Elon’s struggle with Twitter revenue? He blames the Jews

This would mean that Musk is the one doing the defaming.

“Defamation” requires a false statement of fact. Even if the ADL explicitly accused Musk of antisemitism he wouldn’t have any basis to sue for defamation unless they said something that was objectively untrue, such as “Elon Musk is a dues-paying member of the American Nazi Party.”




This lunatic has lucked into it. For example, he got pushed out of Paypal because the rest of the top people there, including Peter Thiel, thought he was a screwed up person and terrible executive. And when Peter Thiel thinks you are awful…well…I’m not sure what to say.But that is bottom of the barrell. But Musk still made crazy money off of it. Our economy and society is pretty screwed up


Well, I was talking about the idea that seems to permeate popular culture that fascists nth level chess players rather than common violent bullies… it’s still an article of faith among far too many people who really should know better.

And pretty much 99.999999% of people who ended up on the top of the heap lucked into it by an accident of their birth… :woman_shrugging:


This gets a little messy because an opinion isn’t always just an opinion.

If the ADL, an organization dedicated to tracking antisemitic acts, makes a statement claiming someone is an antisemite, absent any other remarks for the basis of that statement, then it could imply the allegation of undisclosed defamatory facts, such as antisemitic actions, forming the basis of opinion. If no such acts exist because the person is the reincarnation of Moses, then that could be the basis of a defamation case.

I still don’t think he’d win though.

I used to try to do this on BLAZE right after the election…felt it was my civic duty, not combative, just posting facts. My wearied and worried heart could only take it for a few months.

thank you for your service

It seems unlikely that the ADL made public statements that weren’t made publicly.

If they weren’t made public then there it would seem there is no possibility of slander or libel. They state the reasons they consider something problematic- as pretty much all organizations do.

But hey - give it a look and see what you think. Under their press section you can see their public statements on isuues. Examples:


Oh, I wouldn’t have guessed he wasn’t a member but if you have to actually pay dues that makes sense.


“Set Jewish space lasers to demonetize!”

Oy, Captain!

I can’t tell if Musk is stupid, stoned or deranged.

1 Like

He’s a bigot.

He’s a garden variety every day common as can be bigot.

He just has a ton of money and a large megaphone so we get affected by his bigotry, but not nearly as much as the people he’s targeting are getting affected by his bigotry.


Defamation doesn’t have to be public though.

Like, if you’re ex-employer tells your new prospective employer on a background check that you regularly stole supplies to support your heroin addiction, that’s still defamation… well assuming it isn’t true.

The same is true if you go to someone’s clients, customers, coworkers, friends, etc. - though you have to be able to show damages.

Again, I don’t think Musk will succeed. Defamation suits are hard to win even when they’re the far more straight forward kind.

1 Like

But it does have to involve a false statement of fact. “ADL expressed the opinion that Musk is an anti-semite and that he enacted policies which support antisemitism” would be protected speech in either a public or private context.


As I said earlier, simply being an opinion is not a perfect defense if it creates a reasonable inference that the opinion is justified based on undisclosed defamatory facts.

Suppose Albert tells Carol “I think Bob must be an alcoholic.” This is an opinion, but there’s an implication there that Albert might knows undisclosed facts to justify his opinion which creates liability.

The ADL is, as @jlw stated “one of the leading global organizations battling anti-semitism” so if they say someone is antisemitic, there could be a reasonable implication there that they have facts that justify their opinion. Maybe. It’s a hard argument to make tbh.

1 Like

It was the lay-zeerz.

1 Like

Can you cite an example of someone who was successfully sued for defamation in the United States for expressing an opinion that made no assertion of fact?


McQueen v. Fayette Cty. School Corp

Or to save you time, it comes from Restatement (Second) of Torts § 566:

If the defendant expresses a derogatory opinion without disclosing the facts on which it is based, he is subject to liability if the comment creates the reasonable inference that the opinion is justified by the existence of unexpressed defamatory facts.

Mind, the vast majority of courts dismiss random accusations of things like racism and what not because they’re considered pure opinions so there’s little chance of it being successful even if it was tried.


I hope that the gifter notices that on a credit card statement and gets the message. That is a profoundly bad gift…


I don’t see the relevance of that example since the ADL has been very public from the start expressing exactly why they think Elon’s leadership at Twitter/X has led to a rise in antisemitism on the platform.

How about we stop entertaining the idea that Musk has any legal basis to sue the ADL until such time that he actually provides evidence they defamed him in some way.