I know now that a video exists in which he shows Billy explicitly stating what the lawsuit is about, but then Karl claims "that is all wrong", thereby making it sound like Billy is NOT suing over that, while he likely meant to say "but while Billy is suing me over that, I had legit reason to think it true".
I don't know if this is what you speak of, but when Mitchell the Merciful said, "the complaint actually says nothing, not a single word, about video games," Jobst pedantically used that as an example of a lie in a response video. I only started following this drama since April, but in my poorly educated opinion, this is like the smoking gun that shows Team Karl's dishonesty. It's been nagging me that I haven't seen anyone go into it yet. I'll post about it now.
(
https://youtu.be/1tjWUCUDVjk?t=586 "Billy Mitchell Accuses Me Of Fraud During Insane Rant!" Aug. 19, 2023)
Karl's portrayal was that Billy is lying, because said complaint does mention video games,
literally. However, we only see mentions on the first page of the complaint, which are merely relevant facts describing the parties involved, and there's nothing at all about what the complaint alleges... It seems Karl was mischaracterizing Billy's characterization, to mislead us into thinking Billy is misleading us.
So, anyway:
If we trusted Billy ("It's NOT over video games!"), we were not misled about the lawsuit's nature.
If we trusted Karl ("It IS over video games!"), we were misled about the lawsuit's nature.
In that great tome of cope, titled
"Did Karl Jobst lie about the Billy Mitchell lawsuit?" (
Archive.org), if you scroll 6,973 words down, or 40,152 characters from the start, past the cookie monster gif, ersatz_cats (who deletes comments on his gay blog) says Karl has never lied, but now moves onto whether Karl has misled:
“Did Karl at any point mislead people about the Billy Mitchell lawsuit?”
Wherein he seethes a bit over Billy's statement in particular:
Again, here’s Billy in his own words:
"The complaint actually says nothing, not a single word about video games, nothing. But he has gone online… and has led you to believe that it has to do with the allegations, and it doesn’t."
Remember, this is the dude who sent Karl three Concerns Notices strictly about cheating allegations. And he knows this. He knows doing these things causes chaos and confusion.
Whatever. Setting aside what Billy's done to defend himself on other allegations, Karl caused "chaos and confusion" on this one, by being pedantic and giving undue weight to a benign, inconsequential remark of Billy's.
Everything hinges on what Billy decides he meant by “The complaint” at any given point in time. So if you find Karl discussing the other legal threats, which were about cheating allegations, and you come to the conclusion those threats are the subject of the main lawsuit, Billy can then turn around and pull a “gotcha” when he reveals that your impression was not true.
... Cui bono? It was this misunderstanding which contributed to popular support and many donations toward Karl's defense. How did Billy benefit?
Karl was limited in what he could reasonably say, but he did attempt to dispel this misrepresentation as well:
"I have never spoken about what the lawsuit is actually about. I haven’t led anyone to believe anything. I have said that I’m being sued for defamation, but I’ve never talked about the specifics of the lawsuit. And I won’t talk about them until the lawsuit is over. However, I will say that Billy Mitchell being a video game cheater is extremely relevant to the lawsuit. Billy Mitchell being happy about Apollo Legend dying is extremely relevant. Billy Mitchell abusing the legal system is extremely relevant."
But Karl did lead people to believe that "the case is over video games." And if you believed that, then you would've likely precluded any thought of the case being over someone else's settlement payment (not a video game), which incidentally is specifically what the defamation regarded. How convenient.
He goes on, invoking Karl's legal defense:
Karl showed a portion of his filed defense, which includes “contextual imputations” which are “substantially true”:
Sure, three of those are about Billy’s reputation as a cheater, and one is about his reputation as a crazed litigant. And item (iv) of course harkens back to Billy’s texts about Apollo’s rumored death. Gosh, this lawsuit sounds super-complicated! Like it’s about a bunch of different things all at once.
That's it. This absolute faggot is trying to make the leap that if you use Billy's video game reputation in your defense, then the lawsuit—going all the way back to the remark about the complaint—was actually over video games, and many other thing! Billy wrong to say no video game!
He goes on.
I was about to say we should stay on topic and move on, however, at the very end of that video, Karl included this line from Billy:
"He cannot possibly defend the fact that he said I took the life of a human being. And I’m not, not gonna let it go, no matter what."
Wait HOLY SHIT!!! That’s what this lawsuit was about? Why did literally nobody say anything about this until now?
Look at how dishonest this is. At
21 minutes and 21 seconds into the same video, Karl continues to paint Billy as a pathological liar who does nothing but lie. Only then, after being swayed to never believe a word out of Billy's mouth, are we allowed to hear Billy elucidate further on his lawsuit.
You can't showcase things with the context that they are actually lies, but then once we learn there was truth to them, say, "SEE? TOLD U SO," as if you were being open about it all along.
That's cheating.
