Were he to file a civil lawsuit for defamation, he would have to prove the required elements of that case. In defamation law in the US, falsity is an element (in some other places truth is a defense, which is somewhat different), and for defamation against public figures, in the US, so is actual malice.
Note that both of those requirements have been found by the courts to be necessary to preserve Constitutional freedom of speech.
> There's a huge difference between trying to get someone killed and calling for an election audit or objecting against the election results.
Sure, and in court Cruz would have the opportunity show that he was only doing what you described and neither trying to get anyone killed nor doing anything that might reasonably be mistaken for that. But that's not something Cruz probably wants litigated in court of law, which is why he won't file and litigate a defamation claim.
Were he charged with a crime, he would not.
Were he to file a civil lawsuit for defamation, he would have to prove the required elements of that case. In defamation law in the US, falsity is an element (in some other places truth is a defense, which is somewhat different), and for defamation against public figures, in the US, so is actual malice.
Note that both of those requirements have been found by the courts to be necessary to preserve Constitutional freedom of speech.
> There's a huge difference between trying to get someone killed and calling for an election audit or objecting against the election results.
Sure, and in court Cruz would have the opportunity show that he was only doing what you described and neither trying to get anyone killed nor doing anything that might reasonably be mistaken for that. But that's not something Cruz probably wants litigated in court of law, which is why he won't file and litigate a defamation claim.