228
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 21 Oct 2024
228 points (98.3% liked)
chapotraphouse
13506 readers
1444 users here now
Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.
No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer
Vaush posts go in the_dunk_tank
Dunk posts in general go in the_dunk_tank, not here
Don't post low-hanging fruit here after it gets removed from the_dunk_tank
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
There’s 100% a life-destroying defamation suit to make against Ethan and Stephen “grandpa owned slaves” Bonnercelli opening here. Ethan especially, stupidly, has been lying openly repeatedly. Obviously Amazon and the Twitch CEO specifically can now be roped into a civil suit and also maybe defamation if their internal reasoning for this is literally “because Arabs.”
The first two could be sued by “normal” people and extract ass-destroying settlements. Unfortunately due to Hellscape and all that, Amazon could only be taken on with a chance at winning by ACLU or some other free speech organization with millions to throw at causes. The chances of actually successfully extracting a win from the company is probably not high enough (even though they did clearly cause undue harm and their TOS wasn’t even breached- not that TOS even matters) for them to engage. Nor are the consequences high enough. As in, they aren’t going to prison (yet… let the Nazis keep chipping away).
But I do hope Ethan is sued into oblivion. I haven’t seen anything from Nazielli because I don’t watch his dumb shit. If he’s said anything even 1% as defamatory as Ethan in the last month or so, rope his ass in too along with any other of the pro-genocide dumbasses. The case would be pretty straight forward. Nothing to do with actual pro-Palestinian sentiments just a pure factual look at “Was this anti-semitic… no, clearly not, Ethan, bend over, reach into deep asshole, pull out cash. Steve, you’re next.”
He loooovveeeessss to talk about all his big Ws in court. I think his legal battles have stoked his ego so much, and a FAT L like that makes me salivate. (Ive just finally canceled my membership, watches regularly up until he started bringing the antisemitism shit up every fucking day)
He already caught a fat L in court over slandering Ryan Kavanaugh. It's part of what broke his brain.
Wait- I haven't watched any H3 for years now. I did watch the leftovers show but even dropped that too once Ethan decided he was would come in weekly and read Destiny's "debate" talking points at Hasan and then refuse to actually respond with a counter point... and also refuse to concede that he's a dumbass.
But did he lose that suit? Never have I felt simultaneously happy and yet disappointed at the same time. Because that guy kinda legitimately sucks... but so does Ethan. Hmm.
I think it's still ongoing, but he lost his anti-SLAPP motion in California, which happens like 10% of the time, and basically means the judge felt there was enough evidence to prove that he knowingly spread false info.
I do remember thinking Ethan was probably going too hard over nothing... he gets in these very personal beefs that everyone else and the audience is eye rolling and muttering "come on, dude..."
That's definitely a let them fight situation for me though. Won't catch me defending either side
Critical support to Ryan Kavanaugh, I hope he Gawkers Ethan.
Honest question: how much would such a lawsuit rely on the definition of antisemitism, and how much of an issue is it that the US congress has been making a specific push to include anti-zionism in the definition of antisemitism?
I honestly kinda doubt our justice system would give them a fair definition right now.....
I dunno. Not a lawyer, etc.
I would say it's probably relevant that she and Twitch are in California which to my knowledge has not adopted that insane, ironically antisemitic "antisemitism definition."
Also that law was for specific purposes relating to funding by the US gov to people and colleges specifically. Ie if they are ruled antisemitic (a college, etc.) they are disqualified from federal funds. I understand you were asking, not suggesting or whatever, so, I'll just leave it at that. It would depend upon the judge and any appeals that came (writing this from the POV of Frogan, main target here)... assuming she even won. I would say in my understanding of the law, it would be brought up by the defendant, 100%, but if the judge is a state judge and actually being "fair" and following the correct procedures... then they'd be seeking out like "is she specifically saying antisemitic things? Is she holding up known symbols? Like what is the basis for calling this specific incident antisemitic?" On the other hand, she would be arguing she did nothing to lead to that assessment by the defendant. That they knowingly, falsely spread this narrative despite immediately being pushed back on by the involved parties with explanations, that they did not retract the statement and they did all of this with clear, stated, malicious intent to have her livelihood cutoff. (Maybe I should've been a lawyer... nah, kinda hate lawyers)
But, I concede, this all does hinge on people being fair. I think this case is so far beyond the pale, so egregious, that even a hardcore Zionist judge would find that it was defamation if only to preserve their own reputation... such that it matters. But, again, who knows. People have gotten away with far worse and people have been successfully "punished" for far less.