Legally, "JD is a pedophile" a statement of fact, not an opinion. As a statement of fact, if untrue, it's defamatory. You might see it as a hyperbolic insult; not all will. That is irrelevant because it's not an opinion, it's a statement of fact. Calling someone a pedophile is not the same as calling someone "scum," because "scum" would be clearly opinion.
The question is not whether the suit should prevail, it's a question of whether he gets discovery, and whether anonymous commenters are less subject to libel law than other publishers.
Think of it this way: You are the head of a civic organization. What if an anonymous commenter said on a story about you that he went to Horace Mann High School with you, graduated with you, has known you for years in your town of Springfield, and that he knew for a fact that you wife divorced you (you are divorced) because you are a kiddy-diddler and child porn freak.
The question is not whether the suit should prevail, it's a question of whether he gets discovery, and whether anonymous commenters are less subject to libel law than other publishers.
Think of it this way: You are the head of a civic organization. What if an anonymous commenter said on a story about you that he went to Horace Mann High School with you, graduated with you, has known you for years in your town of Springfield, and that he knew for a fact that you wife divorced you (you are divorced) because you are a kiddy-diddler and child porn freak.