Apparently, the very stable genius tweetedthe following about the Red Hen restaurant, which, of course, was a perfectly civil thing for him to do since he is a Republican, even though it is a lie from start to finish:
“The Red Hen Restaurant,” he lied like a spoiled 6-year old, “should focus more on cleaning its filthy canopies, doors and windows (badly needs a paint job) rather than refusing to serve a fine person like Sarah Huckabee Sanders. I always had a rule, if a restaurant is dirty on the outside, it is dirty on the inside.” His own restaurants may look good– if faux glitzy– on the outside by are virtually sewers on the inside.
A person commits libel when he or she knowingly or recklessly publishes an untruth about someone who is damaged as a result of the statement. Since Trump’s tweet is, first to last, a fabrication, it is an actionable libel. In fact, many of his tweets are.
Before I go on, and just as an aside, if the place is such a dump, what was Sarah doing there in the first place?
Okay, back to the main point. There is a right wing organization (can’t remember the name, too lazy to look) that made a living out of suing Democrats under various theories. Wouldn’t it be a good idea for some well meaning left leaning legal organization to come forward and start suing Trump for libel or slander every time he unleashes a lying tweet about someone?
The case is a slam dunk as far as liability is concerned:
In contrast to Trump’s pigstyes, Virginia authorities found no violations when they visited the Red Hen in Lexington in February and gave the Red Hen their top possible health-risk rating.
I admit, there is a serious question about damages.
Ordinarily, if a president makes a disparaging statement about a person or entity, you can expect the vast majority of people to believe it, and for the victim to therefore suffer damages. Trump’s lawyers might well argue that since he always lies, and everyone knows he always lies, no one would believe any given lie, and therefore the target of that lie has suffered no damages. They are certainly free to make that argument, but it has some obvious disadvantages.
Of course there is the possibility that the Supreme Court will rule that the Paula Jones ruling only applies to Democrats, but that hasn’t happened yet, and the case will have to work it’s way up through the courts to reach that unhappy denouement. I’m not suggesting that this should be the sole such case against Trump. I’m suggesting he should be sued every timehe lies about someone in a tweet, because his lies are so easily demonstrated. Assuming the Supreme Court doesn’t give him a pass, he would be paying out settlements on a regular basis, which might even distract the cable folks from their jihad against those nasty leftists who hurt Sarah’s fee-fees.
This has been yet another in a long line of Modest Proposals.
Post a Comment