Laura Loomer Just Handed George Farmer a Libel Per Se WIN – Lawsuit Incoming!

Hinzugefügt: 2026-05-07

[00:00:00]My friends, as many of you love to learn, as do I. And with all of this talk about litigation and this latigious talk about lawsuits and liel and defamation, the new accusations from Laura Loomer against George Farmer, and is it true, and what if it's not? And I want to provide for you a little bit of well a look at kind of the basics of how liable works. And there's one thing I find is interesting regarding liable per se.

[00:00:37]Excuse me. Popcorn.

[00:00:42]Liel per se. I'll be all right. I just got choked up whenever I'm talking about this. Liel per se.

[00:00:50]By the way, this liel l and before we begin, liel is recorded defamation. Slander is spoken. Slander I never you never even hear of somebody slander somebody, but it technically means it was never recorded. In the old days, it meant written down. But then with audio tapes and movies and radio and uh recordation took on a whole new meaning. So anything that is recorded and why is that important? Because it can be referred to again.

[00:01:30]Slander is transitory, ephemeral. It's right there at that place, at that setting, at that moment among these people. That's it. You got it. This is different. This is recorded. It lasts forever. You can go back and watch it.

[00:01:48]And that's the whole notion of permanency makes it liable a little bit more more permanent. Hence the term permanency. All right, you got that one.

[00:01:59]Now, what what Laura Loomer is doing, and this may inure to the benefit of Candace ultimately in terms of a plaintiff's point of view, Laura Loomer seems to be absolutely positively just hellbent on this behavior. Now, if she's right, if Laura Loomer says the most horrible things about Candace or her husband or her family, and it's true, it's not liable. It's not defamation.

[00:02:36]It might be something else. Some jurisdictions still have something about kind of like exposing pri exposing like prior uh private light or they remember when when Hunter Biden sued on they were revealing information about him. It was it was like um shining a false light or something. It was almost like a violation of it's it's more of an arcane statute and it doesn't come to me now as I think about it, but that's not defamation.

[00:03:06]There's also something which is a a secondary kind of a a one-two punch. If the liel doesn't work, hit them with intentional inflection of emotional distress where somebody did something to hurt you. It's it was to shock you.

[00:03:28]It was it doesn't really fall under the issue of something that was false. In fact, most of it's true because remember true stuff is necessary. True uh extortion. Well, all right. We're getting into the weeds. But what I'm saying is let's just keep in mind this now. What I want to talk to you about is something which is very interesting. And the purpose of this address will be liable per se.

[00:03:50]This is presumed liability without proof of special damages in the context of accusations of criminal conduct and alcoholism and other loathsome diseases which we'll talk to you uh with application to potential defamation claims arising from public statements made from Laura Loomer and others against and anon concerning George farmer. That's the subject. Let us begin, shall we? In the United States, defamation law, this is this is very very critical. Defamation law is the doctrine or rather the doctrine of liel per se.

[00:04:41]By the way, it's liel not liab anyway.

[00:04:43]Bible occupies a kind of a unique little niche, a doctrinal niche if you will. It derives from the common law distinction between liel which is written or published or recorded defamation and slander spoken as I said and it reflects the historical judgment which kind of is still today that certain false statements are of such a nature such an accusation that are so inherently injurious to reputation that harm arm and thus general damages may be presumed as a matter of law. Let me finish this.

[00:05:32]This this is this is legal speak without without the plaintiff's obligation to plead or prove special damages, quantifiable economic loss. What does that mean?

[00:05:48]Normally, you're going to have to say, "Well, so and so said this about me, and it's false." Okay. Did it Did it damage you? Huh?

[00:05:59]Did it Did it damage you? Did it damage me? Yeah.

[00:06:06]Did you lose a job or were you suffering the ignimonyy and the shame and the approprium of people that Well, no. But he said it. Oh, wait a minute.

[00:06:18]Did Did anything bad happen? Not Not really. Well, then we got then we got into problems. There's got to be some kind of damage. Something something. It's It's It's like what what if somebody said something about you in France or or let forget uh Washington State? You knew nothing about it. Nobody here said. They said it. It was false.

