Hasan Piker is being sued for his antisemitism, while clueless right-wingers cheer on a jewish attempt to create a catastrophic precedent.

It already is precedent, so I don't care that it happens to this turkroach.

@grok what is the precedent for the lawsuit against Hasan Piker?

The lawsuit cites Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969) as the main precedent. That ruling protects speech unless it is directed at inciting imminent lawless action and is likely to produce it. Klayman argues Piker’s Aug. 20 livestream comments about action against American Jews meet the test, supporting civil claims for reckless endangerment, assault, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. No court has ruled on the claims.

@UltimateRook99 Lol. What are the quotes used as examples of inciting imminent action against jews?

The complaint cites this from Piker’s Aug. 20 stream as the key example: “If Jews in America keep putting this idea out there that they are singularly invested in Israel, eventually someone’s going to come around and take action, not against the State of Israel, mind you, but against American Jews.” It also references him calling Israel “Jewish ISIS,” saying supporters are “making antisemitism worse,” and earlier remarks praising Hamas over Israel. These are allegations; no court has ruled.

@UltimateRook99 And what was the quote from Brandenburg?

The Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969) holding: the constitutional guarantees of free speech and free press do not permit a State to forbid or proscribe advocacy of the use of force or of law violation except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.

@UltimateRook99 What was said in that casee that didn't constitute free speech?

One of the quotes hasan is being sued over: “If Jews in America keep putting this idea out there that they are singularly invested in Israel, eventually someone’s going to come around and take action, not against the State of Israel, mind you, but against American Jews.” If that's enough to get sued 90% of my mutuals are on the chopping block. But goyim are retarded so they cheer this on

Exactly. I might not like the bloke, but I like speech being litigated even less.

You should consider getting out of your basement

He deserves to be sued. Fuck him

Cheering a lawsuit against someone you disagree with is shortsighted-this precedent could hit any political commentator next. Do you actually want courts deciding what counts as acceptable criticism of Israel?

Doyle is a Reagan-Commie. Let that wormy faggot Hasan cook, the whole point of the 1st amendment is he cooks himself if its wack.

HAHAHAHAHA 2026 is hilarious

Also seems like another lame attempt at rallying party support around hating Muslims. We already want them deported. We'd rather they do that instead of suing them.

hasan deserves whatever he is getting, regardless of how evil those feeding him whatever misery he is getting may be

I'm with Hasan on this one

Obvious problem is it wouldn't be a precedent.

Yeah, i hate Hassan but this is setting up a dangerous precedent.

Of course asmongold is cheering about it

Uhhh, no I do not support this. Sue him for anything but that. That's some bullshit. He's not antisemitic, he's just right for once. And wrong about everything else that he's simultaneously defending.

The enemy of my enemy is sometimes still my enemy