• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

Kyle Rittenhouse To Sue Whoopi Goldberg, Other 'Celebrities, Politicians And Athletes' For Calling Him A Murderer.

PatMiles

PatMiles

Private
Full Member
Minuteman
Feb 25, 2017
1,552
4,141

Zerohedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
www.zerohedge.com www.zerohedge.com

"Rittenhouse, who killed two men and wounded a third in self-defense after being pursued during an anti-police protest, told Fox News' Tucker Carlson that he wants to hold major media and entertainment figures accountable - starting with talk show host Whoopie Goldberg."

Here's hoping Kyle kicks her parking lot sized ass and then moves on to the other scum who feel they are somehow important and should be heard!
 
  • Like
  • Love
  • Haha
Reactions: Kalthoff, forthehunt, Davo308 and 25 others
hollowoutadime said:
if I went through that like he did, I'd make it ugly - scorched earth. DA, celebs, news, all of them. Only need minor settlements to leave a trail of destruction.
Click to expand...
I tend to agree. If this is to be a foundation, with a goal to recompense other victims of media smears as well, I'd like to think that any "wins" from this will hopefully be poured back into its war chest, so they can further go after other media smears, and yeah, with Sandmann, I believe it was Stelter that said those multi-million $ settlements were just "nuisance money." Fine, build this foundation, where a team of lawyers are making bank on their cut, but the settlements and wins keep pouring in, furthering their motivation and build this "nuisance" into a full-blown crusade. Keep winning, gaining more ammo, go after more and more, and maybe this little nuisance will start leveling and scorching the MSM landscape to a burnt crisp; how do ya like them apples, bitch?

Pipe dream? Maybe. But we can hope...
 
  • Like
Reactions: M4orturnate, stevieb92, Darayavaus and 2 others
Like it or not, Rittenhouse is likely a "public figure" and the standard for a defamation claim for public figures is "actual malice", which is very difficult to prove.
 
acourvil said:
Like it or not, Rittenhouse is likely a "public figure" and the standard for a defamation claim for public figures is "actual malice", which is very difficult to prove.
Click to expand...
While that is likely case, isn't the self-referencing nature of the "public figure" in cases like Rittenhouse a BS argument? It should be... Rittenhouse was a nobody, then the MSM went full-blast scandalizing him, which resulted in him becoming the "public figure" in the first place. If not for them slandering/libeling him 24/7, he wouldn't have been the public figure in the first place. There should be a caveat to that defense if they were the ones that launched him into the public eye to begin with.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Austan, canman, Sean the Nailer and 6 others
acourvil said:
Like it or not, Rittenhouse is likely a "public figure" and the standard for a defamation claim for public figures is "actual malice", which is very difficult to prove.
Click to expand...
Would he/could he be classified as a "public figure" at the time of the alleged (real as fuck) slander?
They were tearing his ass up and demonizing him almost immediately as long as it gave them a self righteous and diversionary drum to beat.

./
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: Austan, BuildingConceptsllc, Sean the Nailer and 6 others
ChezJfrey said:
While that is likely case, isn't the self-referencing nature of the "public figure" in cases like Rittenhouse a BS argument? It should be... Rittenhouse was a nobody, then the MSM went full-blast scandalizing him, which resulted in him becoming the "public figure" in the first place. If not for them slandering/libeling him 24/7, he wouldn't have been the public figure in the first place. There should be a caveat to that defense if they were the ones that launched him into the public eye to begin with.
Click to expand...
I'm with you here. We be gonna find out whats the courts have to say in this respect.
Bend them over and pour the pork to them Kyle!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: kmckinnon
acourvil said:
Like it or not, Rittenhouse is likely a "public figure" and the standard for a defamation claim for public figures is "actual malice", which is very difficult to prove.
Click to expand...
No, being reported on in the news is not the same as being a public figure.

He has a good chance of whipping some booty here, I believe and hope.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dot3 and Im2bent
Baron23 said:
No, being reported on in the news is not the same as being a public figure.
Click to expand...

A person drawn into a particular public controversy becomes a public figure through no purposeful action of his own, and I think he became an involuntary public figure by that standard on the night everything happened. His later media involvement probably made him a voluntary public figure. That’s the legal standard, like it or not.
 
acourvil said:
A person drawn into a particular public controversy becomes a public figure through no purposeful action of his own, and I think he became an involuntary public figure by that standard on the night everything happened. His later media involvement probably made him a voluntary public figure. That’s the legal standard, like it or not.
Click to expand...
Don't see it that way. Key words (see def from Cornell Law below)....not "drawn" into but "assumed" As far as his media involvement, was this not AFTER his trial? And was not (aside perhaps from Goldberg) much of the libel he claims happened before his acquittal?

