You see though, that we already have laws against lying…

… to the government… making false product claims…

…impersonating a professional something…

My point is that we have a court system that allows for that determination to be made, whether speech has caused harm, and reasonable compensation for that harm, and that the right to lie, if lying is a crime against the state, should not be protected in any circumstances, including those of negligence

It is easy enough to state an opinion as such, which is fine…

…and satire, when appropriately labeled

But when testimony is presented as fact, particularly when a continuing effort to reinforce a false belief is presented as fact, or implied, that act should not be protected with hurdles like proving intent, or some blanket exemption because the act is one of speech

Speech has been limited by restricting subliminal advertising, but the constant repetition of lies is protected when presented as news, or opinion, even though political speech is advertising…

Besides, the president said we would get better laws against lying