Answer: The situation is unconstitutional because it is defamation or libel
Explanation: The freedom of the press is guaranteed by the First Amendment of the American Constitution, which regulates all the rights and obligations of the media, including the press. This means that everyone has the right to freely report and write, and freely express their opinions without censorship. However, there are some limitations when it comes to press freedom. There are, among other things, the extent to which the journalist, i.e the writer of the article, can secure the protection of a confidential source, then also indecency. In this our case it is defamation which, when it comes to defamation in the press, calls libel. If Nancy wanted to make up a story about a politician she personally dislikes, then it is defamation. The First Amendment also does not guarantee the journalist the right to interfere personal feelings about the politician with professional writing in the newspaper. This means that if Nancy made up the story of a politician without real evidence of any wrongdoing, then it was defamation in the newspaper, therefore, libel.
A. Civil rights
b. constitutional rights and
c. Legal rights
Often conspiracy theorists believe they are the biggest victim of the conspiracy, and that they are being physically or mentally persecuted. They believe that when good things happen to other people, it's because those people are immorally benefiting from the conspiracy. This may be a way to legitimize jealousy.
I'm not really sure what the question is. If you are asking which of the citizens are politicians, then I believe the answer is both citizens 2 and 3. Only citizen 1 answered the question, while the other two changed the topic by accusing citizen 1.
