We should be able to critically identify valid and invalid sources. Peer-reviewed journals, first-hand sources, court documents, and major news outlets are examples of valid sources of information. Even then, we can examine each source critically. A major news outlet may qualify reporting with "According to police" or "critics claim". The Babylon Bee, the Onion, and The Chaser are satirical news sites. They're not valid sources. Much of social media, 4chan, anonymous sources, gossip, hearsay, third-hand accounts are unreliable sources.

He was found guilty. Then after the trial, he tried to sue her for defamation for calling him a rapist. The judge told him, no, she can do that because you were found guilty of raping her. It's not defamation to call you a rapist. That means, every newspaper in the country can call him "Donald Trump, a known rapist, ..." and he can't touch them.