• Stovetop@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    58
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Man is guilty as sin but just to play devil’s advocate for the press: they are subject to libel laws and cannot make definitive statements of guilt/non guilt or else risk being sued.

    So on the one hand it’s dumb that they aren’t telling it like it is but on the other hand I sympathize that they don’t want to put their finances on the line to pay the Donald Trump legal fund if he decides to sue.

    • NJSpradlin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      51
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      They can definitively state that he was found guilty for his hand in the insurrection, as per the multiple cases. There’s no room for libel there, it’s a fact. He was found guilty.

      They don’t need to beat around the bushes about it.

      Edit: it’s not libel, they’re afraid of. It’s being on the wrong end of politics, share holders, and a potential authoritarian anti-journalism president.

      • Stovetop@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        8 months ago

        To my knowledge he hasn’t been found guilty in trial court yet, has he? Courts keep kicking the can down the road because the US justice system is a sham. If he was found guilty already, he’d be behind bars.

        Basically, there are differences between the recommendations of investigation committees, eligibility to run for office, and a conviction. Just because some determination was made by a court or by a legal body doesn’t necessarily mean he was found guilty of the crime. Not yet at least.

        • Funderpants @lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          Colorado trial and supreme Court found that he has “engaged in” an insurrection. I’ve got a link to the Supreme Court opinion in this thread.

      • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        8 months ago

        They can definitively state that he was found guilty for his hand in the insurrection, as per the multiple cases. There’s no room for libel there, it’s a fact. He was found guilty.

        Did I miss a case? AFAIK, to date he hasn’t been found guilty of anything because that would imply he’s been through a criminal trial to completion and we should be talking about his sentencing.

        To the best of my knowledge he’s been found liable in a couple of civil cases and owes a buttload of damages as a consequence, but still hasn’t been found guilty of any crime, yet.

    • AlternatePersonMan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      8 months ago

      You would think journalism would be subject to libel laws, but after seeing Fox and company blast lies for decades, I don’t have that confidence.

      Yes, Fox finally got hit with one major lawsuit for one massive lie, but given all the lies they’ve run, it shows how far past the line you need to go.

      • kautau@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        And only because they lied about a massive corporation who then turned around and sued them. Not everyone they lie about has a legal team on retainer ready to defend them. In this case, Trump can’t find lawyers willing to defend him at this point, but Fox News would never paint Trump in a bad light, it would alienate their viewer base

    • Funderpants @lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      8 months ago

      Yes and I would agree if he were before the court for the first time, but multiple judges have already made a determination in those things.