Editor's Note: Suggesting Dan Snyder Is A Bullshitter Is Not As Libelous As Writing, "Dan Snyder Blows Dogs"

The previous post on Deadspin might have given the impression that Redskins owner Dan Snyder is a liar. Snyder takes such accusations very seriously, and so do we, which is why we now endeavor to answer the question: Is it libelous to suggest that Dan Snyder is a lying-ass shitbag vulgarian?

Probably not. Or if it is, it's nowhere near as bad as saying, for instance, that Dan Snyder blows dogs. That would be libelous. Do not say that Dan Snyder blows dogs, unless of course you have very strong evidence that Dan Snyder blows dogs—video, say, of Dan Snyder going down on an Airedale, or maybe sworn eyewitness testimony from a breeder in Potomac, Md., who says that Dan Snyder sneaks into the kennels every Wednesday night and services the Lhasa Apsos until there's nothing left for the dams. Then you might say that Dan Snyder blows dogs. But without any incontrovertible proof that Dan Snyder blows dogs, I'd strongly advise against writing, "Dan Snyder blows dogs."

"Lying-ass shitbag vulgarian" is probably OK, though.



It would be libelous to write, "Dan Snyder fucks corpses"
It would be libelous to write either, "Dan Snyder has sex with his prize Palomino steed," or, "Dan Snyder and George Will make snuff porn in Sally Quinn's fuck dungeon."