Adult actress Stormy Daniels and her creepy porn lawyer, Michael Avenatti, received some not-so-great news. Earlier this year, Daniels arrived on the national stage with allegations that she had a one-night-stand with Donald Trump ten years ago. In an interview with 60 Minutes, she claimed that the man who would eventually become president threatened her with bodily harm.

After Daniels was swept into the spotlight, the American public was subjected to wall-to-wall news coverage of the alleged tryst and its salacious details. True to form, Trump responded on Twitter, claiming that her statements alleging that he sent someone to threaten her were false.

“A sketch years later about a nonexistent man. A total con job, playing the Fake News Media for Fools (but they know it)!” he tweeted. It appears that the president might have had a point — when you look at the image, you might be led to believe that either Val Kilmer, Willem Dafoe, or Daniels’ own husband may have spent some time moonlighting as an enforcer for Signore Trump.

So, Daniels and Avenatti did what any opportunists would do: They filed a lawsuit. Unfortunately for them, it appears their strategy has backfired.

Judge James Otero dismissed Daniel’s defamation case against President Trump. The lawsuit stated that Trump defamed Daniels by claiming that she fabricated her story. Judge Otero ruled in Trump’s favor, arguing that the president tweeted his remarks “as a rejoinder against an individual challenging him in the public arena.”As if matters couldn’t get worse for the beleaguered porn star, the judge also ordered Daniels to pay the president’s legal fees.

It is interesting to note that in a court of law, President Trump’s frequent use of hyperbole was not viewed in the same manner as it is by the left and their close friends and allies in the establishment media. Indeed, the courts appear to have a better understanding of what differentiates hyperbole from a precise statement of fact. Who knew?

The Left Doesn’t Understand Hyperbole

For some reason, members of the press have taken several examples of the president’s obvious embellishments and used them to imply that he is being dishonest. On many occasions, they have thought it important to run fact checks on his hyperbolic remarks.

The New York Times has kept a running record of supposed lies that the president has told, and if you look at this list, you can see that they include numerous examples of exaggerations that obviously weren’t meant to be taken literally.

For example, on The New York Times list, they include a remark Trump made at a speech for the National Boy Scout Jamboree. “It looks like about 45,000 people. You set a record today,” he said. The Washington Post actually fact checked this claim, stating that “The figure of 45,000 is not official but if so, that would not be a record.”

They went on to point out other Boy Scout events at which there were more attendees. Apparently, they expected Trump to do a little more research before throwing out a number and claiming it was a record, because the American people care so much about crowd size records.

Here’s another: “Economic growth has surged to 2.6% nationwide. You have to understand what that means. Nobody thought that number was going to happen.”

USA Today stepped up to the plate to make sure we knew that there were some experts who believed the economy would grow at a similar rate. Of course, what they’re missing is that we shouldn’t expect Trump to actually mean or know that not a single other person believed in him. Trump was saying it in the same way the average person might say “nobody watches CNN.” Obviously some people watch CNN, though judging by their plummeting ratings, that statement may not be so hyperbolic in the near future.

Last, but most certainly not least, we have the following quote: “Look back there, the live red lights. They’re turning those suckers off fast out there. They’re turning those lights off fast. Like CNN.”

President Trump made this comment at a rally in Phoenix. If you’re thinking that no self-respecting journalistic outlet would be insane enough to fact check this obvious joke, you would be sorely mistaken.

Eager to set the record straight, CNN wrote: “CNN carried Trump’s entire speech live. Even the part where the crowd chanted ‘CNN sucks.’ So did other networks, including Fox News and C-SPAN.” What a relief. If it weren’t for CNN, the average American might have believed that the cameras had been turned off during the rally!

To normal folks, these quotes are clearly examples of exaggeration designed to make a point. These are not statements that anyone in their right mind would take literally. Unfortunately, the far-left media does not seem to employ many normal people. Perhaps that is their problem — and the reason the American public no longer trusts them.

Either the Fourth Estate is full of journalists who are so daft that they cannot differentiate hyperbole from factual statements, or they are simply feigning ignorance to get away with manipulating their audiences. Who knows? Perhaps it’s both.

Read More From Jeff Charles

Remember to check out the web’s best conservative news aggregator
Whatfinger.com -- the #1 Alternative to the Drudge