When a parody video of Becca Balint hit the internet, the libs were triggered. The Congresswoman got all huffy, and the Progressive AG Charity Clark sent a threatening letter to the video’s creator.
[Henry L.] Poitras has said he uses artificial intelligence (A.I.) in his work that “mocks and exaggerates the conduct and statements of Vermont politicians and public figures.”
Vermont has a law about tagging AI video (deepfakes, don’t you know) unless it is clearly political parody. Clark, probably after a call from Balint, threatened Poitras if he didn’t add a disclaimer or take it down.
We’ve shared the video in question, and it’s obvious to anyone except a proglodyte looking for an excuse to suppress protected First Amendment speech that it’s poking fun at the humorless House Rep from Brattleboro.
The judge who issued an injunction against Clark’s office said he got it, but also asked, and maybe he had to because I can’t believe he didn’t understand, “why the state was chasing the case.”
To send a message. That’s what lawfare is all about. Make an example of someone so others will be afraid to engage in any sort of contrary political speech.
Liberals are arrogant; liberals in power are worse. They don’t think clearly because Poitras was clearly the wrong choice for “an example.”
Poitras filed a six-count civil lawsuit against Clark in both her official and personal capacities and said he did not intend to take it down by the June 26 deadline imposed by the Attorney General. Five counts in the lawsuit claim various violations of the First Amendment, while one count is for violation of the 14th amendment seeking dismissal on vagueness grounds.
If we were to take the judge’s question again, why chase the case, we can say without a doubt that it was not to make the video go viral, and national – even though Balint reportedly went on Morning Joe to whine like a baby about it.
I know it is unlikely that blue Vermont will do us all a favor and reject the cranky scolds from office, but they should. Neither Clark nor Balint, like a lot of liberal women, it seems, has the disposition.
And I hope Henry has much success in his civil complaint against the AG. The lawfare message goes both ways, and Vermont has anti-SLAPP laws, so Clark could be on the hook for his legal fees if a court decides this qualifies. Vermont taxpayers might want to consider an AG who doesn’t waste their money on partisan prosecutions.
