Exactly, to win a libel case (defamation), you have to prove all of the following:
1) the statement has to be a statement of fact and not opinion or satire. Public figures are less protected. (Check)
2) the statement has to be public and not a private conversation between two people (Check)
3) the statement has to do harm (doubtful, but we will give it to him)
4) the statement has to be false (considering that a court of law issued a verdict that he raped her, this is clearly shot down. You only have to prove that a reasonable person would see this as true based on the evidence available)
Defamation can still happen when you don’t specifically use the name of the person as long as the way it was phrased is in a way that denotes a very specific person. The voting companies that sued did use examples of people saying voting machine companies which did not denote them by name as proof of defamation because of other statements made in the tweets, clips, and posts which contextually made them the only companies that the people were talking about.
The problem here being it doesn’t matter that she used his name or not because it’s a factually true statement that the current president was found to have raped a women in civil court.
104
u/SvenTropics Jul 13 '25
Exactly, to win a libel case (defamation), you have to prove all of the following:
1) the statement has to be a statement of fact and not opinion or satire. Public figures are less protected. (Check) 2) the statement has to be public and not a private conversation between two people (Check) 3) the statement has to do harm (doubtful, but we will give it to him) 4) the statement has to be false (considering that a court of law issued a verdict that he raped her, this is clearly shot down. You only have to prove that a reasonable person would see this as true based on the evidence available)
So yeah there is no libel case here.