Kyle Rittenhouse an Andrew Yang supporter? (1 Viewer)

[whoknew]

I’m not a tort lawyer, but why is the case frivolous?  Is it simply because Rittenhouse is a public figure?

Not sure if you are familiar with Ken White (@Popehat) but he practices in first amendment and criminal. He had a tweet thread the other day specifically about a case against Whoopi - 

- Kyle Rittenhouse seems firmly embedded in the new right culture of vexatious litigation, victimhood, and entitlement, so it won’t surprise me if he DOES sue Whoopi Goldberg for calling him a murderer after his acquittal. But that suit would be very frivolous.

- The context makes it clear Whoopi is offering her opinion that what Kyle did is murder. She even says “to me it’s murder.” She’s not implying she has access to some secret facts or evidence. She’s saying she saw what we saw and she thinks It’s murder.

- That is absolutely protected by the First Amendment. It’s not, by any stretch of the imagination, a provably false statement of fact, as opposed to rhetoric, commentary, and opinion. This is particularly true because in distinguishing fact from opinion courts look at context

- Here the context is the View, a notorious garbage fire of moronism, and Whoopi Goldberg, notorious for saying idiotic things like “well it wasn’t rape-rape.” A person familiar with the context would not interpret Whoopi as offering some factual insight.

- This is not a close call, frankly. But success isn’t the point. The point is hucksterism, generating eyeballs and clicks and donations, and feeding the culture war, even at the expense of the First Amendment.

- The new right is utterly full of #### on this, and unapologetically so. Would they agree that Jose Ines Garcia Zarate should be able to sue people for calling him a murderer after he was acquitted for murdering Kate Steinle? No.

 

[beef]

@KingPrawn knows what he's talking about when it comes to WI Gun Laws, or non-laws.  All of it.  Perfectly stated.    

 

[-fish-]

I’m not a tort lawyer, but why is the case frivolous?  Is it simply because Rittenhouse is a public figure?

He's profited off of his notoriety that he actively sought.   He has no damages whatsoever and calling someone that kills people and is on trial for murder a murderer isn't going to get you to actual malice in any courtroom.   

You're right, though.  If he had righteous cases, they'd be on a contingent fee.   The fact that he's barnstorming conservative talkshows, cultivating the fame that he gained by killing people, and fundraising on it shows exactly what his intent is--it also kills any chance he would have of proving damages.

Lost earning capacity?  He had close to zero, and now he's cashing in.   No damages there.

Lost future earning opportunities?  Nope, if anything he's making money on the exact thing that he claims he is being damaged by.   

Lost business or economic opportunities?  Same.   The publicity is creating the economic opportunities.

He can't prove any element of a defamation case, and his lawyers know it.   

 

[CletiusMaximus]

I’m not a tort lawyer, but why is the case frivolous?  Is it simply because Rittenhouse is a public figure?

Im not sure about it being frivolous, but it’s probably a weak case if it’s a claim based on defamation. The distinction is between a statement that purports to be factual as opposed to opinion. Volokh did a short piece n this last November. 
https://reason.com/volokh/2021/11/20/is-it-defamatory-to-call-kyle-rittenhouse-or-anyone-acquitted-of-murder-a-murderer/

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

I would think his legal counsel would takes these cases on contingency, in which case he wouldn’t need a bunch of money to finance the lawsuits. 

I know that people who actually know what they are talking about have replied already, and since none of them said what I'll say maybe I'm just spouting off at the end of the bar.  That being said, my first instinct in reading this was-

The only chance these lawyers have to gain a positive result seems to me to have deep pockets such that they can position themselves to drag this out (and legal costs to the defendant) forever.

 

[Sparky Big Time]

I do not understand the lawsuit against Lebron James.  It seems farcical to me.  I have to assume there is a strategy, but I cannot determine what that might be.

Perhaps there is some notion that James might be inclined to settle for cash, and they want to use that to spring board into others?

