Weeb Wars / AnimeGate / #KickVic / #IStandWithVic / #vickicksback - General Discussion Thread

In barely related news, the Covington kid had his defamation case against WaPo dismissed by the judge.

So on end we have Oberlin, and on the other we have Sandmann.


'In a 36-page ruling, U.S. District Judge William Bertelsman noted that the Post never mentioned Sandmann by name in its initial coverage of the incident, referring only to groups of "hat wearing teens." Bertelsman added that "the words used contain no reflection upon any particular individual" and thus could not be constituted as defamation. The judge also ruled that the newspaper used language that was "loose, figurative," and "rhetorical hyperbole" which is protected by the First Amendment. '


#kickvic has - obviously - used names and specific language.


I think the judge's dismissal here is bs btw, but based on the summary given by this media source it's not 1-to-1 comparable to Vic, at least when you take the dumb judge at face value.
 
Last edited:
In barely related news, the Covington kid had his defamation case against WaPo dismissed by the judge.

So on one end we have Oberlin, and on the other we have Sandmann.
Good fucking Christ. How the hell did they squirm out of that one? I really hope Nick covers it tonight.
I can only see this embolding the other side. Expect some olympic quality exceptionalism from lawtwitter in the next few days.
 
yo are you seriously trying to link to your C drive?

Yes! Can't you read it?

Edit: At the risk of some of you being too autistic to understand sarcasm, at the time I post this the live quoted section on the site has a hyperlink to - presumably - the reporter's C drive.

Edit2 [emphasis mine]:

Judge dismisses Covington student's defamation suit against Washington Post
By Vandana Rambaran, Bill Mears, Samuel Chamberlain | Fox News

rambaranv/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/INetCache/Content.Outlook/OOH27HAO/KYSD%20Sandmann%20opinion%20WPost.pdf
 
Last edited:
Good goddamn do I love Vic more having seen this. I respect religious individuals who have no problems calling out their own on their bullshit. You can tell he's politely seething that these holier-than-thou fuckwads are doing this in *his* wheelhouse too, condemning *his* fans. Papa Vic ain't having that. :feels:
Kickvic has tried to claim that he saw cameras around and did it for attention or some shit.
 
Good fucking Christ. How the hell did they squirm out of that one? I really hope Nick covers it tonight.
I can only see this embolding the other side. Expect some olympic quality exceptionalism from lawtwitter in the next few days.
WaPo is owned by Bezo, Bezo has a 6 million dollar contract with the CIA for use of his servers.
Fortunately for us, MoRon isn't Bezo, are broke as shit and have no no way of threatening or paying off a judge.
 
'In a 36-page ruling, U.S. District Judge William Bertelsman noted that the Post never mentioned Sandmann by name in its initial coverage of the incident, referring only to groups of "hat wearing teens." Bertelsman added that "the words used contain no reflection upon any particular individual" and thus could not be constituted as defamation. The judge also ruled that the newspaper used language that was "loose, figurative," and "rhetorical hyperbole" which is protected by the First Amendment. '

Tbh, I didn't expect anything else, from a 83 years old Federal Judge, who was appointed by Jimmy Carter in 1979 and most possibly is a democrat himself.
 
Woke up today to

I might be autistic here but this dude is annoying 2:15 minutes of babble before his intro for another 1:05 minutes of babble, subscribe etc.. to then watch about 4 minutes of his last stream and then a minute of the deposition we already saw a week ago and then ends with 4 minutes of ramblin on why its so sad to lose vic to hit that sweet sweet 10 minute mark so he can add his 3 ads then adds buffer on his outro, this is amazing.

also that title lmao.

Hei is my least liked person on that side of things. Im sure hes a nice enough of a guy, but I find his videos rather obnoxious.
 
I'm having flashbacks to the Aussie bitch that was trying to push that you have to ask your baby for consent to change it's diaper, before you change it's diaper.

That, and the amount of grandmothers and great aunts that would be thrown in jail if we went with this thot's "logic" would be utterly unprecedented.


Holy shit, Shane! If a toddler asks for a smooch, you're not allowed to kiss them now? It's not sexual. Not every touch with another person is sexual. Most physical interaction with other human beings, no matter their age, is not sexual.

You know, it's one thing with the childless weirdos, the ones who aren't even around other family member's children, who's minds have apparently never aged out of the hormone-driven sex fugue that is the teenage years, and apparently don't remember what it was like being a toddler. But the people like Shane, like Skye- the ones who are parents, should fucking know better.

Little girls flirt. All the time. It's not sexual. A three year old batting her eyes up at an uncle, or a neighbor, or some stranger sitting on the other side of a McDonalds is absolutely them flirting, and it's a normal part of their socializing. To the point where, before fuckheads like this started to push the idea that a man even glancing in the direction of a child is molesting them, I found men that wouldn't smile or wink back at them really damn strange.

As a matter of fact, toddlers flirting is an important part of the socialization process with them. For both boys and girls, but especially for girls. It helps to teach them acceptable behaviors and boundaries. Like how you slowly I HAVE AUTISM PLEASE LAUGH AT ME a toddler out of the idea that she's going to grow up and marry her father- a three to five year old saying it is cute, they keep saying it past six and it's uncomfortable. They learn when they can use puppydog eyes to get their way, when it's acceptable to ask to be held and when they should stand by themselves, who's okay to go up and hug and kiss and who they should settle for just smiling at- namely, friends and family as opposed to strangers. And it's good for men to play around in this manner, where things are just fun and there's no underlining scheme except maybe the little girl is trying to get a cookie or some candy out of them. Just like it's good for women to accept dandelions picked by little boys and a sloppy, messy, probably dirt covered kiss on the cheek from them, and remember that sometimes gifts are given selflessly, just because someone likes you as a person and not because they want in your pants.

These sick freaks, running around and constantly trying to sexualize children are absolutely disgusting degenerates, and the fuckers that are willing to do so to try and ruin another person are going to have something to answer for- be it by a higher power, karma, or someone playing the game back at them by showing a picture of them hugging and kissing their own children and using their own professed logic against them.

I have said here and elsewhere on many occasions that people have to stop making excuses and reopen mental institutions. It's not some edgelord comment, it's long overdue. WTF are we supposed to do as a civilization with people like this? It's pretty obvious that we can't continue with the current number of these sociopaths, much less the hundreds of thousands more the schools turn out and the media reinforce globally every year.

Nice as it may sound, the "Start up the Rotors" approach isn't gonna be adopted by most places. At least not until a total civilization collapse is underway.
 
'In a 36-page ruling, U.S. District Judge William Bertelsman noted that the Post never mentioned Sandmann by name in its initial coverage of the incident, referring only to groups of "hat wearing teens." Bertelsman added that "the words used contain no reflection upon any particular individual" and thus could not be constituted as defamation. The judge also ruled that the newspaper used language that was "loose, figurative," and "rhetorical hyperbole" which is protected by the First Amendment. '
On the bright side, it is now a matter of federal court record that WaPo's news articles are loose, figurative, and hyperbolic.
 
I think the judge's dismissal here is bs btw, but based on the summary given by this media source it's not 1-to-1 comparable to Vic, at least when you take the dumb judge at face value.
I'll admit I barely know anything about the case, but did Sandman suffer actual damages? We know Vic has suffered income loss. That's another difference. Vic can point to an actual monetary value.
 
I'll admit I barely know anything about the case, but did Sandman suffer actual damages? We know Vic has suffered income loss. That's another difference. Vic can point to an actual monetary value.
That's a good question; does being labeled a Nazi and racist fall under defamation per se? Being believed to be a Nazi is certainty a state of moral turpitude.
 
Back