General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMike Lee (R-UT) wants Stephen King SUED for REPEATING something Charlie Kirk ACTUALLY SAID.
But King didn't stop there. He later doubled down with a post on his social media that said of Kirk, "He advocated stoning gays to death. Just sayin."
That led to outrage from some in MAGA, including GOP lawmaker Mike Lee. He wrote on X, "Please share if you agree that the estate of Charlie Kirk should sue Stephen King for defamation over this heinously false accusation."
"Hes crossed a line It will prove costly," Lee then added.
Kirk did indeed once say] that it was "God's perfect law" to have homosexual men stoned to death.
https://www.rawstory.com/stephen-king-charlie-kirk-lawsuit/

Jilly_in_VA
(12,985 posts)Don't you ever read anything besides your Book of Mormon? Hint: it's in Leviticus. But Jesus never said a damn thing about it,
UpInArms
(53,381 posts)They never heard a word he said
but then again, they never understand what crap falls out of their mouths, either.
They are too stupid to know how stupid they are.
bluesbassman
(20,317 posts)Same as with their cult leader.
GB_RN
(3,438 posts)But even dumber than that.
Thats the tRump-Kruger Effect.😂
Liberal In Texas
(15,598 posts)If there's anybody who has the funds to slap back a frivolous suit like this, it's Stephen King.
Vogon_Glory
(10,029 posts)court costs?
EdmondDantes_
(891 posts)As for getting costs paid, probably depends on the anti-slapp laws where the suit is filed.
GoCubsGo
(34,292 posts)That's why he's encouraging Kirk's estate to do that.
Aristus
(70,832 posts)I doubt the first deposition would last longer than five minutes. All King's lawyer would have to do is produce records of Kirk saying exactly that, and it's case dismissed.
democratsruletheday
(1,542 posts)Lee is an ass clown
JT45242
(3,615 posts)One is about using male prostitutes to foreign gods.
The other is more aptly translated as rape. But the revised standard version translation favored by many protestant demonstration mistranslated it because some of the lead translators had aces to grind.
wolfie001
(6,082 posts)
Mariana
(15,577 posts)OldBaldy1701E
(8,983 posts)COUNTERSUIT!
yardwork
(67,965 posts)Old Crank
(6,190 posts)About a billion each. They will all get hammered in discovery.
spanone
(140,122 posts)tulipsandroses
(7,913 posts)SMDH.
wolfie001
(6,082 posts)
GiqueCee
(2,809 posts)... is a democracy-hating piece of shit who does not deserve to hold public office. A few years ago, Lee said this: Democracy isnt the objective; liberty, peace, and prospefity[sic] are. We want the human condition to flourish. Rank democracy can thwart that.
Do not take his word for anything.
(Bold emphasis mine)
kwolf68
(8,136 posts)Not a statesman at all.
twodogsbarking
(15,644 posts)
Takket
(23,207 posts)I think even Kirk himself would be upset by how the gop is changing his beliefs after his death. Stoning people to death might be a vile and horrible thing but its something that Kirk believed and the GOP are trying to erase his beliefs to turn him into a sympathetic figure to do what they always do: create hatred towards Democrats in the general public.
IronLionZion
(49,873 posts)

wolfie001
(6,082 posts)RW lunatic. He really expects to shake jeeesus' hand when he returns to Utah because, why the f6ck not? Clown. 🤡
Iris
(16,622 posts)
travelingthrulife
(3,209 posts)frivolous lawsuits? I guess that was before we realized that everything they whine about is projection.
aeromanKC
(3,707 posts)(it will not end well)
Emile
(37,371 posts)EnergizedLib
(2,765 posts)Mike Lee, who mocked the Minnesota deaths, now wants to sue someone for using Charlie Kirks actual words in death.
Theyre insane.
Marcuse
(8,671 posts)bucolic_frolic
(52,320 posts)Hassin Bin Sober
(27,245 posts)The AI machine thingy agrees with me:
No, in the United States, you generally cannot slander a dead person because defamation requires an injury to a living person's reputation, which the deceased no longer possesses. While such statements are considered reprehensible and may harm the memory of the deceased or impact the family, they do not constitute legal defamation. However, living family members may have a cause of action if the defamatory statements also harm their own reputations.
Doodley
(11,313 posts)exboyfil
(18,276 posts)Should have just used his own quotes:
Bailing out Pelosi's husband's attempted murderer.
Seeing scores of kids being killed is just the price of freedom (2nd Amendment)
This quote
Kirk's quote about bringing the fight to Washington (Jan. 6th)
No need to say more.
travelingthrulife
(3,209 posts)He got what he wanted. Let's move on.
Xipe Totec
(44,391 posts)jonstl08
(501 posts)If they sue King all they have to do is bring up Kirks comments about gays and it will be thrown out. Maybe the estate would have to pay Kings legal expenses.
Johonny
(24,590 posts)Grins
(8,815 posts)...Said the senator who posted a photo of a man posing as a police officer and shooting two Minnesota Democratic lawmakers. And their spouses. And their dog.
His photo had the words: "This is what happens When Marxists dont get their way."
The shooter - A registered Republican and strong backer of TRUMP.
Confronted by fellow a senator from the victim's state, Lee didn't back down. The Senate has rules and traditions about decorum and collegiality. Republicans ignored them.
Here is Jon Stewart beautifully ripping Lee apart, and showing what an ass he is. The segment was so powerful, Utah papers wrote it up!
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/v4ol6Neyu5U
Martin Eden
(14,873 posts)... Charlie Kirk defamed himself.
relayerbob
(7,269 posts)The trial would certainly be colorful when they show the videos.