not endorsing the clearly false things in an article.
Does he mean of the events within the specific courtroom, or the events leading up to the courtroom appearance?
Of course “truth” is not a word which John Hoge uses to describe the article at hand.
Osborne was wrong to report on an event he did not attend — unless he had a reliable witness. Schmalfeldt was wrong to use the word truth to describe an article which contains inaccurate statements.
Any other interpretation falls into the area of Clintonian logic. I guess it depends on what “…brutal and true depiction of events” means. To me it means, “yes, that article was tough, but true.”
A court will decide who is right.