You could argue Musk wasn't really making a specific attack against the person related to any specific action/activity he did in his life (for example volunteer

You could argue Musk wasn't really making a specific attack against the person related to any specific action/activity he did in his life (for example volunteer rescue work helping children) (AFAIK). It could easily be perceived as just a general insult Musk made in response to an attack. In Texas, the standard is, "How would the statement be perceived by an average, reasonable person?" Could the statement be reasonably interpreted as a straight-up accusation of pedophilia? I don't think Musk is safe in any jurisdiction. Which would be far easier for the 'victim' to disprove as a false statement Not how it works. The plaintiff doesn't have to prove anything. The burden of proof is on the defendant (the one who said the thing) and being able to show the statement is true is an automatic defense. The latter situation is usually how it'd have to work. Something concrete and specific. For the particular insult/statement, it doesn't work that way. It's defamation per se. It's assumed to be damaging. Otherwise it's perfectly legally to insult people on the Internet and hurt their feelings. Defamation is one of the things you can't do.