[00:06:44]You didn't know it until five years later. And it never even made it. What?

[00:06:50]Were you damaged? Well, not really. See, sometimes there are sometime the law.

[00:06:55]You've got to be hurt. It's called damnum absu injuria. A wrong without an injury. There's no such thing as this car almost hit me. You almost hit me.

[00:07:08]Though again, I'm always correcting myself. negligent infliction of emotional distress, which we're not going to get into, but for the most part, you got to prove you were damaged.

[00:07:18]However, when the subject matter spoken is of these categories, well, that's different. The phrase is almost kind of like um it's a it's a there's there's kind of like a strict liability aspect of it.

[00:07:36]Now, remember something.

[00:07:39]New York Times against Sullivan. Let me throw that one in there.

[00:07:44]Once the statement is shown to fall within a recognized per se category, which I will explain, and to have been published, the plaintiff, who in this case would be Mr. farmer or or or derivatively perhaps one could say um Candice, they need not demonstrate actual harm to reputation or pecuniary laws to recover compensatory damages. Modern constitutional laws and overlays have kind of kind of tempered this rule.

[00:08:20]Remember, if you're a public figure, if you're a public figure and you're bringing a lawsuit against somebody else, you're in the public's eye, you're always saying, "Look at me. Look at me.

[00:08:33]Talk about me. Talk about me. Here I am.

[00:08:34]Here I am. Here I am. Talk about me."

[00:08:36]And then somebody says something in response. You aha.

[00:08:40]You you you defamed me. Well, you're a public figure. And because you're a public figure, you could call a press conference. you could respond.

[00:08:50]Uh, a lot of people think this is but anyway, but the rule is it because New York Times against Sullivan, you you as the plaintiff have to show a little bit more, not just negligence on the part of the person who said it, but the fact that they did it with malice, knowing knowing it was wrong, knowing it was fake, knowing it was wrong, it was false, the statements made, and or I should say having a reckless disregard for the truth. Ah, I don't care. Just say it. publish it.

[00:09:20]When the plaintiff is a public figure or the matter is of, you know, public concern, we we get a we get some issues.

[00:09:29]That's really not going to apply here.

[00:09:31]But I want you to remember this. Always remember this. If you're Joe Blow, Joe's six-pack, Josephine six-pack, whatever that means, and somebody, you know, liels you, slanders you, defames you, you don't have to prove really anything other than the fact that they said it.

[00:09:51]Maybe negligence, just negligence. They said it, they weren't thinking they didn't.

[00:09:57]If it's if they meant to say it and meant to harm you, that's even easier.

[00:10:00]But you just merely have to show that if you're if you're somebody else, if you're, you know, Britney Spears or whoever the hell it is, you're different. You can sue, but you've got to prove that the person who said this, unlike for ordinary folks, you being a public figure have to show that they really they they really either did it deliberately to hurt you with malice or they didn't care. Okay, you got that now. We have this thing called, everybody in Octo, the the the restatement, the restatement of tors. This is the kind of like the Bible. It's a dictionary of all of the terms and the restatement. Second, I believe of most shows of most jurisdictions, a statement is, and this is important, lielis per se. P E R S E two word, right? Libelist per se. If its character, its defamatory cure character that you know what is said is apparent on its face and falls within one or more of the traditional categories. Okay, this is important. Meaning if this is if it falls within one of these categories, don't even worry.

[00:11:22]We're going to presume you were harmed.

[00:11:25]You don't have to you don't have to tell anybody how it affected you, whether you lost any money, uh any kind of, you know, emotional drain. We're under these categories, you just prove they said this and it's wrong and it's a lie and it's you got it. Don't even worry about it. It is liable per se as a matter of law. The first one is imputation of criminal conduct. Meaning to allege somebody of criminal conduct, especially a crime involving moral turpitude, a felony or a serious misdemeanor. Uh drunk driving.

[00:12:10]Drunk driving, particularly when um there is accompanied by allegations of property damage or weapon possession or leaving the scene, all have been held to qualify.

[00:12:22]Courts have said and they reason that such charges impute and carry a serious breach of public safety and moral responsibility.

