In a $788 Million Defamation Settlement, Fox News Admits That It Spread False Claims About Election Fraud
"The truth matters," says Dominion Voting Systems, and "lies have consequences."

Delaware Superior Court Judge Eric Davis today announced a last-minute settlement of the defamation case pitting Dominion Voting Systems against Fox News, which repeatedly aired statements that falsely implicated the company in a criminal conspiracy that supposedly denied Donald Trump a second term. Dominion sued Fox in 2021, seeking $1.6 billion in damages, and the trial had been scheduled to begin this week. Justin Nelson, a lawyer for Dominion, said the settlement includes a $787.5 million payment from Fox.
"The truth matters," Nelson said outside the courthouse. "Lies have consequences. Over two years ago, a torrent of lies swept Dominion and election officials across America into an alternative universe of conspiracy theories, causing grievous harm to Dominion and the country."
Fox more or less agreed. "We are pleased to have reached a settlement of our dispute with Dominion Voting Systems," it said in a press release. "We acknowledge the Court's rulings finding certain claims about Dominion to be false. This settlement reflects FOX's continued commitment to the highest journalistic standards. We are hopeful that our decision to resolve this dispute with Dominion amicably, instead of the acrimony of a divisive trial, allows the country to move forward from these issues."
Even as Fox acknowledges a judge's determination that it repeatedly aired "false" allegations about Dominion, it claims to be upholding "the highest journalistic standards." Surely that means it will set the record straight. Not according to The Hill's Dominick Mastrangelo, who reports that a "source with knowledge of the Fox/Dominion settlement says the network will not be required to issue any on-air retractions or apologies as part of the deal."
This settlement is nevertheless a humiliating outcome for Fox. Although $788 million is less than half the damages Dominion initially sought (an amount Fox described as "wildly inflated"), it is pretty close to the sum the company seems to have had in mind more recently. "The original Dominion complaint," Fox noted in a press release yesterday, "states that the 'lost profits' figure is 'not less than $600,000,000,'" but Dominion "is no longer pursuing it, knocking more than a half a billion dollars off their damages claim." If so, Fox has agreed to pay nearly four-fifths of the revised figure.
Worse, Fox for months had insisted it would continue fighting the case as a matter of principle, notwithstanding a string of embarrassing revelations and adverse rulings. "Dominion's lawsuit is a political crusade in search of a financial windfall, but the real cost would be cherished First Amendment rights," Fox said in an emailed statement on Friday. "While Dominion has pushed irrelevant and misleading information to generate headlines, FOX News remains steadfast in protecting the rights of a free press, given a verdict for Dominion and its private equity owners would have grave consequences for the entire journalism profession."
Dominion argued that Fox repeatedly gave a forum to election conspiracy theorists such as Sidney Powell and Rudy Giuliani even though it knew their claims were false. The company also noted that some hosts implicitly or explicitly endorsed the allegations against Dominion, as Fox Corporation Chairman Rupert Murdoch acknowledged in a deposition.
As Davis noted when he rejected Fox's motion for summary judgment on March 31, Fox guests and hosts claimed that "Dominion committed election fraud"; that it "manipulated vote counts through its software and algorithms"; that it was "founded in Venezuela to rig elections for dictator Hugo Chavez"; and that it "paid kickbacks to government officials who used [its] machines in the Election." Davis said it was "CRYSTAL clear that none of the Statements relating to Dominion about the 2020 election are true." He added that the statements were "defamatory per se," because they "strike at the basic integrity of [Dominion's] business" and "seem to charge Dominion with the serious crime of election fraud."
Fox argued that it was merely reporting newsworthy allegations by the president and his representatives. But Davis rejected that "neutral report privilege," saying it was not available under applicable case law. "Even if the neutral report privilege did apply," he added, "the evidence does not support that [Fox News] conducted good-faith, disinterested reporting."
Fox also argued that its presentation of Powell and Giuliani's allegations qualified as a "fair report" about judicial proceedings. That privilege, Davis ruled, "fails to shield Fox from liability" because only one of the challenged statements referred to a pending lawsuit, and that broadcast went beyond reporting on the case by asserting its "underlying facts."
