As has been discussed and is referenced in the opening link, Guest, the 'he said this, he said that' argument is pretty futile. If someone believes that they have been libelled they can take legal action. If, for whatever reason, they choose not to do so then there is little point in repeating the accusation. That is what I understood by it being empty but, as you have demonstrated, not everyone sees it that way. The English language is very flexible and, in this environment in particular, it is often difficult to glean the true meaning of what someone is saying. It would take a legal expert to compose a truly unambiguous statement at times and even they get it wrong! But that does bring us back to legalities. No-one on here so far has admitted to being such a legal expert so, unless you are and can let us know whether there was indeed any libellous rhetoric, we can only speculate. That does not do the discussion or anyone one it any good in my opinion.