[erkelly]

So up until 1964, the press could be held responsible for publishing libel. Then in the early 1970s, Watergate happened, not only was a decent man hounded from office but, worse, the war in Vietnam which we had won on the ground, it was lost by this lying 5th column in the press. Ever since, this lies have been told about so many many many decent people, good solid patriots who believe in the constitution and personal liberty, and recognized the communist enemy on the left for what they were. The press has almost completely destroyed fair elections with their lying ways. Donald Trump is right, let us address this issue of libel by the press, and do something about it. The press can still lie if they wish, but let them pay for it, and let them be exposed in courts of law for their dishonest and manipulative ways! This one more thing we must do if we are to save our country, we must compel our press to be honest! The constitution is not a suicide pact.

[vbmoneyspender]

Did you read the example I sited to you of what happens when you shift the burden of proof on libel from the plaintiff to the defendant? In the example, the Saudis sued a small-time author who wrote a book accusing the Saudis of funding Al Qaeda? Is that the kind of United States you want to live in where rich Saudis are able to shutdown debate by using expanded libel laws. Because that is how it will be if Trump's way becomes the American way on libel law.

And by the way, when you expand the reach of the libel laws, it won't be the big media operations that suffer. They have plenty of money to defend themselves in court. It is the little guy who will suffer because he or she will lack the financial resources to fight drawn-out legal battles in court.