Davis likewise was unimpressed by Fox's argument that statements by hosts like Lou Dobbs, who repeatedly lent credence to Powell's claims, were constitutionally protected expressions of opinion. Not so, said Davis. In an appendix, he went through all the relevant broadcasts, showing that statements Fox described as opinions included assertions of fact or were based on supposed evidence that neither Powell nor Giuliani ever produced.
Davis' ruling left Fox with one last line of defense: that it did not air the false and inherently defamatory statements about Dominion with "actual malice," meaning it did not know the statements were false or recklessly disregard that likelihood. But as Davis noted, Dominion had uncovered evidence that many people at Fox either were skeptical of the claims about the company or dismissed them outright.
Ten days after the election, Fox's fact-checking "Brainroom" said there was "no evidence of widespread fraud" and "no credible reports or evidence of any software issues." It added that "claims about Dominion switching or deleting votes are 100% false" and called assertions about supposedly deleted Trump votes "mathematically impossible."
Six days later, Murdoch privately called the story "really crazy stuff." That same day in a text conversation with fellow Fox News host Laura Ingraham, Tucker Carlson flatly stated that "Sidney Powell is lying." Ingraham agreed that Powell could not be trusted: "Sidney is a complete nut. No one will work with her. Ditto with Rudy." In a deposition, Fox News host Sean Hannity said he "did not believe" Powell's claims "for a second."
In response to a post-election tweet about "vote dumping" from Maria Bartiromo, fellow Fox News host Bret Baier* told Jay Wallace, president and executive editor at Fox News and Fox Business, "none of [it] is true as far as we can tell." In a December 1 email, Baier said Powell's claims "can't be remotely true." Lucas Tomlinson, another Fox reporter, responded that the allegations were "100% not true" and "complete bullshit."
Gary Schreier, second in command at Fox Business, "believed the allegations were false at the time of airing," Davis noted. John Fawcett, an associate producer for Lou Dobbs Tonight, told colleagues that Powell seemed to be "doing lsd and cocaine and heroin and shrooms." In a text to Dobbs, Fawcett suggested that Powell "could be losing her mind." He noted that her story "doesn't make sense" and added, "I just don't think she is verifying anything she is saying." Tiffany Fazio, executive producer of Hannity's show, called Giuliani's account of systematic election fraud "comic book stuff."
Notwithstanding those behind-the-scenes doubts, Fox argued that it was reasonable to keep giving Powell and Giuliani a forum until it was clear that they had no evidence to support their claims. In Fox's telling, that happened by mid-December, when presidential electors cast their ballots. But in light of the internal communications highlighted by Dominion, the jury might reasonably have concluded that the reckoning could and should have come sooner.
*CORRECTION: Bret Baier's first name was misspelled in the original version of this post.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Precedent for the other news media for trump russia conspiracy im sure.
Even sullums write up shows the judge in the case already pre ruled on the facts and disallowed actual discovery against Dominion. A one sided affair.
Settlememts do not establish precedent.
Those who spread the Russian Collusion narrative and the Brett Kavanaugh is a Rapist narrative can breathe a little bit easier- for now.
Only justice will be had when their breathing is stopped.
Paying a fine doesn’t further justice when the guilty and less guilty consider it simply a cost of doing business.
When the stakes are only incarceration or vindication oligarchs will take justice more seriously.
Imagine if they’d said the holocaust didn’t happen.
Only a retarded lunatic would do that. Probably one that can’t get a woman, and has no dick.
Misek is so sad
Doesn’t even have a dick.
I think he has a bag of them. Part of his diet.
I get paid between $145 and $395 an hour online. I heard about this job 3 months ago and after joining it I easily made $23,000 with no online skills. Just try it on the companion page..
.
.
.
For Details►——————➤ https://EarningDoors1.blogspot.Com
A fews things for everyone here:
1) 788 Million is fine. Fox probably made 1.5 billion just running all those stories for so long.
2) Sullum says... "Admits That It Spread False Claims..." No. They didn't admit anything. And we don't know they are false either! We know that fox couldn't prove them. That's all. Could they be false? Sure! Could they be true? Sure!
3) If Sullum rolled a massive doobie laced with acid, crumbled shrooms, and a very small amount of nutmeg, the universe may reveal the truth to him.
