1600 posts 4/29/2017 8:17 pm
Last Read:
4/30/2017 8:57 pm
|
Do you think Trump...
should be sued for his constant bullshit lies about the various network news shows being "Fake News" when we all know that he is the fake news?
Vive La Difference
|
81699 posts 4/30/2017 3:52 pm |
I think he should be working on more important issue tickles then the fake news hugs V
Become a blog watcher sweet_vm
tickles4us replies on 4/30/2017 8:57 pm:
He just uses it to manipulate the fools who believe in him. Distraction, smoke and mirrors, razzle dazzle to distract the chumps. |
|
32404 posts 4/30/2017 12:02 pm |
I think the pressure for the journalists should be to push the issues like the budget, healthcare, Russia and the fbi investigation. don't let the big issues get cancelled out by his idiocy. the ass didn't even get congressional signoff for bombing Syria. and nothing? no censure?
wtf
You cannot conceive the many without the one.
tickles4us replies on 4/30/2017 8:55 pm:
I doubt the media companies would sue him anyways as he has done lots to improve their income if you know what I mean, shows you where their loyalties lie. |
|
32404 posts 4/30/2017 11:59 am |
Quoting goodatpoetry2:
Isn't that slander though?
Does he say that's his opinion, or that it's a fact?
If I was on TV and said that Macy's sells your CC #s to thieves... I'm sure I'd get sued.
We'd both be doing the same thing... trying to ruin someone's reputation, right?
but who exactly would sue? CNN? MSNBC? Frederick Douglas?
You cannot conceive the many without the one.
tickles4us replies on 4/30/2017 8:52 pm:
 Actually if he had said something bad enough and untrue about Frederick Douglas, Douglas' family could have sued him.  |
|
4077 posts 4/30/2017 10:07 am |
I don't think anyone would or could take him on to the courts. Looks like there has to be a wait till the next election, to get rid of him.
tickles4us replies on 4/30/2017 8:47 pm:
He can still be sued though I'm sure the crooked Republicans would obstruct as much as possible. |
|
|
4/30/2017 4:58 am
|
When he tweets at 3am, is that's when he gets up to pee?
tickles4us replies on 4/30/2017 8:35 pm:
I'm sure there is a relationship to the time and activities.  |
|
|
4/30/2017 4:57 am
|
I would hope they wouldn't stoop to his level, but I'm sure he would sue them if they lied about them.
tickles4us replies on 4/30/2017 8:34 pm:
I'm sure the only reason they don't sue him is because he has made them plenty of money and they are expecting it to continue. |
|
41171 posts 4/30/2017 4:10 am |
Trump is giving fake news a very bad name! 
tickles4us replies on 4/30/2017 8:33 pm:
Now he is claiming to have originated the term.  |
|
16552 posts 4/30/2017 2:39 am |
Isn't that slander though?
Does he say that's his opinion, or that it's a fact?
If I was on TV and said that Macy's sells your CC #s to thieves... I'm sure I'd get sued.
We'd both be doing the same thing... trying to ruin someone's reputation, right?
tickles4us replies on 4/30/2017 8:32 pm:
He has slipped over the line on many occasions and I can only guess why the news services have not chosen to pursue the matter.  |
|
18571 posts 4/29/2017 10:29 pm |
Nope. The first amendment protects his idiotic speech.
Read my diary Journal of a Taxi Driver for taxi stories and pictures of flowers and trees.
tickles4us replies on 4/30/2017 8:30 pm:
Not exactly. It depends very much on what he says and how he says it. You can be sued for saying things about people or businesses that aren't true. |
|
9760 posts 4/29/2017 8:33 pm |
An opinion is not the basis for a law suit. Trump is a fool. Suing is not the answer.
tickles4us replies on 4/30/2017 8:24 pm:
It's more than an opinion, he is stating it as fact. It is only a matter of time before he goes even further. He certainly has malicious intent.
slander
n. oral defamation, in which someone tells one or more persons an untruth about another which untruth will harm the reputation of the person defamed. Slander is a civil wrong (tort) and can be the basis for a lawsuit. Damages (payoff for worth) for slander may be limited to actual (special) damages unless there is malicious intent, since such damages are usually difficult to specify and harder to prove. Some statements such as an untrue accusation of having committed a crime, having a loathsome disease, or being unable to perform one's occupation are treated as slander per se since the harm and malice are obvious, and therefore usually result in general and even punitive damage recovery by the person harmed. Words spoken over the air on television or radio are treated as libel (written defamation) and not slander on the theory that broadcasting reaches a large audience as much if not more than printed publications.
libel
1) n. to publish in print (including pictures), writing or broadcast through radio, television or film, an untruth about another which will do harm to that person or his/her reputation, by tending to bring the target into ridicule, hatred, scorn or contempt of others. Libel is the written or broadcast form of defamation, distinguished from slander, which is oral defamation. It is a tort (civil wrong) making the person or entity (like a newspaper, magazine or political organization) open to a lawsuit for damages by the person who can prove the statement about him/her was a lie. Publication need only be to one person, but it must be a statement which claims to be fact and is not clearly identified as an opinion. While it is sometimes said that the person making the libelous statement must have been intentional and malicious, actually it need only be obvious that the statement would do harm and is untrue. Proof of malice, however, does allow a party defamed to sue for general damages for damage to reputation, while an inadvertent libel limits the damages to actual harm (such as loss of business) called special damages. Libel per se involves statements so vicious that malice is assumed and does not require a proof of intent to get an award of general damages. Libel against the reputation of a person who has died will allow surviving members of the family to bring an action for damages. Most states provide for a party defamed by a periodical to demand a published retraction. If the correction is made, then there is no right to file a lawsuit. Governmental bodies are supposedly immune to actions for libel on the basis that there could be no intent by a non-personal entity, and further, public records are exempt from claims of libel. However, there is at least one known case in which there was a financial settlement as well as a published correction when a state government newsletter incorrectly stated that a dentist had been disciplined for illegal conduct. The rules covering libel against a "public figure" (particularly a political or governmental person) are special, based on U.S. Supreme Court decisions. The key is that to uphold the right to express opinions or fair comment on public figures, the libel must be malicious to constitute grounds for a lawsuit for damages. Minor errors in reporting are not libel, such as saying Mrs. Jones was 55 when she was only 48, or getting an address or title incorrect. 2) v. to broadcast or publish a written defamatory statement.
defamation
n. the act of making untrue statements about another which damages his/her reputation. If the defamatory statement is printed or broadcast over the media it is libel and, if only oral, it is slander. Public figures, including officeholders and candidates, have to show that the defamation was made with malicious intent and was not just fair comment. Damages for slander may be limited to actual (special) damages unless there is malice. Some statements such as an accusation of having committed a crime, having a feared disease or being unable to perform one's occupation are called libel per se or slander per se and can more easily lead to large money awards in court and even punitive damage recovery by the person harmed. Most states provide for a demand for a printed retraction of defamation and only allow a lawsuit if there is no such admission of error. |
|
1875 posts 4/29/2017 8:22 pm |
Bet you reside in La La Land !
tickles4us replies on 4/30/2017 12:15 pm:
Clearly if I did you would be the neighborhood watch organizer. |
|
7262 posts 4/29/2017 8:19 pm |
Of course then he wouldn't have any face...
Vive La Difference
|
7262 posts 4/29/2017 8:18 pm |
I think if I was in charge of any of those networks he has named specifically I would sue his ass off.
Vive La Difference
|
