Public figure exemption.

The standard for public figures is higher but they are not exempt. In order to prove slander against a public figure, the plaintiff must prove both that the comment was untrue and that it was said with "malice," i e with an intentional disregard of ita falsity.

"We all know Trump is being malicious" is not a legal standard.

figure.

And, yes, malice is indeed a legal standard and, therefore, whether Trump acted maliciously IS a question for a judge or jury to decide. Whether the plaintiff can convince a jury that the case meets all of the elements of the offense is a different question. But a plaintiff would have a very strong case here.

FYI, "malice" in the legal sense doesn't mean the same as it does in common usage. In libel/slander context, "malice" means "reckless disregard of the truth."

And there is little question that Trump tweeted out that accusation against Gillum with a reckless disregard for whether it is true. That is why he later said in an interview, "In my opinion he's a stone cold thief." Obviously, his lawyers got to him and convinced him to try to clean up what he said earlier since there is little doubt that he opened himself up bigly to a slander claim - and, unlike most people he slanders, Gillum doesn't seem reluctant to sue his ass off.

I have shared my opinion that trump is guilty of just about every crime except murder, burglary, robbery and molesting animals. Pathological liar, malignant narcissist...you get the picture.

moreover, they've had the scotus for a long time.

we had an opportunity to take it back, but mcturtle prevented it.

blaming fucking scotus on the Democratic Party?!

Democratic Party.

Because i believe that when dems vote dems win

of article 2.
The terrorist extremist right wing
If they win control they will suspend
and ultimately delete freedom of speech
from our vocabulary. Fuck fox News, rush and co for the lies and hate they spread.
And of course the biggest liar of them all.

But that's just what we learned back in the 70's. I once had the privilege to have Carl Rowan visit my classroom post Watergate. He had some issues later, but at that time he was well respected.

is that a private person only has to prove that a statement was untrue and harmful to them. A public figure requires a higher standard f proof - they must prove that the statement was untrue AND made with "reckless disregard" of the truth.

He wants libel laws changed. Of course he's too ignorant to know that he would be sued daily.

One of the oldest male soap operas in the nation. He has the cape of the US flag. It's really a phony white guy thing, also the president.

And hope he can be sued. What's to stop him from calling someone a paedophile or an arsonist or a murderer?