True, the only winner here was Dominion (and the lawyers). Fox Snooze viewers (those who didn't freak out reading what its newsertainers really think about them) will shrug it off and press the button for another dose of the "good stuff".
Fox did not admit anything; all they had to do under the terms of the settlement was acknowledge that the judge's rulings existed.
Fox's lawyers will have plenty of opportunities to make even money in the other lawsuits working their way through the courts. Fox will be paying for it.
When crime results only in the exchange of money, as the courts recognize it does, crime is a legitimate business.
What about when it is a civil action, you know, like in this case?
That’s what I’m saying.
The concept that a victim can be “reimbursed” makes the crime against them nothing more than a legal business transaction.
No crime should be resolved without either a finding of guilt or innocence.
Any feature of a justice system that allows either is unjust.
I'd settle for Joe "The Stallion" Rogan getting five bucks from CNN.
I agree. But given the judges pretrial instructions they could use that as the standard. Acceptance of knowing facts prior to arguments.
You POOR pitiful suffering BABIES, Nadless Nardless the Nasty NAZI and JesseBahnFuhrer! My heart BLEEDS for YE! For whom does my heart bleed?!!? It bleeds for THEE, my fiends, it bleeds for THEE!!!!
Fox News responded to "speech control" of the worst kind (worse even than the other worst kinds)... Speech control of saying ONLY what their viewers WANTED to hear!!! (And pay for). "Tell me lies, tell me sweet little lies!" And now, the chickenshit comes home to roost dropping ALL over the pipes of the Piper, who MUST be paid!!! And your shits are drooping their moral-less un-moored anchors in chickenshit, totally ignoring that their compasses are whirling randomly, and that they are hauling on, not just on frozen ropes, but chickenshit-covered frozen dope-ropes! It could NOT happen to nicer folks!
Did someone fart?
He just burped.
With his passion for copraphilia it's the same thing.
That is an ignorant response given CNN, MSNBC, and all the other media was the voice for the state saying that the vaccine was 'safe,' it worked, and it would prevent covid. They also knew that the altercation between the Native American and the young American was not a 'hate crime,' yet they settled out of court, MSNBC also settled many lawsuits, and others. You attack Fox News and viewers as clueless when it's you and others that can't see that they are not the voice of the state ran media. Most of the Fox News hosts were skeptical about Dominion, as most Americans, but they never said it was true. If Fox News were just like the other 'news,' we would have no news to trust since the rest of them work for the democrats. The lies about inflation, the Ukraine war, Biden and China, his lies about his past, etc., NEVER gets called out, so people like you never hear of those lies. Just like the lie that the border was closed, guns are the problem, and our military is strong. Do some research instead of just jumping on the band wagon. Fox News is destroying CNN!
I am guessing that no one is going to sue on either Russian collusion story or Bret Kavanaugh because there is no case. I am however sure any lawyer would love to get Guiliani, Flynn, Manafort, Trump and some of the others under testimony for discovery.
Uh huh, sure. You’re totally a moderate, even though you shill for the entire democrat platform and actively root against this country.
I shill for the American electoral system which has been defamed to appease the vanity of the former President.
Including all those last minute swing state court decisions that illegally changed election law? How about those?
Can you cite which illegal changes were made?
Wisconsin election boards allowed unstaffed drop boxes in violation of the law.
Any ballots deposited there still had to be verified. So, total nothingburger.
Hillary Clinton did it first
Russian Collusion narrative
The Trump Tower meeting where data and strategy was plotted with Kremlin officials was more than a narrative, you gullible Hannity fan.
You’re a self admitted pedophile that proudly serves as a Soros lackey. Your claims are meaningless and endlessly discredited.
Now go commit suicide.
Conservaturds making friends, gathering votes, and influencing people by... PEDDLING KOOL-AID AND SUICIDE!!! How's it workin' for ya, servant of the Evil One?
EvilBahnFuhrer, drinking EvilBahnFuhrer Kool-Aid in a spiraling vortex of darkness, cannot or will not see the Light… It’s a VERY sad song! Kinda like this…
He’s a real Kool-Aid Man,
Sitting in his Kool-Aid Land,
Playing with his Kool-Aid Gland,
His Hero is Jimmy Jones,
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Jim-Jones
Loves death and the dying moans,
Then he likes to munch their bones!
