putin goes to attack his critics. to the uk. even if journalists are courageous there, he goes for the corporate publishers, and uses the laws that the right is trying to replicate here in america. this is all really out in the open. i want to show you the specific evidence. take the book putin s their company s risk tolerance, in light of their limited resource. it just meant they could go bankrupt fighting putin in court. after another book came out last year, it faces more. experts say they russian cases in foreign courts are not just
civil rights leaders, other citizens, and so many journalists for really the past 60 years. that s what meme are asking the people are asking the court to overturn. england makes it easier to sue for libel. it puts the burden on the defendant. that has made england a legal destination for powerful people to mess with their critics. this is how we get to putin. putin is a dictator with an army, a cyber-army, a spy service that literally poisons people. he has many powerful tools, jokes around with other leaders, that just getting rid of reporters.
next thing in the news, but we re tracking these deadlines, because it is the policy in new york. it is what biden is trying to do. and everyone has the right to sue. even in the absence of a pandemic, i remind viewers. the court has said, you can make this kind of requirement for safety without the existence of a pandemic, well, this is a pandemic, a stronger art. are we going to see a surge in the weeks ahead? we have seen a surge in the last week, and i agreed, we will see a surge in the weeks ahead. you have already seen in alabama where the governor ivy has said, you know, we re going to resist these mandates, university of alabama, because it s got money
king. now, these citizens, they activists, they were just people. they didn t have a newsroom of fact checkers or professional process. they did get some points incorrect. so this person i told you about, sullivan, seizes on that and sues them for alleged libel. sullivan lost. the civil rights activists won. the supreme court ruled that free speech gets very strong protection, including the idea that people can sometimes get things incorrect without having to be dragged into court or fined or bankrupted, as long as you don t deliberately lie with actual malice, knowledge that it s false against a public official. the cord found the alternative, to not have that protection, would tip the balance too far towards powerful people, like sullivan, who worked with the klan, who could outspend and bankrupt to say critics. that ruling that s back in the news, that s what protected the
developed. there is more speech and more propaganda on the web that masquerades as journalism. from to spread a catchy, clique-y conspiracy, and i hoot court has not yet agreed to take a case challenging this, but it s in the news, because it s already going all the way up to the court. it s what trump and gorsuch want. those claims from the justice that i just read about the internet are actually a really long ways from how the supreme court developed these protections for free speech, to try to make sure that people could not crush reporters and other critics with these kind of libel lawsuits. i want you to stay with me right now. this may be the most important thing that i talk to you about tonight. the actual, actual history is instructive. it started right here, with the