The Goldwater Rule was codified into the APA precisely because of a libel lawsuit in Goldwater v Ginsburg, over Fact Magazine's publication of an article impugning Goldwater during the election. The jury found the defamatory statements were both false and motivated by actual malice and awarded $75,000. When hacks and quacks like Bandy X. Lee and others tread over the Goldwater rule, they're tiptoeing right up to the line of libel and probably figuring that even if they were committing a crime in fact and law, any attempt to sue them would only boost their reputation and bring on the donations from liberals around the country.

Claims of psychological incompetence obviously fulfill the requirement of injurious / contempt, and there's no shortage of third party publication, satisfying 2 out of 4 requirements. Whether it can truly be considered a false statement of fact as opposed to an opinion is trickier, but as the precedent shows psychoanalysis can indeed qualify, though it still requires that high bar of "actual malice". The Goldwater Rule, while carrying no force of law on its own, would be a compelling factor because it establishes intentional disregard for professional ethics rules. That's something that afaik has been a factor for publishers in other defamation suits- its very damning if you can show someone knew what they were doing was wrong. And it would probably also factor into strengthening the claim of what is fact vs opinion, when psychoanalysis is held to such standards professionally.

Damn! I was saving that up. That $75,000 award was in 1969....$512,000 in 2019 dollars.

On a side note, has anyone noticed that the bimbo in the article claiming Trump has NPD, looks a helluva lot like Blaisey-Ford (with a few extra pounds) (the Kavanuagh bimbo shrink).







This post was edited by Ghot on Dec 4 2019 03:13pm

The Goldwater Rule is still an ethics one, not a legal one. It even says so in what Goom posted (carrying no force of law on its own).

This post was edited by Surfpunk on Dec 4 2019 03:13pm

Except the court ruled in Goldwater's favor. So they thought it carried the force of law.

But they are top psychiatrists ... If they do this shit it probably means something is AT LEAST wrong in his dossier, data we don't have.
Just patriots doing their duty.

according to Ghot OJ was convicted of murder because he lost in civil court. lol.

just think of how Ghot's heart fluttered when he saw Goom had come to his rescue, only to still be 10 feet deep because he cant make anything but a hyperbolic claim then double down on it's literal correctness.



not all courts make just legal judgements.

just say "i shouldnt have said illegal" and go back to hawking memes from facebook.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Dec 4 2019 03:16pm

A CIVIL court. Not a criminal one.

no lol. The rule was enacted after and is a professional rule of ethics.

Doesn't matter. The shrinks LOST the case.



/e




Again, I hope you're just saying that to... argue. Cause if you don't place any weight in ethics violations, you're not gonna last very long as a doctor. ^^


This post was edited by Ghot on Dec 4 2019 03:19pm

"
Donald Trump’s description of Chair of the House Intelligence Committee Adam Schiff as a “deranged human being” is simply the president projecting onto others what is true about himself, a prominent psychiatrist has said.
"

ohhhh