Posted on 03/24/2022 4:56:48 AM PDT by RandFan
Kyle is no Nick Sandmann, because Kyle used deadly force, whereas Nick Sandmann just smiled.
Once criminal charges were filed against Kyle, that pretty much nullified any "malice" in reporting against him, because the media were allowed to opine on Kyle's guilt or innocence of the charges brought against the state.
He shouldn’t have any trouble finding a lawyer who will take his lawsuit against the media on a contingency, which means the lawyer takes a percentage of whatever is recovered by settlement or judgment.
Time to watch “Citizen Kane” again.
The first possibility seems the more favorable.
So, what you are saying is if you use your Constitutionally protected rights to survive, our enemedia can lie, AT WILL, about what actually transpired? They can call you a racist, without any actual proof (prejudicing public opinion and slandering your name)? They can lie and tell people you illegally carried a firearm over state lines (prejudicing public opinion and slandering your name)?
If this is true then we, as a people, would be better off letting ourselves get killed in similar instances than be willfully destroyed by our enemedia.
I’m not against you or trying to start an argument, I am simply saying our system of justice is flawed, EXTREMELY FLAWED, if our enemedia is allowed to get away with what they attempted to do to Kyle Rittenhouse. And if our laws ALLOW our enemedia to get away with this, then we need to change the laws!
Sadly, you are probably right. However, he might be able to bring a bright spotlight on the media by forcing discovery on them. In that regards, I think he has a chance to be successful and the effort will be worth it. If he can further show the media to be the lying, Democrat narrative writers that they are, then he will have succeeded. A slow drip can destroy the stiffest wall.
I knew that the left was determined to throw KR in jail when I saw that the social media were censoring anyone who “liked” a posting favorable to him.
The media works very closely with the power behind the democrat party - the ones who are not in the news every day, but who direct operations.
They will ALL settle for massive quantites of cash.
the last thing the media wants is to be paraded under oath in front of judge and cameras. Possibly having to report on it.
And Ultimate last thing they want is a judgement/ precedent set in a real court.
It may be interesting in suits against individuals if their corp lawyers don’t jump in.
AND all settlements will be made with confidentiality agreements so the actual amount will never be known..
The media have ONLY the power that the people GIVE TO THEM.
How to break their hold on the American psyche? TURN OFF THE TV. Wean off the Internet. Even bit-by-bit is better than nothing.
But that would take effort.
Interesting thought...
Assuming KR sues Both the Companies AND individuals.
I could see CNN (espeically) defending itself on the corp level. Meaning, a large out of court settlement with some sort of NDA.
BUT, They may very well have seen this on the horizon already. And may be letting their “personalities” fend for themselves and NOT provide corporate lawyers.
This could be an easy way to clean house at CNN. And possibly, get out of a LOT of high $$ contracts. With no blow back on them.
Barnes says that Kyle's mom has a much stronger defamation case than Kyle: https://youtu.be/4R2wV6zqPDo?t=831
(Both video clips are cued up to the pertinent spots to save your time, but you can also listen to the entire Viva Frei podcast if desired.)
If it can be shown media outlets continued to make false claims about Kyle when the facts were available to the public and reporters, Kyle's case has merit.
Hey Kyle, it wasn’t just the media that tried to,do,that, it was black lives matter too, which I understand you support?
What’s the deal with his gun? I saw a story the other day that the police shredded it.
The gun should’ve been returned to him on the day he was found to be not guilty.
I am assuming that you didn't listen to the two Barnes video clips I posted earlier in post 15 of this thread, and I don't blame you if you hadn't.
Barnes' point wasn't that a defamation case wouldn't have merit, but that it would be difficult to prove more damages to Kyle's reputation from the defamation than the state had already caused by charging him and putting him through a trial, and that a court would probably dismiss a defamation case at some point in the proceedings because of it.
He also states that Kyle's mother Wendy has a much better case, because she was never charged or tried in court, so damage to her reputation would more easily proved. (Second video clip I posted.)
The gun should’ve been returned to him on the day he was found to be not guilty.
The gun didn't belong to Kyle when it was confiscated, it belonged to his buddy Dominic Black who bought it.
Regardless, it was Kyle's wishes that the gun be destroyed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.