... hiding Andrew Anglin, founder of the neo-Nazi Daily Stormer website (image via Twitter). Andrew Anglin, infamous founder of the neo-Nazi Daily Stormer website and the subject of a lawsuit alleging he unleashed an anti-Semitic “terror campaign” on a Jewish woman, has been served via an Ohio newspaper. As The Daily Dot reports, Anglin, who has been off the grid for five months, was served via the Daily Reporter, a Columbus-based legal and business newspaper. Anglin is believed to be in that area based on multiple known addresses, the Daily Dot reports. The lawsuit was served on behalf of Tanya Gersh, a Montana real estate agent who said Anglin and the Daily Stormer launched a “troll storm” against her that resulted in anti-Semitic death threats against her and her 12-year-old son. In April, Gersh filed suit against Anglin and accused him of posting a series of articles that “caused his followers to overwhelm Ms. Gersh with hundreds of hateful and threatening anti-Semitic phone calls, voicemails, text messages, emails, letters, social media comments, and false online business reviews,” her suit read. Read more: http://www.rawstory.com/2017/09/whi...ing-jewish-woman-after-five-months-in-hiding/
Can he really be held responsible for threats made by other people because he wrote bad things about her? Sounds like a potential freedom of press issue, although individual states have their own laws about individual harassment and false defamation. Anyway, without actual details about what he wrote, we can't make judgements here. Btw, you two have serious issues with your fantasies about wanting to find nazi villains. Only you can't seem to find any violence. Only that they said things or wrote things. And you're desperately imagining they'll "get what was coming to them" for doing that. I don't know, seems mostly like a boogeyman effigy of the Left.
Do you have another source which lays out what he did to this woman? What's posted in the OP sounds pretty much like 3/4 of the articles we see these days. And as we learned in the Palin lawsuit vs the NYT, claiming you made statements without doing any research is a viable defense.
The Jewish woman was targeted because she tried shaking down Richard Spencer's mother. She's not innocent, and it speaks volumes the reason is not mentioned why this Jewish woman was targeted.
The SPLC, a Jewish advocacy group, is volunteering to handle her legal defenses. Anglin raised about $160,000 from subscribers for his legal defense, and he is more likely to win, given the circumstances. The Jewish woman wrote an online article explaining why she would not be helping Richard Spencer's mother with her transaction, and gave the political reasons for doing so. She didn't like his politics, so she decided to take it out on his mother. This article opened herself up to public scrutiny, so she can't claim her privacy was being violated. She put herself in the spotlight by putting herself in the center of all of this. All Anglin did was tell his readers to let her know what they thought. He specifically stated to not threaten or do anything criminal. Plus, she's not going to be able to prove in a court of law that the people harassing her and making death threats were followers of Anglin. This story circulated in many more areas than just his website. He ended up being the target because he has been on the SPLC's radar for a long time and they think they can do the most damage by taking him down. This is a total farce.
Thanks for the explanation. I am personally not as optimistic the court will side with anglin because courts don't rule only on the basis of law anymore. I think if shenanigans with the travel ban happened then no court is impartial.