 

[Zow]

Not sure if you are familiar with Ken White (@Popehat) but he practices in first amendment and criminal. He had a tweet thread the other day specifically about a case against Whoopi - 

- Kyle Rittenhouse seems firmly embedded in the new right culture of vexatious litigation, victimhood, and entitlement, so it won’t surprise me if he DOES sue Whoopi Goldberg for calling him a murderer after his acquittal. But that suit would be very frivolous.

- The context makes it clear Whoopi is offering her opinion that what Kyle did is murder. She even says “to me it’s murder.” She’s not implying she has access to some secret facts or evidence. She’s saying she saw what we saw and she thinks It’s murder.

- That is absolutely protected by the First Amendment. It’s not, by any stretch of the imagination, a provably false statement of fact, as opposed to rhetoric, commentary, and opinion. This is particularly true because in distinguishing fact from opinion courts look at context

- Here the context is the View, a notorious garbage fire of moronism, and Whoopi Goldberg, notorious for saying idiotic things like “well it wasn’t rape-rape.” A person familiar with the context would not interpret Whoopi as offering some factual insight.

- This is not a close call, frankly. But success isn’t the point. The point is hucksterism, generating eyeballs and clicks and donations, and feeding the culture war, even at the expense of the First Amendment.

- The new right is utterly full of #### on this, and unapologetically so. Would they agree that Jose Ines Garcia Zarate should be able to sue people for calling him a murderer after he was acquitted for murdering Kate Steinle? No.

I  this. All of it. 

 

[Zow]

He's profited off of his notoriety that he actively sought.   He has no damages whatsoever and calling someone that kills people and is on trial for murder a murderer isn't going to get you to actual malice in any courtroom.   

You're right, though.  If he had righteous cases, they'd be on a contingent fee.   The fact that he's barnstorming conservative talkshows, cultivating the fame that he gained by killing people, and fundraising on it shows exactly what his intent is--it also kills any chance he would have of proving damages.

Lost earning capacity?  He had close to zero, and now he's cashing in.   No damages there.

Lost future earning opportunities?  Nope, if anything he's making money on the exact thing that he claims he is being damaged by.   

Lost business or economic opportunities?  Same.   The publicity is creating the economic opportunities.

He can't prove any element of a defamation case, and his lawyers know it.   

If true, I hope this lawyers have a good ethics counsel on retainer. 

 

[Zow]

He's profited off of his notoriety that he actively sought.   He has no damages whatsoever and calling someone that kills people and is on trial for murder a murderer isn't going to get you to actual malice in any courtroom.   

You're right, though.  If he had righteous cases, they'd be on a contingent fee.   The fact that he's barnstorming conservative talkshows, cultivating the fame that he gained by killing people, and fundraising on it shows exactly what his intent is--it also kills any chance he would have of proving damages.

Lost earning capacity?  He had close to zero, and now he's cashing in.   No damages there.

Lost future earning opportunities?  Nope, if anything he's making money on the exact thing that he claims he is being damaged by.   

Lost business or economic opportunities?  Same.   The publicity is creating the economic opportunities.

He can't prove any element of a defamation case, and his lawyers know it.   

While I don't practice in this area of law, I don't even think the analysis should even extend to damages. As @CletiusMaximus explained above, there doesn't even appear to be a prima facie case for defamation as the speakers are merely stating opinion. 

 

[-fish-]

While I don't practice in this area of law, I don't even think the analysis should even extend to damages. As @CletiusMaximus explained above, there doesn't even appear to be a prima facie case for defamation as the speakers are merely stating opinion. 

Right.  That's the second sentence of my post.  He can't prove any element of a defamation case.  

I don't think that these "plans" to sue Biden, Lebron James or Whoopi Goldberg are actually going to come to fruition.   I think it's just fundraising and grifting the hero-worshipers.   He's just another version of My Pillow guy, only he appeals to a more specific audience of racists and the gun culture, and Tucker Carlson and the usual right wing infotainment outlets are acting as his publicists.  You think choosing Whoopi Goldberg and Lebron James is a coincidence?  Both have been favorite targets of right-wing racists for years.

