Again, I totally disagree. Had Fox sued D******n for defrauding the e******n yes, Fox would have to provide proof. But this was D******n saying that the reporting of these accusations injured them and that somehow Fox is culpable with the accusers by reporting the accusations. Also, D******n has to prove the injury no matter how false the accusations might be. D******n would have to prove more than just bruised egos and hurted feelings. Did they lose business? Prove it. Did they go out of business?

Journalists report lies all the time, just like the l*****t outlets reporting that Trump colluded with Russia for years now. And they weren't just reporting the accusation, they WERE the accusers. But I suspect that given the corrupt nature of our judiciary, had Trump sued CNN and MSNBC for slander, the judges would have thrown it out.

I have always wondered what the attraction to the f**e drama of wrestling is. The outcome is predetermined, the opponents f**e it with each other in a sort of physical martial ballets of sorts, and one pretends to lose while the other pretends to win. Obviously they are fully capable of getting real, so to speak, and actually hurting each other badly, but they are very sk**lful in not k*****g each other for real, not breaking backs, paralyzing each other, splattering their bones across the matt, etc, etc. Ver sk**led but it is all acting.

I have always wondered what the attraction to the f**e drama of wrestling is. The outcome is predetermined, the opponents f**e it with each other in a sort of physical martial ballets of sorts, and one pretends to lose while the other pretends to win. Obviously they are fully capable of getting real, so to speak, and actually hurting each other badly, but they are very sk**lful in not k*****g each other for real, not breaking backs, paralyzing each other, splattering their bones across the matt, etc, etc. Ver sk**led but it is all acting.

Is belief a pre-requisite to reporting news/accusations directed at others by people involved? Politicians lie all the time about their opponents. If the reporting agency doesn't believe those accusations to be true, are they prohibited form interviewing the politician or individual making such a claim? Is it liable to interview these people??

In the Fox case everyone keeps saying it is an obvious lie that the d******n machines weren't doing what was claimed. Really? How do we know that? Does anyone here on OPP have the proof that the D******n machines weren't doing what they were accused of??

Seems to me that even hating Trump or "knowing" that the stories about the D******n machines are lies, or just believing they are lies, does not preclude interviewing the accusers. Something is just not right about this. I wish Fox had dared to take this all the way. I truly believe that D******n would have backed out in the end.