[00:12:33]So if that's the subject matter, Laura, and you say that, Laura Loomer, and it's false, you all they have to do is go to court and prove you said it, and that's it.

[00:12:50]The jury says, "Okay, they've proved the damages. Now they have to then assess how much it's worth and all that." But normally, you have to show, well, our business dropped. You know, greatest example of showing businesses in liel is, you know, with all this Yelp and stuff that people use these travel advisory advisors. Sometimes they'll say, I give it four four stars or three stars or it was terrible. The soup was cold. Sometimes people have gone so far as to say things like there was a there was a dead rat in our soup and it it was false. You know, that that's really bad. You know, things things like that, you know. I mean, you could say our business dropped. It's very easy to show drops in business. But in this case, imputation of criminal conduct, moral turpitude. Oh, that's it.

[00:13:34]The second one is imputation. Again, to impute to to allege of a loathome, that's my favorite, a loathome or socially stigmatized condition.

[00:13:46]Historically, it was VD or leprosy.

[00:13:50]Later on, it was AIDS.

[00:13:54]today. It might be, this is weird, it might be maybe mental illness, which is weird because you're going to say, "Well, there's no stigma to mental illness." Oh, yeah. Really? Well, do you mind if I call you mentally ill? Well, maybe not.

[00:14:06]So, the idea was that leprosy. Oh my god. Leprosy. You You even intimated somebody had leprosy or a VD or Oh my god. But but in many jurisdictions, it's extended also to chronic alcoholism, habitual drunkenness. when the accusation is made portrays the individual as a danger, irresponsible, uh, you know, more than just drinking too much, but I mean really like a dangerous drunk.

[00:14:34]older authorities and and certain state courts have treated the label, you know, drunkard or claims of a serious drinking problem as actionable per se because they tend to expose the subject to hatred, ridicule or contempt. So when you say he's a drunk and he's this and he's that, I mean, this is and you're you and it never happened.

[00:15:01]Oh man. Now remember remember New York Times against Sullivan.

[00:15:10]Let's assume knowing that it's false or reckless disregard for the truth. If it's proved, if it's proved that these facts were somehow either fudged or adulterated or you know uh fixed, alleged, altered, uh not necessarily illegally obtained, but if for the wrong guy with the wrong hair color, you say, "This isn't George Farmer. This is somebody else." you know that kind of thing.

[00:15:46]All right. So, you got it. So, first of all, it's a crime. Imputation of a crime. Number two, imputation of a loathome disease. Now, next one, injury to trade, profession, or office.

[00:16:00]Statements that would tend to deter uh and may make third parties uh uh uh stay away from associating with you in business or public life. Um that that's kind of like but but something that really is like this this guy is untrustworthy. He's he's dangerous. He's he's a slob. He's violent. He's something that goes beyond something we think damn.

[00:16:24]Did you say this? Did you prove they said this? Yeah, that's it. You don't have to prove how it hurt you. We're going to impute this to you. We're going to per se. We're going to say this is liable per se. And the next one is imputation of unchastity. This is accusing a woman of unchased character.

[00:16:42]Historically this was kind of gender specific but now now it's largely you know kind of obsolete in most jurisdictions to call some woman a or a harlot or some cortisan some trumpet some mere tricks some ver well not a verago a a a uh a slatter.

[00:17:04]You see, now when a statement satisfies any of those categories, the law presumes both falsity, which is of course subject to rebuttal. You can say, "Oh, no, no, that's true, and general damages, reputational harm, emotional distress, etc. Punitive damages remain available.

[00:17:24]Punies as we call them upon a showing of common law malice, you know, ill will, reckless indifference, which often times comes into play tanamount or tandem to the uh New York Times against Sullivan public uh public figure case. I don't want to complicate it in public figure cases, constitutional, you know, actual malice. We get into these words and they make it sound like it's so different. Okay, but here's the thing.

[00:17:58]What we're looking at right now is something really, really, very, very critical. George Farmer Candace Owens's husband as the spouse of a prominent political commentator Candace and the figure with his own history in conservative activism, you know, various things, entrepreneur, recent US citizens. By the way, a lot of this is as Candace brings up could have affected his status as a citizen, revoke uh uh whatever immigration status he enjoys. He would likely be classified as a limited purpose public figure with respect, you know, the statements touching on his personal conduct or immigration status or public persona.

