Part I:  The Washington Post

Back in the 1980s or early 1990s, an engagingly talented young writer at the Washington Post made up a series of stories about an 11-year-old heroin addict.  She swore to her editor that it was real – not fiction and this series of articles won a Pulitzer Prize.

Rival ‘reporters’ at other publications demanded a second chance at the coveted prize by insisting that the series was physiologically impossible.  Heroin would kill an 11-year-old.  By the time the corporate management demanded the ‘editor’ personally verify its legitimacy, he accompanied her in a car to search for the 11-year-old.  Finally, she broke down and cried acknowledging the emotionally appealing hoax.

Oh, by the way, she was an affirmative action black female reporter.  If she had more common sense, she would have taken her creative fiction writing skills to Hollywood and become a millionaire screen writer; or better still, she should have signed up with Democrat Party favoring political public relations consultants and perhaps even become the billionaire that might have gotten the thoroughly unqualified Kamala Harris elected President in 2024 – as the crowning achievement of a life-time career of misleading the perpetually dopey American voter.

Part II:  The New York Times

Some years later, when a mysterious assassin was randomly murdering people, a New York Times ‘reporter’ won the Pulitzer Prize for his ‘coverage’ of the ongoing story by plagiarizing copiously from the work of others.  Since the New York Times was desperate for a ground-breaking Black reporter to win the prize, they heavily promoted this series of articles written by their man.

Rival reporters from other publications demanded a second chance at the coveted prize by publishing articles about the plagiarism.  By the time corporate management demanded that the (political activist) ‘editors’ verify the legitimacy of the ‘reports,’ the Hoax fell apart.  As with the first Hoax about the 11-year-old heroin addict, it required the rarest of contemporary actual competitive behavior by other news organizations to Force a Verification.

Part III:  Operation Crossfire Hurricane

Both the Washington Post and the New York Times received Pulitzer Prizes for their ‘co-conspiracy fraudulent reporting’ that enabled Operation Crossfire Hurricane which interfered with the post-election victory of Donald Trump, the 2018 midterm elections, and everything else ever since.

No ‘competitive rival news organization’ compelled them to ever admit the Hoax nor the fraudulent ‘sources’ with whom they conspired to be identified.

Part IV:  Pre-early 1960s Sullivan Rule of Law

Should a libeled individual wish to seek Justice with the actual Truth, they would bring a lawsuit against the publication.  Since two ‘sources’ were required before a reporter could report a critical, potentially libelous news story, both sources would be required to testify under oath followed by regular cross-examination to persuade the jury as to the TRUTH.

If such sources had lied and stuck to their lies, they would be financially libel to be sued for SLANDER.

Part V:  Post Sullivan Rule

No legal verification is ever required under today’s Two-Tier so-called Rule of Law.