The response of Thomas Mix to my coverage Wednesday of his Florida lawsuit against Jeanette Runyon has been shocking. He has repeatedly made statements on his Twitter account that would appear to be threats to do me harm. His online conversations with “Nicole Bonnet” were sufficiently alarming that I wrote an email to Mr. Mix’s attorney Wednesday, informing him that his client’s behavior could have legal consequences. Yet this did not prevent Mr. Mix and “Nicole Bonnet” from falsely claiming that I was engaged in “stalking” and “harassment,” all because (a) I had reported on Mix’s lawsuit against Jeanette, and (b) I had then taken notice of Mix’s apparent threats toward me. This is insane.
This morning, however, Mix decided to take it up a notch — threatening to deprive me of income — which is a whole new ballgame. This raises the question, what is going on inside Thomas Mix’s mind? In August 2015, Examiner columnist Joe Newby reported on how Jeanette Runyon’s Facebook post supporting traditional marriage was deleted, and Newby’s column indicates that Jeanette believes Thomas Mix is responsible for this pattern of online harassment against her. Why?
This kind of scorched-earth mentality, pursuing obsessions with “enemies,” is arguably symptomatic of mental illness. More importantly, however, if Thomas Mix attempts to harm me by wrongful interference with my financial arrangements, he has crossed a line he should be advised not to cross, so I wrote yet another email to Mr. Mix’s attorney:
Dear Mr. Rooney:
After I sent you an email Wednesday, informing you that your client Thomas Mix had been making statements about me on Twitter that could be construed as threats, Mr. Mix not only failed to cease this pattern of menacing behavior, but has now made new threats that could possibly put him in legal jeopardy. As I explained to you in Wednesday’s email, I had ceased paying attention to the conflict involving your client and Jeanette Runyon after the controversy over the Kailyn Hunt case ended. However, when it came to my attention that Ms. Runyon was being sued by Mr. Mix over their online arguments surrounding the Hunt case, this struck me as newsworthy, per se, and relevant to recent news about online harassment.
However, it seems that Mr. Mix believes that no one should be able to report about his lawsuit against Ms. Runyon, a matter of public record which is newsworthy as a matter of public interest. Mr. Mix claims that it is “harassment” for me to report on the case, and seems to actually believe it is “harassment” even for me to mention his apparent threats against me. He has now even gone so far as to suggest that he will endeavor to deprive me of the advertising revenue on my blog, simply because I have used my blog to report about his lawsuit against Ms. Runyon, and about his evidently malicious statements toward me.
It should not be necessary, Mr. Rooney, for me to explain that this behavior by your client Mr. Mix could be construed as tortious, an attempt to deprive me of my First Amendment rights as a journalist. Furthermore, Mr. Mix’s apparent threats toward me could be viewed in a very unfavorable light — as evidence of malicious intent — in regard to the current litigation between your client and Ms. Runyon.
Keep in mind, Mr. Rooney, that I had no intention of doing any further reporting on Mr. Mix’s activities after my Wednesday morning article about his lawsuit against Ms. Runyon. It is only because of Mr. Mix’s arguably threatening statements, in the wake of that article, that I have continued writing about this. It is apparent, from examining Mr. Mix’s communications on Twitter, that he is being incited by the person using the account “Nicole Bonnet.” This behavior is highly suspicious — who is “Nicole Bonnet” and what is that person’s interest in this case? — and I believe that your client Mr. Mix is being influenced to behave in a manner contrary to his own best interest. As you are his attorney, however, it would seem that you have an obligation to advise him of the potential legal consequences of his activities.
To reiterate, sir, I have no personal interest in your client Mr. Mix, and took notice of him Wednesday only because of his lawsuit against Ms. Runyon. This might have been the end of it, had Mr. Mix not begun publishing statements that seemed to threaten me in response to my coverage of that case. In all that I have written, I have reported only the facts and shared my opinions. Never have I defamed Mr. Mix, nor is it my intention to harass him. Rather, it appears quite the opposite, that Mr. Mix is attempting to harass me.
Based upon what I have seen in the past two days, Mr. Rooney, it is my belief that your client Mr. Mix is suffering from serious psychiatric problems that impair his judgment. Mr. Mix appears to be in the throes of some sort of paranoid obsession that is leading him to pursue an insane vendetta against me, based on his delusional belief that I have done him some wrongful injury. Mr. Mix’s apparent fixation on me, and the evidence that he harbors some kind of revenge fantasy against me, is of course deeply troubling to me. However, your client is probably a greater danger to himself than he is to me or any of the various other “enemies” with whom he seems to be obsessed.
You did not reply to my email yesterday, but I hope to hear from you soon, as it continues to be my sincere desire ever to remain
Your most humble and obedient servant,
Robert Stacy McCain
Playing around on Twitter or Facebook is one thing. Trying to destroy a successful online publication that has generated tens of millions of page-views since 2008? Well, that’s just plain crazy, and it might also be against the law. Let’s hope Thomas Mix’s lawyer can talk sense to him.
UPDATE: Does anyone expect sane reactions from such people?
I’m a “stalker” and I’m “going down,” according to Thomas Mix, who is currently suing Jeanette Runyon over a Twitter flame-war dating to 2013. And notice that he has changed his Twitter handle yet again, evidently because it’s “harassment” for anyone to take notice of his online activity.