It should be noted that right-wing hero Nicholas Sandmann (the high school kid with the punchable face that sued CNN over coverage of him confronting a Native American) is being reported by Fox News (shocking) as encouraging him to file these lawsuits.

Isn't it odd that so many of the people Tucker Carlson and Fox are promoting are asking for money?   

 

[Zow]

Right.  That's the second sentence of my post.  He can't prove any element of a defamation case.  

I don't think that these "plans" to sue Biden, Lebron James or Whoopi Goldberg are actually going to come to fruition.   I think it's just fundraising and grifting the hero-worshipers.   He's just another version of My Pillow guy, only he appeals to a more specific audience of racists and the gun culture, and Tucker Carlson and the usual right wing infotainment outlets are acting as his publicists.  You think choosing Whoopi Goldberg and Lebron James is a coincidence?  Both have been favorite targets of right-wing racists for years.

It should be noted that right-wing hero Nicholas Sandmann (the high school kid with the punchable face that sued CNN over coverage of him confronting a Native American) is being reported by Fox News (shocking) as encouraging him to file these lawsuits.

Isn't it odd that so many of the people Tucker Carlson and Fox are promoting are asking for money?   

Ah, my bad. Missed that. 

 

[Sparky Big Time]

Not sure if you are familiar with Ken White (@Popehat) but he practices in first amendment and criminal. He had a tweet thread the other day specifically about a case against Whoopi - 

- Kyle Rittenhouse seems firmly embedded in the new right culture of vexatious litigation, victimhood, and entitlement, so it won’t surprise me if he DOES sue Whoopi Goldberg for calling him a murderer after his acquittal. But that suit would be very frivolous.

- The context makes it clear Whoopi is offering her opinion that what Kyle did is murder. She even says “to me it’s murder.” She’s not implying she has access to some secret facts or evidence. She’s saying she saw what we saw and she thinks It’s murder.

- That is absolutely protected by the First Amendment. It’s not, by any stretch of the imagination, a provably false statement of fact, as opposed to rhetoric, commentary, and opinion. This is particularly true because in distinguishing fact from opinion courts look at context

- Here the context is the View, a notorious garbage fire of moronism, and Whoopi Goldberg, notorious for saying idiotic things like “well it wasn’t rape-rape.” A person familiar with the context would not interpret Whoopi as offering some factual insight.

- This is not a close call, frankly. But success isn’t the point. The point is hucksterism, generating eyeballs and clicks and donations, and feeding the culture war, even at the expense of the First Amendment.

- The new right is utterly full of #### on this, and unapologetically so. Would they agree that Jose Ines Garcia Zarate should be able to sue people for calling him a murderer after he was acquitted for murdering Kate Steinle? No.

What is remarkable is that change a few names and one could easily be talking about leftists....I think if we continue to frame each other like this we fix nothing, and only strengthen our divides.

It's time to stop portraying those with whom we disagree as villains and evil.

 

[bigbottom]

Thanks for all the very helpful explanations.  My memory from tort law class is refreshed!

 

[jon_mx]

Why?  Is BLM fundraising for cases it can't win with lawyers that have proven losing track records?

No, it seems like most of the money is going towards buying its leadership expensive real estate.

Marxist BLM leader buys $1.4 million home in ritzy LA enclave

BLM transferred millions to Canadian charity to buy mansion formerly owned by Communist Party

Anger over BLM's purchase of $8.1 million Toronto mansion grows as group's finances scrutinized

BLM Founder with Massive Wealth and Four Homes to Step Down

 

[-fish-]

No, it seems like most of the money is going towards buying its leadership expensive real estate.

Marxist BLM leader buys $1.4 million home in ritzy LA enclave

BLM transferred millions to Canadian charity to buy mansion formerly owned by Communist Party

Anger over BLM's purchase of $8.1 million Toronto mansion grows as group's finances scrutinized

BLM Founder with Massive Wealth and Four Homes to Step Down

Great.  So it's completely irrelevant and just another attempt to derail a thread with hate for BLM.   

