>>5892649 (pb)

Re: the memo to TV producers

Is this setting them up so if they persist in booking guests who perpetuate the Russian Collusion/Trump is a traitor/Russian asset lie, it'll then prove it's out of malice so they can then sue the socks off these idiots?

"New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case that established the actual malice standard that must be met for press reports about public officials to be considered libel." (Wikipedia)

>>5895869

Sorry I wasn't clear. Can Trump then sue them if they persist in booking guests who keep repeating the same lies?

It indirectly benefits us if he could stop them from perpetuating these lies now that the Mueller report is out. Obviously, if they keep letting people like Brennan promote these lies over and over, even now that it's been debunked, that should prove there was an intent to defame POTUS.

What does "actual malice" mean then legally?

(I'm basing this thoughtline on what Lin Wood has done/is doing for Nick Sandmann.)