It seems that Donald Luskin is trying to intimidate Atrios. As a good little republican, he hired a attorney and the attorney wrote Atrios an attorney-like letter about Atrios using the word "Stalker" to refer to his client. The Atrios post in question was titled "Diary of a Stalker".
...You chose the unfortunate caption “Diary of a Stalker” for your link. More importantly, your readers, in responding to your invitation to comment, have posted numerous libelous statements regarding Mr. Luskin. Picking up on the theme you introduced, several have made false assertions that Mr. Luskin has committed the crime of stalking. ...
And exactly how does Atrios stop someone from making that assertion? And are assertions facts? Especially when one of the most obvious and glaring problems, at least in my view, is that Luskin wrote an article for NRO, titled "We Stalked, He Balked" on May 7, 2003. The title of the article is not "We Stalked in a metaphorical and totally non-threatening, non-physical, non-corporeal kind of way, He Balked". Or maybe I misread the headline, I don't know.
If Mr. Luskin was proudly proclaiming his stalkerhood concerning Paul Krugman, why is he so upset by Atrios applying the same epithet to him?
The good news is that Krugman is clearly shaken by the new experience of having somebody dare to challenge his insouciant lying. He's even starting to get personal — referring to me in his latest posting as his "stalker-in-chief."
It will be interesting to see where this goes. Atrios will, undoubtedly be able to raise the money to at least get a decent attorney. I suspect that this will go the way of the Franken litigation...after all, when you call yourself a stalker, it's pretty tough to deny others the right to do the same thing I would think. Let's see where American Blind Justice takes this one...
I have an idea. Let Luskin and his attorney file his complaint on the Internet and Atrios then can file his response. Interested bloggers can then intervene as amicus curiae. Legal discovery can also take place on the Internet. Then Luskin can provide his testimony in his efforts to establish that he has been libeled, as well as his alleged damages. Of course Atrios and his attorney would be able to cross-examine Luskin and present evidence in Atrios' defense. We in bloggersville can sit as arbitrators. Justice on the Internet.
Early in my legal career (just short of 50 years), I learned to advise a client claiming he had been defamed to be aware that the legal proceedings may bring to the attention of more people the alleged defamatory statements, which may thereby become even more of a problem for him. I am not giving legal advice to Luskin, but I think he should rethink this situation. And there is the question of what if any damages may be involved and can be proved, including Luskin's need to disclose just how he has been damaged financially and otherwise.
The stalker subject brought back some memories and I spent some time looking at my collection of 78s, where I rediscovered:
"Celery Stalks at Midnight" on Columbia, Will Bradley and his Orchestra featuring Ray McKinley.
Maybe we can get Al Franken to come up with a parody on Luskin on the Internet.
posted by: Shag from Brookline on 10.30.03 at 07:36 AM [permalink]
Oh please. The purpose here isn't to vindicate rights-- its to trample on them. Regardless of the merits of whether or not Luskin stalked Krugman, as to ATRIOS, there is no QUESTION that Luskin is a fucking stalker-- threatening to use a per se frivolous litigation to "out" the A. man.