[00:18:45]Publication on X, you know, Twitter to a national audience further implicates first amendment scrutiny. Nevertheless, nevertheless, the per se classification I'm talking about still operates to relieve the plaintiff to make it unnecessary to uh prove special damages once actual malice in the case of a public figure and falsity are established. Okay, let me just make it simple.

[00:19:22]Did he say this? Yes. Was it published?

[00:19:26]Yes. See, it's got to be publication.

[00:19:28]Publication doesn't mean like publishing a book. It means you got to say it. You got to say it. You got to broadcast it.

[00:19:35]I can't go up to you and say you're a you're a lo disease. Nobody heard that.

[00:19:41]That's not liable. People have to hear it. You have to prove people heard it.

[00:19:44]Well, when you publish on X, it doesn't matter.

[00:19:49]and Laura Loomer's public statements on X there they are in late what April and May including this alleged what posting of an alleged mug shot and arrest documentation explicit explicitly accusing George Farmer of operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated in Nashville Tennessee on about whatever in August but the blood alcohol level reportedly is approximating.26 26. Let me tell you something. Port 26 is serious business.

[00:20:18]Business. Business. All right. This is serious business. If this is false, and we're presuming it is because Candace is saying it's false, oh my god. Toting a truck in the internet, possessing a firearm while intoxicated, engaging in a pattern of excessive drinking that endangered the public could have killed an innocent person, uh, or having a serious drinking problem. you go back and readers because when when Laura Loomer gets started or whoever is supposedly for her, oh man, potential immigration related misconduct and obtaining a US citizenship without full disclosure of the foregoing I mean this is this is as serious as it gets.

[00:20:56]So these allegations squarely absolutely implicate two classic per se categories. Imputation of criminal conduct because DUI is a criminal offense in Tennessee. The company facts elevated to beyond a mere traffic and imputation of habitual drugness or alcoholism.

[00:21:19]Now under Florida law, this is weird.

[00:21:23]We're getting into venue.

[00:21:25]Whose law you going to go to federal court claim diversity jurisdiction when you have two people of two different states and the amount of controversy is over? what 7500 or John whatever the hell it is the this is called diversity uh jurisdiction that's a different story so you got to sometimes say do we do we file it in the middle district of Florida do we go to the Tennessee if I recall doesn't have per se per se doesn't have liel per se there's other aspects to it it's you've you've got to figure out remember all of this is subject to which jurisdiction uh snap statues, anti-nap, we're not even going to get into that one. Okay.

[00:22:11]But in Florida law, which is where uh Laura Loomer apparently resides and could be the form in which she has previously litigated defamation claims, I think or was suggested statements that impute the commission of a crime or that tend to injure one in reputation are lielist per se. Damages are presumed.

[00:22:32]damages are presumed. Makes it so much easier.

[00:22:37]Imagine imagine going to court and there was a special you're you're hit in a personal injury case. Imagine if you can prove uh damages per se. If you're kicked in the nuts, all you have to prove is that you're kicked in the nuts and you don't even have to prove any damages. People say, "Uh, we know. Say no more." Don't you want to hear? Nope. You don't have to say no more.

[00:23:03]It's It makes it say, "Wow, that's easy.

[00:23:05]I don't I don't have to bring in doctors and nope. I don't have to bring in medical experts to see how my testicles were crushed in the Nope. Just prove you were hit. That was it. That's it. We're going to presume damages."

[00:23:19]Tennessee law by the way governing governing the situs situ incident farmers in Kansas's residents follows the same traditional categories but in either jurisdiction you know a court would likely hold as a matter of law that the statements read in context and as a whole are defamatory per se.

[00:23:40]Please don't hold me to this. I am not researched on Lexus Nexus or whatever the the the current law in in in New Jersey because if I mean excuse me in in Tennessee and if you went to federal court there you would use the law of the state. So in any event in any event if the underlying arrest record of mugsh shot or authentic and correctly attributed to farmer the claim fails that's it. public records disputes including allegation that uh documents containing clerical errors or may pertain to another individual that would be that would be litigated at summary judgement or trial. The bottom line is simply this and I want you to understand this. I want you to grasp this. I want to spend too too much time because sometimes we get into this and I'm trying to clarify this. I'm thinking to myself, I don't know if they're following us.

