by Travis Mateer
This picture is of me because this post is about me because, for legal reasons, I need to consider how famous I am, and I’m not simply talking about the inflated self-regard I may have developed after traveling the country and writing a book that no one has read yet.
I first suspected I was getting famous, locally, when a person working at a coffee shop recognized me from some reference in a college class she had. She asked me if I was that guy who commented at City Council a lot, and I said yes, that sounded like me. What class was this? I still need to figure that out.
I’m also getting some recognition from a guy who gets VERY stand-offish with authorities, of which he thinks I’m a member. How does a public access video I did while working Missoula Aging Services prove I’m a DIRTY FED? I don’t know, ask the guy with the name that rhymes with Fed and maybe he can tell you, because fame in his circle doesn’t sound like a whole lot of fun.
My legal quandary centers on the incredibly false depiction of me YELLING at City Council, a depiction that Martin Kidston splashed at his “news” website, the Missoula Current. I preserved the fact-challenged article, along with my recorded public comment, in my May 16th post, titled On Living Life In Double-Standard Town Where Hypocrite Cowards Call The Shots. I followed that up with another post a few days later, titled Is This What Missoula Current Advertisers Want To Be Paying For? You will understand why all this is important in just a moment.
My interest in defending myself against what I thought was an actionable, malicious depiction of me (contributing to serious consequences for me behind the scenes) was effectively deflated earlier this week when I got some much-appreciated feedback from a legal source about how I need to consider how locally famous I am. Huh?
Yes, I guess it might not matter that Kidston’s depiction of me has become a Missoulian opportunity to associate my name with hate speech because I might easily be considered, for legal purposes, something called a “limited purpose public figure”. What the hell does that mean? I don’t know, I just copy and pasted this:
Typically, these are individuals who have gained prominence in a particular field or in connection with a particular controversy. Plaintiffs classified as limited-purpose public figures must prove actual malice only for defamatory statements that relate to matters in which they are considered public figures.
What this means, I was told, is don’t waste your money on fighting this LEGAL fight, so that’s probably good advice. Thankfully, some other ideas are starting to come together, and this series of ideas will be kicking off October 29th, at 3pm, at the XXXXs on north Higgins. That is the location in time and space where your time-traveling tour guide (me) will be providing the FIRST Zoom Town Walking Tour, which I’m hoping to continue on a regular basis, but on Wednesdays.
The other ideas are still forming, but I have this cool studio with a Lego world to make use of, and some other things that might be useful for getting out information that I think is important.
To prove I did once get opportunities to talk on podcasts, here are some the ones you can check out to assess for yourself how I successfully I took these opportunities and became so damn famous that my chances at successful litigation against my favorite propagandist are basically now zero.
Tin Foil Hat #511: Missing People, Drug Dealing, MKUltra and Homelessness with Travis Mateer
Opperman Report: Rebekah Barsotti, February 5th, 2023
Deep Dives with Monica Perez: Incestuous Corruption w/ Travis Mateer
My Family Thinks I’m Crazy: Missoula Mysteries, Globalist Microcosm and Synchromystic Sherlocking
I’m excited for the new ideas and the new people I’m meeting. It’s going to be, I am hoping, educational AND funny.
Thanks for reading!