Every.  Single.   Time.

 

[jon_mx]

Great.  So it's completely irrelevant and just another attempt to derail a thread with hate for BLM.   

Every.  Single.   Time.

ROTFLOL....This is a Rittenhouse thread about being an Andrew Yang supporter.   You guys are off on a tangent talking about his lawsuits and how much of a low-life money grabber he is.  I have not mentioned BLM....IT WAS YOU WHO SAID:   "Is BLM fundraising for cases it can't win with lawyers that have proven losing track records?"

You can talk about it, but when I do it, it is then derailing???  You are so full crap.

 

[squistion]

This kid loves to play the victim, doesn't he?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/kyle-rittenhouse-blasts-dishonest-media-after-jussie-smollett-verdict/ar-AAUYCnM?ocid=msedgntp

Kyle Rittenhouse Blasts 'Dishonest Media' After Jussie Smollett Verdict

Kyle Rittenhouse blasted what he called "dishonest media" after the sentencing of former Empire actor Jussie Smollett to 150 days in prison and 30 months felony probation.

Rittenhouse, who was acquitted in November on all charges in the killing of two men in Kenosha, Wisconsin, criticized the media for their coverage of both cases.

"The media called me a white supremacist from the start and instantly called Jussie Smollett innocent," Rittenhouse tweeted on Friday.

Smollett was found guilty on five of six charges in December for staging an attack against himself in 2019 that was made to look like a racist and homophobic hate crime. He maintained that he was innocent at his sentencing on Thursday.

"I'm thankful our justice system in America doesn't work like the dishonest media; who refused to get the answers before declaring the innocent guilty and the guilty innocent," Rittenhouse said.

Last month, Rittenhouse launched a new donation fund he says will help take certain media outlets and individuals to court to hold them accountable for their "lies."

[...]

 

[Captain Cranks]

This kid loves to play the victim, doesn't he?

Don't they all?

 

[BladeRunner]

This kid loves to play the victim, doesn't he?

Aren't you the same guy in the Juicy Smollet thread defending him?  Saying his sentence was too harsh because he was black?  That same guy who actually tried to start a race riot because he wasn't getting paid enough?  That same guy who got on LIVE TV and literally cried about being the victim of a fake hoax he perpetrated?

But, yeah, Kyle Rittenhouse is the problem. The guy who actually has a legitimate claim to take action - that's where you draw the line?  

You should be wary of throwing stones while living in that glass house.

 

[squistion]

Aren't you the same guy in the Juicy Smollet thread defending him?  Saying his sentence was too harsh because he was black?  That same guy who actually tried to start a race riot because he wasn't getting paid enough?  That same guy who got on LIVE TV and literally cried about being the victim of a fake hoax he perpetrated?

But, yeah, Kyle Rittenhouse is the problem. The guy who actually has a legitimate claim to take action - that's where you draw the line?  

You should be wary of throwing stones while living in that glass house.

No. I have not been defending him.

And I never said his sentence was too harsh because he was black.   That is a lie. 

 

[IvanKaramazov]

I thought the media actually did an okay job in the Smollett case.  That story was fishy right from the beginning, and my recollection is that it didn't take very long for people to start tugging at loose ends.  The system seemed to work in that case, despite the best efforts of the Chicago prosecutor's office.  

The coverage of the Rittenhouse shooting was terrible and remains pretty bad to this day.  The guy has a legitimate gripe IMO.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

I thought the media actually did an okay job in the Smollett case.  That story was fishy right from the beginning, and my recollection is that it didn't take very long for people to start tugging at loose ends.  The system seemed to work in that case, despite the best efforts of the Chicago prosecutor's office.  

The coverage of the Rittenhouse shooting was terrible and remains pretty bad to this day.  The guy has a legitimate gripe IMO.