I think the key words/phrases are "assumed" and "thrust themselves into the forefront" neither of which do I think applies.

But, we will see when it gets to court.

Cheers

"A public figure, according to Gertz v. Robert Welch, is an individual who has assumed roles of especial prominence in the affairs of a society or thrust themselves into the forefront of particular public controversies to influence the resolution of the issues involved."

www.law.cornell.edu

public figure

www.law.cornell.edu www.law.cornell.edu
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: TxWelder35, canman, Baron23 and 1 other person
After Kyle's done with Whoopi, her eyebrows will NEVER grow back.
 
Wish they disclosed Sandmann's settlement amounts. I truly feel that KR has a massive case, and I hope he hammers them all, and he's young, which means he will be around a long time to continue to push all of the people that slandered him.

I hope he's got a massive warchest to fund it, and I hope he doesn't settle for pennies on the dollar. He's probly looking at 10years to close them all out. Discovery is going to take a while, a really long while. It'd be funny if Musk invested in the case and funded the lawsuits.

Again....I hope he wrecks them, bad enough they never recover financially.

Branden
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6.5SH, Milf Dots and Yasherka
It will really make so little difference as the only people that know about it are the people that actually look for "news".

Most americans will know nothing of it, as it will get zero coverage on "normal" media. Your neighbor down the street that does not follow events and only turns on the news to see the weather and happens to catch a little bit of....oh russia is invading ukraine, where is ukraine? will know nothing and keep doing what they are doing.
 
acourvil said:
A person drawn into a particular public controversy becomes a public figure through no purposeful action of his own, and I think he became an involuntary public figure by that standard on the night everything happened. His later media involvement probably made him a voluntary public figure. That’s the legal standard, like it or not.
Click to expand...
Like you said, the media made him a public figure and it was involuntary. Whatever appearances and interviews he did were after the fact.

His attorneys were on top of this. He’ll get paid.
 
I hope that he uses is foundation for more than suing people. Not that I don't want to see these people held accountable and drained of every cent they have...

But Rittenhouse could do a hell of a lot of good with a foundation that helps support free speech, identify propaganda, go after media and social media outlets that are abusing speech and stealing the political narrative as un-elected bureaucrats.

Sort of an ADL or SPLC FOR the Constitution and Free Speech... to counter the ones that were taken over and weaponized for socialism.

But bring it on! Standing up against bullies is what gets rid of bullies.

Sirhr
 
  • Like
Reactions: MadDuner
Before many of you "go Kyle," ya might want to remember that he was a supporter of blm
https://thehill.com/homenews/media/582568-kyle-rittenhouse-i-support-the-blm-movement

Just strikes me as a ship without a rudder and trying to make $$. I don't necessarily find fault with that, but I have to wonder who is advising him and if he really has an original thought in his head.

I'm all in for nailing the liars in the media with legal channels, but there's just a nagging sense with this kid that something isn't right.
 
I thought saying that (at the time) was a good play. All part of "I went there to help out, fine with peaceful protests, I'm not a racist". He takes that off the table for his accusers. Now we all know what BLM is and has become, leftest thugs, profitable for those at the top.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChezJfrey and Milf Dots
Part of me is concerned that conservative powers are taking advantage of this kid and I truly hope it doesn't backfire for all 2A supporters.

If I were Kyle, I'd lay low and not try to instantaneously become some kind of conservative party ram rod. I'd still sue, but it would be a surprise.
 
hollowoutadime said:
I thought saying that (at the time) was a good play. All part of "I went there to help out, fine with peaceful protests, I'm not a racist". He takes that off the table for his accusers. Now we all know what BLM is and has become, leftest thugs, profitable for those at the top.
Click to expand...
Not only that, I think he chose his words carefully. He supports the BLM "movement." Supports peacefully protesting. Believes there needs to be change...there is much prosecutorial misconduct, not just in his case, but others as well. None of that should be disputed and BLM itself, though corrupt, has the clever name, and you can't say "I don't support black lives matter" without the gotcha; I think he's just playing politics and choosing not to touch that third rail. I wouldn't impart any more meaning to that other than he's just trying not to be stupid right now and burn whatever little political capital he has among the simpleton crowd that may not know much about what BLM really is and who he really is and might actually be swayed toward truth...there are still people out there that heard Rittenhouse is evil, but might not be willing to reconsider the more they know. I think he's playing toward that crowd of the potentially swayed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Maggot
Interesting story on Aussie sniper
Replies
30
Views
2K
UKDslayer
U
The Surgeons Ghost
Anti-gun Companies, Organizations, etc...
Replies
9
Views
2K
_Windrider_
_Windrider_
Top Bottom
Back