Not exempt - if that was the case there would be no Dominion suit against Fox. If the people doing the defaming are using "facts" they know are not true - or can be shown not to care whether T or F - that is "actual malice" and they can be sued. I'm pretty sure the R's slurs on Soros qualify.
Not exempt - if that was the case there would be no Dominion suit against Fox. If the people doing the defaming are using "facts" they know are not true - or can be shown not to care whether T or F - that is "actual malice" and they can be sued. I'm pretty sure the R's slurs on Soros qualify.
Wouldnt you think? Why is no one making any attempt at all to at least put it out there - I mean - think of all the ridiculous lawsuits from numnuts! No one is really fighting any of this garbage - just allowing it to be thrown out there as if its true. Frustrating.
thing is, Tom, I'm pretty sure they all believe it. it'd certainly be a major legal challenge to prove to a jury that they were all completely aware they were lying. and I think Soros figures he has better things to do.
sometimes (and certainly in THESE times) the First Amendment can seem to bite us in the ass.
Not exempt - if that was the case there would be no Dominion suit against Fox. If the people doing the defaming are using "facts" they know are not true - or can be shown not to care whether T or F - that is "actual malice" and they can be sued. I'm pretty sure the R's slurs on Soros qualify.
Wouldnt you think? Why is no one making any attempt at all to at least put it out there - I mean - think of all the ridiculous lawsuits from numnuts! No one is really fighting any of this garbage - just allowing it to be thrown out there as if its true. Frustrating.
thing is, Tom, I'm pretty sure they all believe it. it'd certainly be a major legal challenge to prove to a jury that they were all completely aware they were lying. and I think Soros figures he has better things to do.
sometimes (and certainly in THESE times) the First Amendment can seem to bite us in the ass.