> the statement he makes. You're not parsing the legalese finely enough. It says the statement in that quote. Not every statement, but just one in paritcular

> the statement he makes. You're not parsing the legalese finely enough. It says the statement in that quote. Not every statement, but just one in paritcular. They defended one particular statement Tucker made on air in that lawsuit as "rhetorical hyberbole" which is a defense against defamation that has been used in, e.g. the Larry Flint case. You can read more about what rhetorical hyperbole if you wish: https://www.virginiadefamationlawyer.com/rhetorical-hyperbole-is-not-defamation/ https://www.virginiadefamationlawyer.com/rhetorical-hyperbol... https://mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1796/rhetorical-hyperbole https://mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1796/rhetorical-hyp... This is not the sort of argument you should make if you want people to take your opinions on legal matters seriously.