Enquirer Fails With Its Wendy Williams Story About Richard Simmons Lawsuit

Truth rating: 10
Wendy Williams Richard Simmons Lawsuit

By Gossip Cop Staff |

Wendy Williams Richard Simmons Lawsuit

(Courtesy of Wendy Williams Show)

Is Wendy Williams going to be the National Enquirer and RadarOnline’s secret weapon in court when the outlets defend themselves itself against a libel and invasion of privacy suit filed by Richard Simmons? As Gossip Cop previously reported, Simmons is suing the Enquirer, RadarOnline and their parent company, American Media, Inc., for falsely alleging that he’s transitioning into a woman named Fiona. Now, the supermarket tabloid exclaims in the headline of a new article, “Burn! Watch: Wendy Williams Goes After Richard Simmons’ ‘Epic Fail.'”

So, did Williams offer proof beyond a shadow of doubt on her talk show that the Enquirer or RadarOnline are right, and that Simmons’ case has no merit because he’s actually transitioning? No, she actually spewed most of her anger at Simmons’ latest comeback as a “life coach.” Williams said on her eponymous show, “You’ve lost your credibility as a life coach because you disappeared from us.” She added, “I just believe your comeback is an epic fail!”

William never said Simmons’ lawsuit was an “epic fail.” In fact, Williams emphatically says, “I don’t believe Richard is transitioning. I believe that he just likes to dress in drag.” And while she doesn’t believe Simmons should sue the Enquirer and RadarOnline, she reiterates, “I don’t believe it’s transition.” That’s the Enquirer’s big “burn”?

In between grousing how “we didn’t know where you were,” Williams noted that Simmons has posted a number of shots of himself cross-dressing. But there’s a big difference between wearing drag and being transgender. And her objection to Simmons’ lawsuit is not only wrong, it’s arguably insensitive to the entirely separate transgender community.

There’s an old adage attributed to Carl Sandburg that goes, “If the facts are against you, argue the law. If the law is against, argue the facts. If the law and the facts are against you, pound the table and yell like hell.” Or in the tabloid and its sister site’s case, publish a rant on TV from Wendy Williams that has nothing to do with either the facts or the law.

Admittedly, Simmons has a tough case because among the thresholds one must prove in a libel case, particularly with a public figure like the fitness guru, is malice. Did the Enquirer and RadarOnline publish its inaccurate articles with malice and a reckless disregard for the truth? The outlets will undoubtedly claim they had a source to back up their reports. And if the source was wrong, and they ultimately published a falsehood, the outlets will probably maintain none of it was done with “malice.”

That’s for a judge to decide. Not Wendy Williams. And her saying Simmons’ suit is a “waste” and has no merit is actually meritless. Burn!

  1. Gossip Cop
  2. Mediaite
  3. LawNewz