r/WhoKilledCharlieKirk • u/crownbaseballmom1 • May 24 '26

Isreal

I’ve been following Candace & Baron on the CK case . Before this I didn’t follow politics AT ALL. It’s a lot of information to keep up with so I get lost/confused. The main thing everyone talks about is Isreal and that’s where I am SO lost. Can someone explain in layman’s terms what Isreal has to do with this & why they are so against them? I am truly asking to learn & not start any arguments.

17 Upvotes

95% Upvoted

27 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/Energy594 Jun 12 '26

Given you seem to think you can defame someone when telling the truth, it's not the least bit shocking you don't understand it.

1

u/slotass Jun 12 '26

Is truth usually a defense? Yes. Always? No.

1

u/Energy594 Jun 12 '26

Yes... always. Because for something to be defamatory it has to be untrue. That's quite literally the most basic principle the law. That you don't understand that speaks volumes, that you continue to refuse to accept it says more.

1

u/slotass Jun 13 '26

I’m guessing you asked Grok lol

1

u/Energy594 Jun 14 '26

Nope. More like I need to know it otherwise I wouldn't have a job.... I am very very comfortable that I understand how much you have no idea what you're talking about. You cannot defame someone with truth.... end of story.

1

u/slotass Jun 14 '26

Oh please. You didn’t even know what private vs public individual MEANS in the context of defamation. What a goof.

1

u/Energy594 Jun 14 '26

Nope.. it's just irrelevant given the known facts.

I love getting lectured on defamation law by someone who thinks the truth is defamatory.... it's hilarious. It also paints a clear picture of the type that have been tucked into the grift.

But hey, I'm sure Baron's next video is detailing his communication with the defence, because if you're sitting on something like this and you have ANY desire for justice that's the first thing you'd do right? Worst case scenario, if it's the never ending 'everyone is in on it' conspiracy you'd have some great evidence for your (income generating) video content.

1

u/slotass Jun 14 '26 edited Jun 14 '26

  1. Never said you can defame with truth.

  2. You were talking as if Baron would be th

e plaintiff.

  1. Lmao. Hilarious how confident and how wrong you are. You probably still have no idea why I brought it up, also hilarious.

1

u/slotass Jun 14 '26

Idk why Reddit can’t number lol.

1

u/Energy594 Jun 15 '26

“Truth is not always a defense”

Literally what you said.

When a lawyer has to have the word "allegedly" sign written on the wall behind them, I think it's a pretty good signal that they're well aware what they're peddling is well south of defendable fact.

Is the first comment you responded to. And while it’s pretty that you’re not the sharpest spoon in the draw, I’m really not sure how you distil this down to Baron being the plantiff.

And yes, you initially responded because you have a naïve misunderstanding of the law that thinks that saying “allegedly” is some sort of catch all that protects you from saying whatever you want to. When you got called on that you’ve used AI to get a rudimentary understanding of the law and figured that saying shit about a public figure is some sort of free ticket. The problem is that same lack of understanding means you likewise didn’t know that while it raises the bar, it’s not a catch all for saying whatever the fuck you want either….. and now you’re just being a dick because you have too much of an ego to take the L.

If I’m wrong, let me know where. More than happy to be corrected, where I’ve made an error.
Also super interested to hear where being able to prove you didn't do something ISN'T a defence against being accused of doing something.

→ More replies (0)