[00:24:33]If you're going to be on YouTube or anything and you're going to say people do something now, you could do the old I think in my opinion, you know, I as far as I know, there's something also we're not going to get into. Liel per quad. Not going to get into that. That's more inferential stuff. But but be very careful even with sometimes the gratuitous in my opinion if you're accusing somebody or saying that somebody was involved in certain things something that imputes a criminal activity loathome disease you know whatever alcoholism you're into another world you're sitting You're sitting here in another world. As far as Candace's tactics, I think, I've not spoken to her. I have no idea. I think what they're doing is they're sitting back and letting Laura rev the engine.

[00:25:40]Keep it up. Keep it up. Keep saying, "I want some more.

[00:25:46]I want some more."

[00:25:49]Instead of her saying this on one day, she says it on 20 days. 20, you know, posts that takes whatever it is and just multiplies the damages. Now, remember, I don't think Candace is talking about making a killing, going after Laura Loomer to to drain her millions. And I don't think that's what this is about.

[00:26:10]There's a principle about this.

[00:26:14]Courts have a wonderful way, especially when somebody is really out of line, when somebody uses a courts or or uses statements to hurt people. The courts have a way of of seeking some type of retributive justice to an extent.

[00:26:34]I am not a fan of liel defamation. Not at all. A lot of times it's not even defamation. It's just this is a different story. Sometimes with people, the only way they're going to stop and no matter how much you think, well, Candace is pretty tough. Well, George is pretty tough. You get to a point where you got to say, especially George.

[00:26:58]George says, "Look, I didn't sign on for this shit." Okay, I know I was involved, but but never I'm not doing a podcast.

[00:27:06]You're doing I mean, I'm I'm loving everything. you're my wife. But uh you know, and Candace, who I think has a very I don't want to sound like Sarah Palin, kind of like a mama bear kind of a you know, mama grizzly or whatever it's called. I think she's going to say, "I'm going to take care of you. You go after me, that's one thing. You go after my husband, my family, I'll rip your lungs out." That's where we are right now. So just keep this in mind. Liel per se.

[00:27:37]If you're the subject of your liable, if what you if you say he's a liar, he's he's a he's a he's an adulterer.

[00:27:53]Is that a crime? Sometimes adultery is a crime. Is he committed a crime? He's a heroin trafficker. You know, that's that's definitely a very serious He had DUIs, property damage, a threat on the highway. Oh my god. Yep. Loathome disease. He's an alcoholic. He's a He's a He's a drunk. He's a Now we're into a different category. We're into the per se, liable, per se. And when you do that, damages are presumed.

[00:28:27]Meaning, if you're the plaintiff and you can prove it's not true, remember if any of this is true, we're done. But assuming it's not true and it was said, it was published and this was said these subjects and they're not true. That's it. That's it.

[00:28:48]Damages are presumed. Let's go straight to the jury now. How much? We don't have to worry about well how how did it affect you? What do you mean how did it affect me? It speaks for itself. You told me I'm a drunk. Okay, you're right, right, right. That's liable per se. You know what? Don't even don't even worry about this. Don't even worry about showing the damages. We understand. Said I was involved in a de and maybe the I think the latest one is that I I I had the record sealed and I and I paid people off allegedly. If that's true, it's like oh my god, that's double double triple quadruple. So, be careful.

[00:29:25]And my advice as an officer of the court, as a lawyer, former prosecutor, licensed, a whole bit, I'm going to say, watch what you say. And a lot of And listen to me. Listen, listen to grandpa here, youngans, you're new at this, okay? You don't want to go through a lawsuit. You don't want to go through.

[00:29:44]People say, "I don't care. I don't have any money." No, you can't just It's It's horrible. It's horrible. I mean, it's just a pain in the neck. Don't even bother.

[00:29:55]Don't bother.

