My comments about libel were in response to a post in which Gary Stevens was quoted as saying that if Santos sued for slander he would end up owning the Herald, & were not intended to suggest that Carlson's piece was libelous per se. In fact, I went back & read the original article with that in mind & have to agree with you. That said, the article is, as is so often the case, constructed in such a way that it suggests dishonesty without actually coming out & saying it, probably with the help & advice of the Herald's libel lawyers. In other words, the Herald's conduct may very well be even more reprehensible than originally thought.