About That Lawsuit, Michael Mann

Get lost:

Usually, you don’t welcome a nuisance lawsuit, because it’s a nuisance. It consumes time. It costs money. But this is a different matter in light of one word: discovery.

If Mann sues us, the materials we will need to mount a full defense will be extremely wide-ranging. So if he files a complaint, we will be doing more than fighting a nuisance lawsuit; we will be embarking on a journalistic project of great interest to us and our readers.

And this is where you come in. If Mann goes through with it, we’re probably going to call on you to help fund our legal fight and our investigation of Mann through discovery. If it gets that far, we may eventually even want to hire a dedicated reporter to comb through the materials and regularly post stories on Mann.

My advice to poor Michael is to go away and bother someone else. If he doesn’t have the good sense to do that, we look forward to teaching him a thing or two about the law and about how free debate works in a free country.

He could use a lot of education on that score. As I said at the time, this was nothing but bluster to try to get a cheap apology.

[Update a few minutes later]

Mark Steyn: Stick it where the global warming won’t shine.

[One more update before bed]

I have to say that it’s unusual (fortunately) for me to be mentioned in a response to a libel lawsuit. I still hope he moves forward, but if he does, he’s even more of a fool than he’s already demonstrated himself to be. I don’t think his tobacco lawyer had any idea what he was getting himself into when he sent that letter on Mann’s “behalf,” and he’s likely advising him to give it up at this point.

17 thoughts on “About That Lawsuit, Michael Mann”

  1. So how does it feel to be the trigger? As I recall, it was your article that was quoted by Steyn which got the ball rolling on this.

  2. Of course, by publishing this post, the chances of getting to that discovery go down significantly.

    1. Mann publicly threatens lawsuit; Steyn publicly threatens discovery. This is just tit for tat legal gamesmanship. Neither party really wants it to come to a trial.

      1. Steyn certainly does, this isn’t his first rodeo. The whole Canadian human rights commission fiasco was great publicity for Steyn and Maclean’s. Mann is the one with secrets, not Steyn.

        1. Steyn certainly does, this isn’t his first rodeo.

          I doubt the experience was a particularly pleasant one.

          1. Well, it seems like a win-win stategy for the NR. If, having called his bluff, Mann backs down, it will look like he has something to hide. That will confirm everything they have written about him in the past. Easy victory. If Mann does not back down, it will be a more drawn out process, requiring more resources, but they will eventually get their hands on the documents critics of Mann have been demanding for years.

          2. You’re assuming that Mann is smart enough to be dissuaded. If that were the case, he wouldn’t have threatened the suit in the first place.

            The post had two purposes: to taunt Mann, and to explain the NR’s readership why it wouldn’t be a bad thing to have the suit.

          3. It’s called fair warning. The good-guy fast-draw artist always tries to warn off the ambitious but foolhardy townie who wants to be known as The Guy Who Beat Mr. Fast Draw.

            Even if Mr. Fast Draw thinks the gene pool would be much improved without the townie in it.

  3. If it does go forward, Rand, let me know. I’ll be glad to pony up a little for the defense, and have some skills that I might be able to donate to the cause.

    Watch it, kayawanee – the popcorn concession’s mine. ;-p

      1. If it goes forward, don’t sell the popcorn machine, sell popcorn! You’ll likely make more money.

Comments are closed.