Yes, it’s SUE or DON’T SUE time for Teddy. If these allegations are patently untrue, he should sue the NE for all they’re worth.
But you see that’s unlikely to happen. And you can draw your own conclusions from that.
Not everyones as litigious as Donald.
He won't because the baseless accusations then would become the story for the next 6 months, not his platform.
Instead of educating the voters on crucial issues of our time the campaign becomes a source of titillation for the more easily entertained among us.
Also NE is very careful how they write a story.....they simple report what a few people “have said”. If you read the story they never report any facts or conclusions but simply accusations from a few “unnamed sources”.
No law suit there. They’ve been doing this for a long time and know how far they can go without leaving themselves vulnerable to litigation.
Pecker has protected himself from a lawsuit by reporting this as what it is, rumor. Case precedent says it is legal to report rumors as long as they are specified as rumors.
After months of digging, no evidence has been produced. Only Trump’s good friend, Pecker, would print this. Reputable outlets turned it down for lack of evidence.
Yes, it’s SUE or DON’T SUE time for Teddy. If these allegations are patently untrue, he should sue the NE for all they’re worth.
<><><><
Obviously, everything you know about the law you learned on network TV, may LA Law back in the day.
Have you read the NE story?
Do they make categorical statements?
Do they report rumors others are discussing?
If yes to the reporting of rumors, is it actionable?
When you discover the answers to the questions above, get back to us and let us all know precisely what Ted will be suing for, and who will he be suing.
Not holding my breath.
Hulk Hogan just won $115 million from Gawker. It can be done.
The Enquirer story doesn’t make any claim that Cruz is having an affair.
Really!
It cites a single unnamed source claiming 5 women are being investigated.
It doesn’t say the inquirer independently found, or confirmed anything about Cruz.
In other words it is reporting a rumor, as a rumor.
If it doesn’t pan out they can just say their source lied to them.
They are in no legal danger at all and no one can sue.
While many would like to see that happen, it’s not likely for two reasons.
US libel and slander laws are such that it is almost impossible for a public person to obtain satisfaction in court.
First a plaintiff must prove that the slanderer KNEW that the allegations were untrue and proceeded willfully anyway, with the intent to cause harm. The recklessness element usually available to plaintiffs is not available to public persons.
Second, you can be sure that this article was thoroughly vetted by NE lawyers and tweaked to make sure that there are no actual assertions of fact against Ted Cruz. I read the article standing in line at the supermarket over the weekend and was struck by how little the article actually managed to say. There’s probably nothing in there that is actionable, since the NE never actually says Cruz did ANY of these things.
It’s all nothing but vile spew. And, the only named source for any of it is Trump henchman, Roger Stone. That’s just about the only real fact alleged.
Why doesn’t Stone sue the NE if he wasn’t the source of the spew?
Since when is the only way to prove innocence is to sue whomever made the accusation against you? Isn’t the burden of proof on the accuser?