So....you accuse Person A of being a pedophile...in public...in front of witnesses...and it's filmed. The news picks it up and reports the altercation in which you accused person A of being a pedophile. Now you or the person you accused can sue the news for reporting the altercation?I see you are still too stupid to understand the difference between "altercation" and "accusation".
No one is denying the altercation took place.
Do you understand that?
It is an interesting question of the law.
Morally speaking, spreading that type of poisonous rumor, with out ANY supporting evidence, is pretty vile and evil.
There is no doubt the media is vile scum. Whether they have crossed the line into illegality, I don't know.
Once AGAIN it isn't a 'rumor' --- it's recorded on video. Sean Spicer's publicist said he was 'taken aback by the incident'. How could he be taken aback if there was no incident?
Are you sitting here trying to tell us what's clearly on the video --- and acknowledged by Spicer's people --- did not happen?
Once AGAIN the story isn't what may or may not have happened in Spicer's prep school. The story is the guy who came in and yelled at him. There can be no dispute about that --- IT'S ON VIDEO.
NOt sure if you are being serious or just playing stupid
The rumor is that Spicer called someone a name.
The AP is spreading that accusation without any supporting evidence or sources at all.
That is vile of them. They are scum.
Your task, that you continually run away from, continues to be to show the class where the AP, or the originating site, "spread an accusation". You can't do it, because it's a fantasy you made up.
It's in the linked AP article from the OP. They gave the utterly and completely unsupported accusation national coverage.
Why are you dodging talking about the actual issue?