After accounts of a confidential congressional hearing on a national security matter were published, the chief counsel at the hearing made a statement to a major newspaper accusing a popular network news anchorman of leaking the story and endangering national security. The network immediately fired the anchorman. When facts came to light a few weeks later showing that the allegation was not true, the anchorman was rehired and restored to his position. The anchorman sued the newspaper for defamation, claiming compensatory and punitive damages, and made allegations legally sufficient to sustain those damages if proved. No affirmative defenses were allowed. What is the newspaper's best defense?

The publication was not made with knowledge that it was false nor with reckless disregard for the truth.

Explanation:

Defamation plaintiffs are required to prove that the defendant committed actual malice. Actual malice with regard to defamation of the plaintiff would need to have been done with actual knowledge of the falsity of the statement of defamation and a reckless disregard for the truth.

the answer is: c. c.it limited the president’s power to start wars.

the war powers resolution of 1973 requires the president to notify the congress whenever the president wanted to order a military operation to other countries within 48 hours. if after being reviewed the congress disagree with the proposal, that the president will be banned from ordering the operation.