SR,

If someone accosted Juliar Gillard and shouted repeated at her repeatedly "why are you such a liar" while she was alone whilst frequently producing videos claiming that she was corrupt would you consider that harmless?

Shadowminister,

In the first interaction at the university politics in the pub Kristo asked of Barilaro the following?

“I want to know why you are threatening to sue?”

When Barilaro said he was suing he asked:

“Why are you suing?”

On the second occasion he said the following:

Hey John? John? John? Hey John. I've got something for you. John, you're suing my boss. John? John?

That is it.

https://youtu.be/OXtq4a8829g?t=465

It wasn't screamed as you asserted, it wasn't done in a threatening manner, he didn't call him a liar, it wasn't even shouted either.

Nor was Barilaro alone as you asset. He was with his dive. it was Kristo who was alone.

You, in your usual fashion are doubling down on your utter falsehoods. Pretty pathetic.

This is about a politician who continues to act in a manner which causes so many to question his integrity.

http://youtu.be/vWsJ1hoeh34?t=62

Why are you defending him?

SR,

My interest does not lie really with the pissant little youtube channel of Jordan Skanks and his sidekick Kristo, but with the defamation case and the inclusion of Google in the suit.

That Jordan's claims that JB is corrupt haven't a single jot of evidence makes the defamation case as close to a slam dunk as possible. This is why I believe that JB and mates are using this to clip Google's wings as taking on Google is not to be taken lightly.

No matter how you try and spin this all you are doing is damaging any shred of credibility you might have had.

As Google has refused to take down the defamatory videos any protection as an uninvolved carrier has evaporated, and while it may have deep enough pockets to cover legal costs and damages, contempt of court has real teeth as does the precedent it sets.

That the police have independently determined that Kristo's actions meet the legal standards of a fixated person does not help their case.

If Jordan loses, his war chest of $1m from left whinge follows is likely to evaporate just meeting damages and legal fees, and certainly would not be ready for round 2.

Shadowminister,

Jordan Shanks has more subscribers to his channel that both Channel 7 and Channel 10 news and he is fast catching up to Channel 9 so hardly pissant to anyone with a brain.

You now care more about the defamation case purely because your lies and exaggerations about Kristo's interactions with Barilaro were shown to be complete distortions.

But even you should be able to discern the difference between being sued for defamation and being charged with a criminal offence. There is the potential for the deprivation of freedom in the form of detention behind bars. It is designed to curb dissent and is a direct result of a politician or his staff directing a goon squad to arrest Kristo on spurious grounds.

This would worry most Australians, even Bolt, why doesn't it you?

SR

You are becoming even worse a liar than Paul. While I humoured your bulls1t spin on Kristo's stalking your arguments have zero believability. Jordan and Kristo's only topic is JB and the term fixated is appropriate. Similarly, your comparison between the clickbait subscribers to a youtube channel and viewers on channel 9 is laughable.

While the pissant Kristo is crapping his pants for petty crimes, the real issue is whether Google will be held responsible for hosting and refusing to take down defamatory material.

From what I can see Skanks' trial date is today. I am keen to see how it goes.