Agree the Rittenhouse coverage was terrible, but I think it cut both ways. Not to say it was necessarily a 50/50 thing, but there was no shortage of ill-founded attacks on the prosecution, the DA, the judge and even the defense lawyers that were unfair and ignorant.

Rittenhouse is entitled to monetize his moment in the spotlight and ride it for whatever it is worth. As others have pointed out, its a big badge of fraud that he is fundraising for this lawsuit. As a plaintiff seeking (supposedly) large damages, this is a case that would normally be handled on a contingent fee basis.  If the claim has merit, there would be a long line of plaintiff-side lawyers ready to handle it on a "you don't pay unless you win" basis.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Agree the Rittenhouse coverage was terrible, but I think it cut both ways. Not to say it was necessarily a 50/50 thing, but there was no shortage of ill-founded attacks on the prosecution, the DA, the judge and even the defense lawyers that were unfair and ignorant.

Rittenhouse is entitled to monetize his moment in the spotlight and ride it for whatever it is worth. As others have pointed out, its a big badge of fraud that he is fundraising for this lawsuit. As a plaintiff seeking (supposedly) large damages, this is a case that would normally be handled on a contingent fee basis.  If the claim has merit, there would be a long line of plaintiff-side lawyers ready to handle it on a "you don't pay unless you win" basis.

To be clear, I'm not saying that Rittenhouse has a gripe that leads to a successful lawsuit.  Just that he has a legitimate gripe about the way he was treated by the media.  That's probably non-compensable, and it shouldn't be.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

So Rittenhouse just reenacted his EGOT-winning performance on the stand for... I dunno.  To mock the jurors?  Prove liberals right?  Who can say what was in his mind.

 

[squistion]

ABC7 Eyewitness News @ABC7 2h

Days after he told a conservative podcast that he was going to Texas A&M University, Kyle Rittenhouse corrected himself on Twitter to say that he plans to attend Blinn College, a two-year public college, this year

https://abc7.com/kyle-rittenhouse-twitter-the-charlie-kirk-show-blinn-college-texas-a-and-m/11933374/

Wait, what...Rittenhouse lied that he had been accepted and was going to Texas A&M? Shocking from such an honest and law-abiding citizen. 

That reminds me, we haven't seen his #1 fanboy on this forum lately. Hope he is OK.

 

[Bogart]

ABC7 Eyewitness News @ABC7 2h

Days after he told a conservative podcast that he was going to Texas A&M University, Kyle Rittenhouse corrected himself on Twitter to say that he plans to attend Blinn College, a two-year public college, this year

https://abc7.com/kyle-rittenhouse-twitter-the-charlie-kirk-show-blinn-college-texas-a-and-m/11933374/

Wait, what...Rittenhouse lied that he had been accepted and was going to Texas A&M? Shocking from such an honest and law-abiding citizen. 

That reminds me, we haven't seen his #1 fanboy on this forum lately. Hope he is OK.

Blinn College has also come out and said that Rittenhouse is not yet enrolled for a current or upcoming term. It amazing how easy it is to verify these statements.

He was on Fox News today saying he may never be able to get a job because potential employers might not hire him because of the media. How about stopping going on TV?

 

[JIslander]

Blinn College has also come out and said that Rittenhouse is not yet enrolled for a current or upcoming term. It amazing how easy it is to verify these statements.

He was on Fox News today saying he may never be able to get a job because potential employers might not hire him because of the media. How about stopping going on TV?

Whoa is the disenfranchised white male 

 

[Herb]

That reminds me, we haven't seen his #1 fanboy on this forum lately. Hope he is OK.

Serving a well deserved and lengthy suspension is my guess. While talking trash about this place on "the other forum."

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Blinn College has also come out and said that Rittenhouse is not yet enrolled for a current or upcoming term. It amazing how easy it is to verify these statements.

He was on Fox News today saying he may never be able to get a job because potential employers might not hire him because of the media. How about stopping going on TV?

