As shared back in June, the online Twitter feud over Juneteenth has turned into a $20 million defamation suit

Back in June, McHenry County Blog covered the topic of the new Juneteenth holiday and included the Twitter exchange between Candace Owens and Kim Klacik back then brought up by commenter “Correcting”.

Little did any of us know when the updated article on Juneteenth was published the cascade of events that would result in the filing by Klacik of a $20 million defamation suit against Owens, which was filed in late July but came to public light late last month.

One may call this a war of the millennial black women, with the younger Owens’ (32) nearly 3 million social media followers opposed to Klacik (39).

The events after the Juneteenth Twitter feud included the following:

• June 22, Owens publishing a 44 minute Instagram video detailing multiple allegations against Klacik
• June 26, Klacik responding with her own video, a medley including a TV interview, her own commentary plus (in my honest opinion) an unnecessary appearance by former Florida congressional candidate Jessi Melton
• July 22, Klacik filing the $20 million defamation suit in Maryland court

This nearly 25 minute video from alternate media platform California Underground highlights several components of the Klacik lawsuit and compares it to anti-SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) laws in both Maryland and California.

The California defamation suit filed around the same time the Klacik suit was filed in Maryland has to do with Major Williams, who’s a declared candidate in the 2022 California gubernatorial election (but is not running in the Recall election later this month) who ran unsuccessfully for mayor of Pasadena in 2018, and had allegations made against him earlier this year. He responded to the allegations in April, and filed his lawsuit this summer.

The video is interesting, and does have relevance to Illinois as there is a fine line between protected free speech anti-SLAPP laws are meant to protect, and defamation. Seasoned voters who’ve been through many campaign cycles can usually discern, but newer activists and especially candidates need to learn what is protected free speech and what is real defamation.

Point brought up in the video, when you enter the public policy arena, especially as a declared candidate for elective public office, you are setting the bar much higher to prove defamation against you than the ordinary private citizen.

Candidates not only subject themselves, but also their spouse and children to scrutiny and a prospective candidate must decide if they want to put their spouse and kids (including adult children) through the public scrutiny a candidate draws by being a public figure.

The scrutiny not only reserved for high profile office seekers like governor and Congress, but also local county elective offices and even precinct committeepersons if the county or township party chairmanship will be close (and I’ve seen candidates drop out when their jobs or kids are threatened as part of political pressure).

From the desk of John Lopez: Where are Klacik’s Financial Disclosure statements?

For the record, I take no sides in this lawsuit between Klacik and Owens. As the video explains, Owens’ attorneys will likely move for a dismissal of the civil suit against Owens, as the video outlines reasons why.

Two things I will point out about Klacik and the allegations her now estranged husband, Jeffrey Klacik owned adult entertainment clubs and that was allegedly how Kim and Jeff met.

An article was published by the internet bilingual publication El American at the end of June detailing, and providing empirical research about the allegation Klacik’s husband owned strip clubs. Within 48 hours, El American, LLC was threatened with litigation by Kim Klacik, which was published by El American.

Both El American articles were written by Orlando Avendaño, vice president and co editor-in-chief. The two articles (in English) are below:

• “Fraud, Money Laundering and Exotic Dancing: Are the Claims Against Kimberly Klacik True?” 6/29/21
• “Kimberly Klacik Threatens El American for Reporting on Her and Asking Questions about her Ex-Husband” 7/1/21

I will be honest, I was frosted Klacik threatened litigation against El American, LLC due to its pursuit of the truth. Prompted by the Klacik threat against El American, LLC, I thought the source of Klacik’s then-husband’s (they separated in October of 2020) income would be in Klacik’s Financial Disclosure statement (FD), since Klacik ran for Congress in Maryland’s 7th Congressional District in both a regular and special election last year.

Congressional candidates are required to report the sources of their spouse’s income, but not the amount. Be it earned income or unearned including ownership interests, a spouse’s income source and assets must be disclosed for congressional candidates per federal law.

So, and here’s my 2nd point I make and something no one’s coverage of the Klacik-Owens feud has mentioned — Kim Klacik has no Financial Disclosure statement on file for 2020!

While Owens and others are posting about reviewing Klacik’s Federal Election Commission (FEC) filings from 2020, NOWHERE does Owens mention Klacik’s FD or even searching for it!

As McHenry County Blog has documented multiple times over the past two years, an FD is required by federal laws, both the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 as amended, and the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge (STOCK) Act of 2012, as amended, for all congressional candidates to file once their campaign raises/spends $5K.

Klacik’s campaign raised over $8 million for all of 2020, so she needed to have her initial FD filed with the U.S. House clerk’s office in January of 2020 for the special election for MD-07 since the primary was February 4, and May 15, 2020, for the regular general election.

One of two things happened to Klacik’s FD:

• Klacik filed her FD with the U.S. House clerk, and the House clerk did not post the FD on the public portal as required by the STOCK Act to be completed within 30 days, or
• Klacik NEVER filed an FD

If the Klacik defamation litigation is not dismissed, one can assume Owens’ lawyers, in Discovery will not only be asking for Klacik’s FD, but also the Klaciks’ income tax returns through 2020 and a few years prior, in order to prove if Jeff Klacik had ANY ownership interest in the adult entertainment clubs brought up by Owens, or found and published by El American‘s Avendaño in his June 29 article.

And for the record, for the past two months, I have attempted to reach out to Klacik, both directly and indirectly, to ask about her FD, but received no response.

Impact to Catalina Lauf?

In my honest opinion, the Klacik-Owens lawsuit and feud will have no impact on fellow millennial, IL-16 Republican candidate and McHenry County resident Catalina Lauf.

Klacik openly endorsed Lauf on March 16 at an event in Rockford along with Scott Presler, and Lauf has participated in numerous joint appearances with Klacik on podcasts, and in person in Maryland and at Mar-a-Lago in Florida.

Back in late April, Lauf appeared as a panelist in-studio on Owens’ Nashville-based show.

McHenry County Blog is aware of fringe elements trying to tie Lauf to both Klacik and Owens, but their amateur attempts did not hit the mark and doubtful any future attempts to link Lauf to either one will go anywhere.

McHenry County Blog will be watching how all events unfold in the Klacik-Owens feud, including the litigation.