As precedent compels that the state-law right to preemptive dismissal of spurious defamation claims be treated as a dismissal for not stating a claim if made on a matter of law and as a summary judgment if made on a fact-dependent determination, the court was powerless to look beyond the pleadings to the additional evidence provided by the non-movant when adjudicating it as a motion for preemptive dismissal on a matter of law.
A reasonable viewer would discern from the tenor of the show that the only fact being reported by the television host was the content of the news story being discussed, and that the rest was opinon and commentary. By disclosing the specific factual basis of the statment, the host reveals the rest to be commentary and hyperbole.
No abuse of discretion in denying leave to amend, since it was never requested, and would have proved futile anyway.
https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2021/08/17/20-55579.pdf