Which exact quote from Karoline Leavitt is cited as defamatory in the lawsuit involving Coco Gauff?

1. What the supplied sources actually show

The items returned by your search are a mix of sensational blog posts and social-media snippets that describe a dramatic television exchange and claim a high-dollar defamation suit; none of those pieces appears to publish a court filing or authoritative transcript that quotes Karoline Leavitt as the basis for a defamation claim against her by Coco Gauff ^{[1] [2] [3]}. The All For Today item frames an on-air “pointed attack” and a $50 million legal demand, but it reads like a sensational recap rather than a citation of legal documents ^[1]. The Hindustan Times link explicitly treats similar stories as circulating viral claims and notes that various names and dollar amounts have been swapped in copycat posts, undermining the reliability of the viral narratives ^[2]. A threads.com post reproduces dramatic fragments such as “Sit down, Barbie,” but that is social-media content, not a court citation ^[3].

2. No verified defamatory quote found in the materials provided

Among the three supplied sources, none presents a verifiable, court-filed allegation that reproduces the exact language Karoline Leavitt is alleged to have said and labels it defamatory in a lawsuit brought by Coco Gauff. The Hindustan Times piece specifically signals that these stories have circulated with inconsistent names and wording—an indicator that the reporting may be built on viral claims rather than primary legal documents ^[2]. Therefore, the precise quote you ask for is not present in these sources (not found in current reporting).

3. Where the narratives appear to come from — viral and copycat outlets

The All For Today article and the social-post excerpt reflect how an attention-grabbing TV clash can metastasize online: outlets and threads amplify selective phrases, attach large damages figures like $50 million, and recycle emotive lines—often without linking to a complaint, transcript, or reliable court record ^{[1] [3]}. Hindustan Times documents this pattern directly, noting the same bogus story template has been used repeatedly and that names (including claims about John Legend) were swapped into similar headlines, which reduces confidence in any single viral claim ^[2].

4. Competing interpretations in the available reporting

The supplied materials offer two competing dynamics: one set (All For Today, social posts) treats the exchange as an established on-air confrontation that prompted immediate legal action and public outrage ^{[1] [3]}. The other (Hindustan Times) treats the narrative as a dubious, recycled viral claim with inconsistencies and no clear legal source, implying the lawsuit story may be misinformation rather than documented fact ^[2]. Both perspectives are present in the corpus you provided.

5. How to verify the exact quote if you need it

Available sources do not include a court filing, official transcript, or reporting from an established news outlet that reproduces a filed defamatory allegation from Coco Gauff’s complaint against Karoline Leavitt (not found in current reporting). To locate an exact quoted phrase that is alleged to be defamatory, consult primary documents—civil complaint filed in the relevant court, court transcript of the broadcast if admitted in filings, or reporting by major outlets that cite those materials; none of the provided links supply those documents ^{[1] [2] [3]}.

6. Limits and recommended next steps

My analysis is limited to the three items you supplied; they include sensational accounts and a fact-checking-style rebuttal but no primary legal text. If you want the exact, legally-cited quote, request the court complaint or a reputable news story that quotes it directly; these supplied sources do not contain that quotation ^{[1] [2] [3]}.