Keep Scrolling for continue reading for more stories

Marine Veteran Files $11M Lawsuit Against Notorious Pro-Trump Trolls for Defamation

Jack Burkman and Jacob Wohl Screenshot_YouTube

A Marine veteran has launched an $11 million lawsuit against Jack Burkman and Jacob Wohl, two pro-Trump figures notorious for their controversial political antics, accusing them of a defamatory smear campaign. The lawsuit, as detailed in The Daily Beast, alleges that the veteran’s professional and personal life was irreparably damaged after being falsely accused of being a child sex predator in a 2021 video produced by the duo.

The incident centers around “Predator D.C.,” a web series by Wohl and Burkman, which purported to expose sexual predators within the U.S. government. The plaintiff, identified only as “John Doe,” was lured into a sting operation under the pretense of meeting an adult woman he had matched with on Tinder. Upon arrival, he was confronted by Wohl, Burkman, and their associates, who then accused him of intending to meet with an underage girl, a claim vehemently denied by Doe.

Despite promises from Burkman that the footage would not be used if Doe refrained from contacting the police, the video titled “Across the Border and Into a Teen” was later published, painting Doe as a predator. This public defamation led to Doe’s dismissal from his job at Johns Hopkins University, eviction from his apartment, and eventual bankruptcy.

The Daily Beast’s report reveals the depth of Wohl and Burkman’s disinformation campaigns, which have previously targeted political figures with baseless allegations. Their tactics, which include illegal robocalls and false sexual misconduct claims, have now tangibly impacted the life of an individual with no public political affiliations, highlighting the dangerous reach of their actions.

The lawsuit not only seeks financial restitution but also aims to prevent further distribution of the defamatory video, underscoring the serious consequences of Wohl and Burkman’s reckless behavior. This case illustrates the subtext of how far-right political extremism can manifest in personal attacks against individuals, further blurring the lines between political activism and outright harassment.

As the legal proceedings unfold, this lawsuit serves as a critical examination of the limits of political speech and the real-world harm inflicted by unchecked conspiracy theories and political smear campaigns. The outcome may set a precedent for holding individuals accountable for the spread of malicious falsehoods under the guise of political discourse.