Why can't journalists be sued?

Update:

2.10.19:

9:00 :

Could Senator Mark Warner be tied to this fake Russian dossier story?  If he was, you'd never hear about it in the liberal media.


8:00 :

Seems that Mark Warner is using an encrypted app to send messages to a Russian oligarch.  Now, the question is this:  are we going to hear about Mark Warner forever and ever, as we have with Trump?

Don't bet on it.  Liberal media outlets won't run that story.  Fox did, but Fox is supposedly not liberal.

7: 00 :

Mollie Hemmingway writes about the contrast in how the so-called Russian collusion is reported.  Now that the collusion narrative is falling apart, the media buries the stories.

Isn't this a sign of malice?  If you report only one side of the story, isn't that evidence of an intent to do harm?

This should be litigated.  I'd even say it should be litigated aggressively.  At least as aggressive as the reporting has been towards Trump.  Bring in the government, too.

2.9.19:

I posed that question in an online search, and the answer from Quora is:

as Karen Gutierrez put it ''plaintiff must prove actual malice''

Seems like I have heard that before.

Would it be impossible then, to prove malice with regard to political reporting?  It seems that most political reporting these days is malicious indeed.  It is truly cut-throat, as there are people, like Donald Trump, who could actually be charged with a crime.  If the stories run against him are not truly substantiated, and meant to cause harm; and if it actually does, then why can't Trump sue for damages?  Indeed, why can't anybody sue?

If there is anything guiding the reporting these days, I would definitely say that malice has to be a part of the motivation for what gets put out there.