CHARLESTON — Don Blankenship has filed a memorandum opposing a motion for summary judgment regarding his defamation case against several media agencies.
Blankenship argued the defendants' motion for summary judgment should be denied because none of the arguments put forth by the defendants would negate the fact that a reasonable jury could find the network's false statements to be false and defamatory.
"NBCU News Group has not met its burden of establishing the absence of disputed material facts on this issue of actual malice," Blankenship wrote.
Blankenship contended that the defendants published defamatory statements in reckless disregard for the truth and that the defendants falsely described him as a "convicted felon" when he'd only been convicted of a misdemeanor and his conviction was a matter of public record and readily available.
NBCUniversal and CNBC filed the motion for summary judgment last month, arguing there was no genuine dispute as to any material fact about Blankenship’s claims and the defendants are entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
"Specifically, Blankenship’s defamation claim fails because there is no evidence, let alone clear and convincing evidence, that the authors of the challenged statements acted with actual malice or with reckless disregard for the truth in publishing their statements" the defendants contended. "Blankenship also cannot present evidence that NBC’s or CNBC’s statements about him were materially false. Even if Blankenship could present evidence of those elements of his claim — which he cannot — he has adduced no evidence that he suffered any compensable damages or that Defendants caused him any damage. Blankenship’s claim for false light invasion of privacy fails for the same reasons."
The defendants also said in their reply to Blankenship's opposition that he still failed to produce any facts or offer support for this case to survive summary judgment.
"Lacking evidence, Blankenship’s Opposition to Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment relies on speculation, bald assertions about what the authors 'should have' known, and a bare regurgitation of Defendants’ policies about accuracy," the reply states. "He cannot refute that the authors of the challenged statements believed Blankenship had been convicted of a felony when they wrote their respective articles or show that they harbored any doubt their statements were accurate. He has absolutely no evidence of actual malice here, let alone the clear and convincing kind required by the First Amendment."
Blankenship has filed several lawsuits against media outlets for how they handled his election campaign in 2018 when he was running for the U.S. Senate.
"The mainstream media and much of the political establishment today routinely, and with actual malice, sets out to destroy public figures with outright lies," the complaint states. "The competition for viewers is intense and nothing brings in eyeballs like scandal and degradation. So too is the establishment media’s bloodthirsty desire to destroy those with whom they disagree politically."
Blankenship claims during the 2018 election cycle, when he was running as a Republican for U.S. Senate, he was constantly dragged through the mud by Democrats, as well as other Republicans, such as U.S. Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who Blankenship alleges would tell everyone that Blankenship "had to be stopped at all costs."
"McConnell set in motion the wheels of a clandestine campaign — including a 'menu of items' — to destroy Mr. Blankenship and blatantly interfere in a federal election, using among other things, the National Republican Senatorial Committee, and his contacts in the establishment media, including Fox News in particular, to do McConnell’s (and in turn, the NRSC’s) bidding," the complaint states.
Blankenship claims liberal media companies also set out to destroy him, constantly calling him a convicted felon and saying he had been imprisoned for manslaughter.
Blankenship claims he never was a felon and has never been convicted of a felony, neither manslaughter nor any other. He claims media agencies attacked him throughout the election cycle and he lost his bid to be the Republican nominee. He claims the defendants continued to smear him even after the election.
"Mr. Blankenship was damaged by Defendants’ statements placing him in a false light before the public in an amount to be proven at trial, but which exceeds the jurisdictional minimum of this Court," the complaint states.
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia case number: 2:20-cv-00278