The First Amendment does not protect you from that!

That's always the toughest hurdle to leap in a suit involving a public figure, but I can't imagine a more malicious person than Pirro.

that always seemed like the squishiest part of the slander/libel laws to me -- if the defense can portray the plaintiff as a "public figure" then malicious intent standards apply, which are notoriously difficult to establish.

unfortunately as a leader/spokesman in a movement, no matter how amorphous, Mckesson probably does qualify.

all qualify as public figures
I'm guessing that if you have a youtube channel, you probably now qualify as a public figure, no matter the content of your show

I think he would qualify as a public figure and I think he'll have a hard time proving malicious intent. All she has to do is claim that she heard from several anonymous police sources, or police and non-police sources, etc