Re: ABC settles "rape" claim re: Pres. Elect.

On Sat, 21 Dec 2024 11:21:32 -0500, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
 

On 12/21/2024 10:19 AM, NoBody wrote:

On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 13:07:26 -0500, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
>

On 12/20/2024 7:06 AM, NoBody wrote:

On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 12:15:53 -0500, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
>

On 12/19/2024 10:04 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

super70s <super70s@super70s.invalid> wrote:

On 2024-12-18 19:58:23 +0000, moviePig said:

>

. . .

>

Did the jury weigh in on the specific question of whether NY's legal
definition of 'rape' had been met, or was it an instruction to them?

>

I'm content to let Big Daddy go down in the history books as an
adjudicated sexual abuser instead of a convicted rapist. Because that's
what happened, there's no wiggling out of it by his apologists.

>
As super70s is relying on discussing facts as accurately reported, he's
unemployable as a member of the mainstream media. Too bad George
Stephanopolous chose to ignore the most basic tenets of journalism; he'd
have saved his employer $15 million.

>
He made a sincere (and for all practical purposes, piddling) error.  I'm
not sure why a simple retraction was judged insufficient.
>

>
Over 10 times?
>
Laughter.

>
10 separate occasions?
>

>
Watch the Nancy Mace interview.

>
I'd call a single interview a single occasion.
>

 It is completely unclear what point you are attempting to make.  Are
you trying say that verbally assaulting a rape victim in an interview
with 10 instances of a libelous statement only counts as a single
libelous statement?  If so, then wow...