It’s actually neither of those things. “Anti-semitism” isn’t a tort, anyway.
Why would google sue fox.
You guys are pretty litigious for a group of people who screech about tort reform and the strength of the trial lawyer lobby when it’s convenient
1 Like
A gentle reminer. The topic is the Google pyramid.
Brought to you by….
Actually I’m not looking for advice from internet lawyers. I’m saying that the victims of Google’s white rage should not just sit back and take it. Action is needed.
2 Likes
Sure. First understand how defamation and libel works so nobody has to take advice form internet lawyers amd then second profit!
2 Likes
Rufo is grifting you.
He is presenting an out of context power point slide and letting you come to your own outrage conclusions.
The outrage is the point. His employers at the Manhattan Institute want you to be angry so you will vote for more tax cuts for the rich and fewer regulations so companies can squeeze a few pennies more of profit at the expense of the environment and the workers.
This culture war grift… man… doesn’t it get old falling for it over and over just to get that tingle in the lizard brain?
3 Likes
Christopher Rufo. Hard to separate the man from the ■■■■■■■■■
2 Likes
It’s the only way the right can motivate voters. Because their policies don’t actually help anyone.
4 Likes
I understand that you feel aggrieved - that’s the baseline of right-wing politics these days - but your feelings of victimhood don’t translate to having a cognizable claim.
3 Likes
They have policies?
2 Likes
Good point.
1 Like
The big company doesn’t care what people think about it’s training.
They won’t cancel on the whim of conservatives (or liberals for that matter)
Allan
Hopefully, there is a post letting us know what was the outcome of the lawsuit.
They don’t.
saying mean stuff isn’t defamation.
Ben Shapiro responded ““All it would take is one Google search to learn just how much white supremacists hate my work, or how often I’ve spoken out against their benighted philosophy.”
Does he not realize that the definition of white supremacist no longer has anything to do with a belief that whites should be supreme? That is so yesteryear.
We are now told that a black (Elder) can be a black white supremacist.
It just means that you believe you should take responsibility for yourself, and that your own hard work and abilities do/should have something to do with your success in life. That is the new white supremacy.
2 Likes
Where does the 1A fit into all of this?
You don’t have to be white to support white nationalism.
Only one policy. Bend the knee to Trump or else. 
