"When you refuse to just watch a TWENTY MINUTE VIDEO before defaming a child -- what could define "reckless indifference to truth or falsity" than that?"

Ace reports today on Nick Sandmann losing his lawsuit against the Washington Post.

...But the judge is determined to dismiss the suit -- so he takes a black-letter statement of fact , which can either be proven true or false, and simply says, without any argument supporting his position, "It's opinion and therefore not libelous. Case dismissed."
But Sandmann did not block the Indian -- the Indian marched right into his face.

Sandmann did not "taunt" the Indian -- the Indian banged a drum in his face, taunting Sandmann.

The Indian made false, defamatory claims of fact, not opinion, and the Washington Post published these false, defamatory claims of fact, either knowing they were false or having been recklessly indifferent to their truth or falsity,

When you refuse to just watch a TWENTY MINUTE VIDEO before defaming a child -- what could define "reckless indifference to truth or falsity" than that?

This is black-letter law -- by which I mean, the sections written in BIG BLACK LETTERS to let you know that these are foundational points of the law upon which all other law is based.

And this judge just threw black-letter law out the window,

Because this was a contest between a leftwing billion-dollar corporation and a little conservative kid from an unfashionable little town, and it doesn't matter what the law says -- the real law is that leftists win, always and forever.

Read more here.