It is not edgy to hate people it is popular to hate.

Tee hee, in Minecraft and allegedly Iin my opinion are not actually talismans that fend off whether you are stating a fact and alleging if it is true or not.

No. Someone is or is not racist. That is a factual statement. It had been allowed to skate by because we have a high bar for defamation. If we lower the bar, then a lot of these statements are now defamatory.

Loads of those examples I gave are objectively false statements. Someone is or is not a pedophile or racist or wants to put black people back in chains or went to Kenosha to shoot black people. Again: If you want this low a bat, ok. But, be ready for the consequences.

If this is, Rittenhouse could sue everyone who claimed he wanted to shoot black people. It's a known lie. Again, if we want to alter the rules to get Jennings, ok. But a lot of bills ought come due if we lower the bar.

Yeah, if they do that, they should face consequences. That is bad. The only reporting I've seen had been... Well inconclusive at best, but if it is happening, it should stop.

Any of the various X is a pedophile claims, to start. Or X is racist. Or the infamous he wants to put you back in chains statement. Defamation is a high bar for a reason, and I don't see this meeting the bar as currently exists, and should the standard charge, it will be for the worst.

I'd you're unfamiliar with the topic, it's not worth the time. I'm not going to be sea lioned to show you things everyone is aware of. What next, I have to prove he streams on Twitch? If you're not up to speed, stop wasting people's time.

If this can get past that state, loads more people have actionable claims. Think how many people Trump, Obama, Romney, etc. Could sue on this low of a standard.

Are you denying Hasan supports Hamas?

Ok. Let me know when you have time to understand it and we can continue. It's pretty straightforward.

If I ever supported baby eating, you'd have a point.

Actually whether or not similar cases succeed is kinda important. It lets us know how statutes are interpreted and the limits of free speech etc. You can try and say this is novel and different, but I just don't see this as much different from routine clips farming drama that goes nowhere because people can't prove harm, or are people like Hasan we with a bad enough reputation (which is we why he's trying for per se so he can sidestep some of these issues.)

Defamation is a surprisingly high bar.

It's a reasonable shot to take in a friendly jurisdiction shooting for them to settle. It likely can't win, but Hasan just needs Jennings to get the Tucker treatment because this is about silencing opponents.

Hasan crashes out every month, so really not taking a big gamble there.

Look, he supports the terrorist organization Hamas and considers babies valid military targets.

Yeah, sorry. Both of those are routinely shot down. Again, these are the rules established for years of accusing people of routinely heinous stuff. Perhaps it should be defamation to accuse period wanting to murder people or even falsely claiming people have said that. It never has been before, and Hasan's reputation is already garbage so makes a poor standard bearer, since it is reasonable to think he wants to purge Jews due to his support for Hamas, that also mistakenly thinking the circle of people he wants purged is larger than it is can't really be defamatory.

You entered this discussion aggressively with vague threats about being careful. If you're not equipped for the discussion, don't waste our time.

Calling them value targets is exactly that.