Someone in Fox looking for a new job.

Hobbes

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rag1DyFpdI

I guess they are so used to reporting crap about people they don't know when to stop.

I'm not a Bush fan (Obvious) but I'm 99% sure there has never been any proof or accusations of him using Cocaine.

Charlie

I was watching that live (my guilty secret is out now ) when she started digging that hole for herself, T'was gas. I would have loved to heard how Sean HAnnity would have reacted if he was in studio with her.

The whole thing though comes across very unprofessional. I am currently in my final year of Law, and what she says clearly spanks of defamation. From the friends I have studying Journalism I know that media law and defamation in particular is an area they have to be clued in on so in theory most journlaists would know this too. How did she not know that making such remarks could be defamatory (based on the assumption that Bush Jr. hasn't been proven to be an ex-coke user)!?

flogen

charlie mchugh wrote:

I was watching that live (my guilty secret is out now ) when she started digging that hole for herself, T'was gas. I would have loved to heard how Sean HAnnity would have reacted if he was in studio with her.

The whole thing though comes across very unprofessional. I am currently in my final year of Law, and what she says clearly spanks of defamation. From the friends I have studying Journalism I know that media law and defamation in particular is an area they have to be clued in on so in theory most journlaists would know this too. How did she not know that making such remarks could be defamatory (based on the assumption that Bush Jr. hasn't been proven to be an ex-coke user)!?

If that were said on a UK or Irish show she'd probably be facing a defamation lawsuit (or the threat of one would be very real, at least)... in America it's different and once can often prove far harder for those who feel defamed to get a judgement in their favour.

There is the rule of "actual malice" too, which says that the plantiff must prove that the comments were made with an intended malice and not as an honest mistake; she'd certainly be covered under this.
Irish journalists will have a somewhat similar defense soon, where if they can prove they published the comments after verifying them as much as possible and under the honest belief that they were true they won't be found to have libeled someone (I think that's called 'fair and reasonable' publication).

Just as a small aside, had she not mentioned the cocaine thing her point would have been totally fair; GWB defused the issue of his drinking problem by admitting it and "showing" us that he has overcome this demon; better that than have it dug up by the media only for him to be put on the defensive.

monument

Politicians are also fairer game then, let's says, plumbers and plasters from down the road.

You’d name the politicians far quicker then business men, I mean builders, or, sorry of course I mean, the politician’s business – but mainly social – friends.

Judt

She may be culpable, but if I were president Bush I would likely not move on it - at the moment the joke is on her. Best leave it that way, rather than raise a case and get the whole "There's no smoke without fire" crowd going.