[rockinqsranch]

FTA: “This isn’t a fight about the First Amendment because the First Amendment doesn’t protect false and misleading speech.....”

The ‘H’ it doesn’t. Find a politician anywhere that doesn’t use false and misleading speech.

FTA: “.....Congress does not have the authority to interfere with a state inquiry into whether a private company violated state laws, and we will continue to fight any and all efforts to stop our investigation.”

When several of the states Attorneys General came together as opposed to a single Attorney General from a single state I do believe they opened themselves up for such inquiry.

“FTA” “From The Article”

[monkeyshine]

The First Amendment does protect false and misleading speech. However the courts have held it does not protect false and misleading commercial speech. An interesting question whether politicking is a commercial enterprise. It most definitely is these days, but in the truest sense of the First Amendment, politicking must be protected speech. But if you can sue a food company for selling you pumice oil labeled as extra-virgin olive oil, why can't you sue a politician to return a donation made under false promises?