I'm glad the guy got acquitted -- that was definitely the right verdict IMO.  And I feel bad for him now, because his life is basically ruined over a dumb decision he made as a kid that had disastrous consequences.

That said, it's not a bad thing if this serves as a warning to other people who want to role-play as post-apocalyptic heroes in a riot zone.  Just stay home, guys.

 

[parasaurolophus]

If I was Rittenhouse I would announce 100 more times I plan to attend xyz college.

Just to watch all these losers try and fact check him

 

[BladeRunner]

Whoa is the disenfranchised white male 

I don't know why you guys always got to bring race into it. 

 

[RCon]

Lighten up, Francis.

I'm guessing jokes or comments about men - white men in particular - wouldn't bother you at all?  You see, we know how you guys roll.

I don't like this move towards totalitarianism I'm seeing from the woke crowd.

I don't know why you guys always got to bring race into it. 

 

[BladeRunner]

I don't know why you guys always got to bring race into it.  

That's exactly why I brought it up - because one of your buddies did and not a single one of you rushed over there to admonish him over it. 

 

[The Commish]

People are still talking about Kyle???  For real??? 

 

[-fish-]

People are still talking about Kyle???  For real??? 

He and his attorneys are still grifting, so he needs to stay in the Fox News rotation from time to time.  It's either that or murder more people.   

 

[dkp993]

People are still talking about Kyle???  For real??? 

Why not.  He’s a hero.  

 

[squistion]

People are still talking about Kyle???  For real??? 

He keeps injecting himself into the news and his fanboys keep portraying him as a media victim, a narrative that he plays into. That's why.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

He keeps injecting himself into the news and his fanboys keep portraying him as a media victim, a narrative that he plays into. That's why.

You're the first post about him in 3 months

 

[squistion]

You're the first post about him in 3 months

Probably because I am not one of his fanboys. 

 

[bigbottom]

If I was Rittenhouse I would announce 100 more times I plan to attend xyz college.

Just to watch all these losers try and fact check him

Texas A&M are losers?  

 

[parasaurolophus]

Texas A&M are losers?  

Reporters, internet stalkers, etc.

I am assuming these schools release statements because of the slew of messages/calls they get.

 

[The Commish]

He keeps injecting himself into the news and his fanboys keep portraying him as a media victim, a narrative that he plays into. That's why.

YOU bumped the thread.  I see self awareness continues to be a problem  

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

Bots gonna bot. 
 

 

[squistion]

YOU bumped the thread.  I see self awareness continues to be a problem  

Oh, the irony.

 

[The Commish]

Oh, the irony.

you need a dictionary too?   

 

[squistion]

you need a dictionary too?   

I see you are using the laughing emoji to ridicule me. 

 

[Max Power]

I love this forum. 

Rittenhouse lies about what college he is going to... 

Hunter Biden continues to be a national security risk taking nude photos with hookers, multiple drugs, and illegal guns... 

 

[squistion]

I love this forum. 

Rittenhouse lies about what college he is going to... 

Hunter Biden continues to be a national security risk taking nude photos with hookers, multiple drugs, and illegal guns... 

Kyle Rittenhouse is a right wing darling, as evidenced by his frequent appearances on Fox News and at events like CPAC. 

No one on the left is a fanboy of Hunter Biden. He is in the same category as Billy Carter or Roger Clinton, just a POTUS close relative who is an embarrassment.

 

[Max Power]

Kyle Rittenhouse is a right wing darling, as evidenced by his frequent appearances on Fox News and at events like CPAC. 

No one on the left is a fanboy of Hunter Biden. He is in the same category as Billy Carter or Roger Clinton, just a POTUS close relative who is an embarrassment.

You widely overstate how popular Rittenhouse is. How often does he appear on Fox news?  

 

[The Commish]

I see you are using the laughing emoji to ridicule me. 

sorry....I thought the way you used the term "irony" was a joke.  my bad...I was playing along.  Report me if you must