He’s not going to “sue his accusers” because he’s a public figure UNLESS he can show that deliberate lies were published with MALICE, then he has a case.
Id certainly say they were deliberate lies published with malice.
Do you seriously think these were not deliberate, malicious lies? You truly believe these women lived with their tales for decades, right up until weeks before the election?
I am pretty sure he can prove easily both that they were lies and that they were published with malice, i.e., the intent to destroy his reputation and thus to deprive him of a fair election.
Trump is currently a private individual in the public eye running for a public office he does not (yet) hold - libel does indeed apply.
Good points! Let’s not get carried away with exacting revenge just for it’s own sake. You need a legitimate case, or you are wasting your time, money and credibility.
I'm quite sure he was talking about the actual women themselves.........
I don't think it will be hard to prove malice.
All of the accusations were timed to undermine his campaign. That's practically the definition of malice.
Well is it malice enough to go public when victim is running for election? What other non malicious motive could they have?
They weren’t?
An email from WikiLeaks, showing Gloria Allred, setting up the accusations as far back as May, will help...
Sent: Monday, May 16, 2016 11:25 AM
To: Vaughn, Jordan
Subject: RE: Blast Language - Approval Needed
Please delete the word “fellow”. Also, his position on equal pay is unclear. I think you should delete that. Is there anything you can substitute for that, e.g. demeaning treatment of women in the work place or sexual harassment in the work place?
Probably provable, if accusations are false. Agree that media outlets are exposed (malice can easily be proven) and all who are sued will have to spend time and money to defend themselves. I expect that the lawsuits will be very public and brand damage to media companies could be staggering to public companies.
Malice and intent, when attempting to destroy a person’s life.
If they lied and were motivated by politics to do so; that established malice.
“He’s not going to “sue his accusers” because he’s a public figure UNLESS he can show that deliberate lies were published with MALICE, then he has a case.”
Anyone can sue anyone else at any time for practically anything, whether they have a case or not. Just because Trump might not win due to a technicality, he potentially could create havoc for this accusers and at least cause the truth to come out, and certainly part of that would be attempting to prove malice.
“Actual malice” in defamation law has nothing to do with ill will. It is defined as publishing something (other than parody) that one knows is false, or publishing with reckless disregard for the truthfulness of the publication. “Reckless” is a jury question.
I think there is a chance that money exchanged hands on a few of them and if that is the case he can sue and win if he proves it.
He will blow through their collective entire net worth on day 2 of the lawsuit. If Gloria wants to put up a few hundred thousand each to defend these lying hoes, I’ll be surprised.
“He’s not going to “sue his accusers” because he’s a public figure UNLESS he can show that deliberate lies were published with MALICE, then he has a case.”
The intent was to destroy Trump and install a corrupt evil hellbitch as POTUS! That is about as malicious as can be!