To add further, Fox News has never claimed to be "entertainment" as a defense in court and even if it had "collateral estoppel" (which is not actually a thing anyway) does not apply since even "entertainment" is protected by the First Amendment. There is no special First Amendment protection for "the press" or "news" as Pam (and many many others) claims, those protections are open to anyone who publishes. All of this is aside from the fact that even if Tucker Carlson were to literally say he hopes Putin wins in Ukraine it's not "seditious treason" as Ukraine is not the United States, the United States is not at war with Russia, and it's not sedition or treason anyway to say you hope your country loses a war. That is still protected by the First Amendment. Treason is defined very narrowly and specifically in the Constitution, the government cannot simply prosecute you for opposing its war policies. The Supreme Court failed when it said otherwise (the famous case of "fire in a crowded theater" which the Court did not say was an exception to the First Amendment even in that case) and has since revoked its approval of this position anyhow. I'm so tired.