[00:29:57]Don't do it. You could say everything they want. Just keep in mind these things. Keep in mind, in a weird way, liel laws kind of keep other people from saying things about you because it's it's you don't want actual we don't want reputations to be hurt. However, when you get to some level like President Trump, man, this guy's been he's he's been caught everything from a murderer to a I mean, there there's he he he judgment proof. Not because he doesn't have any money, but because it's just he's been he's been just tattooed since 2015 or whenever he decided to come down that escalator. So, that's a different story. All right. So think about this.

[00:30:49]Be very careful. Candace is handling this thing very very very carefully.

[00:30:55]Also keep in mind if there are people who have utilized or secured certain um systems. Let's say I work for an insurance company or DMV or some credit bureau company or something.

[00:31:17]and I violated the rules by going in and doing somebody a favor say, "By the way, I know all I got all these uh records and arrest records and blah blah blah." Which which nobody would have ever been available. This this is this is uh this is um something which is a information which is directly associated with your business that should never be violated. I mean, somebody somewhere is also maybe looking to perhaps to prevent themselves from getting into trouble, cutting a deal and saying, "Wait a minute. Here's what happened."

[00:32:04]Yeah. he or she or somebody came to me and paid me and I went in and I So now now you now it really just I mean it just God knows God knows the uh the proprietary violations and wire fraud and I mean you when you get into federal federal's got stuff that laws you never thought of it gets really dangerous and whenever you get somebody by the way cuz you The argument is that where did you get this stuff from? And remember, there are people right now, I would imagine, who are saying, "Listen, you didn't hear this from me. Yellow envelopes under the door. You didn't hear this from me.

[00:32:45]Here's something you might want." That's always been the case since Watergate, since since the Whiskey Rebellion. But let's see what happens. But be careful.

[00:32:56]And I got to tell you something. Two things. Human being to human being. Ben Shapiro, I don't know. I don't know where you think you're benefiting anybody. I I I don't know how you think you're you're helping whatever your causes. And Laura, you need help.

[00:33:18]You need to get a grip on this.

[00:33:22]There are a lot of people who read, you know, when something when something is read or written, I should say. so dangerously even in even in a few words on an expost. You think, "Whoa."

[00:33:40]Oh, this is Let me tell you something, Ben.

[00:33:47]Got it. And Laura, when you get to be so radioactive, the people around you, the people who who were normally your friends and your your uh uh benefactors and the ones who utilized and appreciated your genius will cut bait and and and silence you and ghost you and just you are you are on your own like that and ask yourself are you becoming too hot what happens Laura's connection is ostensibly through President Trump without whatever that is whether it's true or not who knows all kinds of rumors and if one day he formally and I think Susie why what we're hearing is Susie Y is saying that's it make a statement I don't know who she is forget it get her out of here and Trump will do this look at her foreign policy Okay, we're done with Iran. Here you go. We're going to lift the sanctions. What?

[00:34:52]What? Watch some certain people go berserk in a moment. That's another story.

[00:35:00]And Ben, I don't know who you're helping or the whole TPUSA. I've never seen such a sniveling group of people.

[00:35:12]And remember, you're trying to keep this thing afloat by having young people still honor the the message of Charlie by you sitting back and spending all your time. How can we destroy Candace Owens Christian? And then you've got this Erica walking around Rhythm Nation thing. I mean, this is like the most coldblooded. The mafia is not as hardcore as this. I'm serious.

[00:35:44]I don't know who in the hell would ever look at you and say this is not a Christian organization. They're just all they want to do is just kill and and defy and shut down. That's all I'm going to say.

[00:35:55]So what I'd like you to do, my friends, is follow me. You know I'm on X. Did you know that at Lionel Media? Did you know that? Lionel Media. I know Lionel Nation here. It's a long story. Lionel Media.

[00:36:08]see my stuff. I got some weird things, too, which have nothing to do necessarily with this. They're just weird because I do love the weird and the macabra. Also, make sure you like this video. Make sure you hit that little button so you'll be notified of live streams and new videos. And subscribe, subscribe, subscribe.

[00:36:26]All right, my friends. Now, I got some questions for you, too. What do you think? Comment as you see fit.