How is Jerome Corsey not guilty of libel?

[Hugabear]

This is the guy who wrote the 'Swift Boat' book that hurt John Kerry's presidential bid in 2004, and now has an Obama "birther" book on the market. IMHO, this asshole is clearly guilty of libel, which is written defamation of character. In the SCOTUS case New York Times v. Sullivan, the court held that public officials can collect damages if they can prove malice, if falsehoods were made with "reckless disregard" for the truth.

Would be nice to see Obama sue Corsey for libel. Put the burden of proof on him for a change.

[fishwax]

1. well, that wouldn't really put the burden of proof on Corsi

the person suing has to prove both that what was written was incorrect and malice, I believe.

No doubt Corsi if full of it, though.

[Hugabear]

3. I don't think there's any doubt regarding the malice

His targets have been high-profile Democrats, complete smear campaigns. His intention is to bring them down. He succeeded with Kerry by setting the tone for the campaign, now he wants to do it with Obama.

[fishwax]

4. "actual malice" is different, though

I should have written "actual malice" rather than malice -- the plaintiff would have to prove the defendant not only printed falsehoods, but did so knowing they were falsehoods, or else with reckless disregard for whether it was true. (And the burden of proof would be on Obama, rather than Corsi.)

[LTR]

2. He writes fantasy fiction

Minus the Orcs, of course.

[COLGATE4]

5. Leaving aside all the political considerations why a sitting President would

be unlikely to sue someone for libel, President Obama is what is called in law a "public figure". Under the NYTimes standard, libel against a public figure can only be proven when actual malice (legal malice, not dictionary malice) is proven, i.e. the publisher of the libel published a falsehood knowing it to be false. It is a very difficult standard to meet, which is why you rarely see public figures who have clearly been libeled sue in the U.S.