Please look up the specific legal meaning of libel. This isn't libel. It's distortion, it's cant, it's malicious partisanship, it's sloppy journalism but it isn't libel. Even if it was libel, the way the law is written you have to prove "malice." That's nearly impossible unless you can find one of those mind-readers who can sort out "hate crimes" from regular crimes of the same kind.
>>Please look up the specific legal meaning of libel. This isn't libel. It's distortion, it's cant, it's malicious partisanship, it's sloppy journalism but it isn't libel. Even if it was libel, the way the law is written you have to prove "malice." That's nearly impossible unless you can find one of those mind-readers who can sort out "hate crimes" from regular crimes of the same kind.<<
True and incorrect !
Alright, that misleding headline is not LIBEL .
And in the case of Libel, you do not have to prove malice !
Only that the VERBATIM quote is false, in short- if you say you heard such-in-such party make this statement 'to you' and they did not- you committed libel .
In defamation of character, or slander, then you have to prove malice !