Has no thoughts that help the people,
He wants to turn them all to sheeple!
On the sheeple, his Master would feast,
Master? A disaster! Just the nastiest Beast!
Kool-Aid man, please listen,
You don’t know, what you’re missin’,
Kool-Aid man, better thoughts are at hand,
The Beast, to LEAVE, you must COMMAND!
A helpful book is to be found here: M. Scott Peck, Glimpses of the Devil
https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1439167265/reasonmagazinea-20/
Hey EvilBahnFuhrer …
If EVERYONE who makes you look bad, by being smarter and better-looking than you, killed themselves, per your wishes, then there would be NO ONE left!
Who would feed you? Who’s tits would you suck at, to make a living? WHO would change your perpetually-smelly DIAPERS?!!?
You’d better come up with a better plan, Stan!
What part of "go commit suicide" didn't you understand, Nazi?
No "data or strategy" was discussed in that 20 minute meeting.
CNN..Waspo.. NYT... Reuters...all of them lied.... network news too.
Fox had its opportunity for discovery as well. Nothing one sided.
No. They actually didn't. The judge made most of what fox asked for off limits such as source code. Try again dummy.
Please cite where Fox asked for the source code. Both sides agreed that the allegations against Dominion were false. The question was Fox's motive to defame Dominion.
Without examining the source code how do you know that? Not that it matters. You’re in the tank for the democrats no matter what.
Did Fox ask for the source code? Did both sides agree the allegations were false?
1. Yes. 2. Not until the settlement, when it was obvious that the judge was crooked and a fair trial wasn't in the offering.
"In further support of the falsity prong, Dominion provided its source code to its own expert, as well as Fox's expert. Dominion's expert stated it was unable to detect any mechanism to switch votes, which no Fox expert has contested."
https://courts.delaware.gov/Opinions/Download.aspx?id=345820
Uh huh.
I was wrong there. But that was information given this year, not prior the claims made on fox news and never to trumps team prior.
Drfamatory statements of public figures require knowingly false statements. At the time did Fox have this knowledge. Yes or no?
They require knowing false statements, or reckless disregard as to the falsity of statements.
Drfamatory statements of public figures require knowingly false statements. At the time did Fox have this knowledge.
They didn't have any specific evidence that their claims were true and they were fully aware that they didn't have any evidence that such claims were true. This is called a lie.
"They didn't have any specific evidence that meets my standards of truth that their claims were true."
FTFY
How do you think we got here in the first place? We're having this entire conversation about Dominion because of evidence that lead many people to suspect malfeasance.
No, we're having this conversation about Dominion because they sued Fox for saying things about them with no basis in fact (and Fox admits as such) to the express purpose of discrediting Dominion. Also, what the fuck are you on about "standards of truth"? There are things which are "true" and there are things which are "not true". It's not a sliding scale of "truthiness". There are no "alternative facts". Saying things that are not true by casual accident is an error. Saying such things intentionally or recklessly is a lie. In neither case is it any kind, level, or standard of "truth".
Point went right over your head. You are correct that there isn't a scale of truth, but you fail to understand that truth is like a mathematical limit. Absolute truth cannot be realized. You cannot possess all information with no questions remaining. At the time these claims were aired, there was reasonable suspicion about Dominion.
You feel that the information available at the time was insufficient for Fox to host guests who had questions about Dominion. I disagree. If you really believe your standards matter more, that's sad.
And there goes one leg of your stool...
And then you falsely clam that defamation of a public figure requires knowledge... (no, reckless disregard for the truth can suffice)
By my count, either your stool has a lot of legs, or you're now on the floor looking rather stupid.
“Mountains of evidence boxes were wheeled into a seventh-floor courtroom on Tuesday morning, moments before lawyers for Dominion Voting Systems planned to eviscerate Fox News and its Fox Corporation leadership for the volley of false claims about the company in the aftermath of the 2020 election.
Later that morning, jurors were sworn in. They ordered lunch. Hours later, it was over. And Fox News admitted that statements on its airwaves about Dominion were false, agreeing to pay the voting machine company more than $787m in a settlement that averted one of the biggest-ever defamation trials in American history.”https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/fox-news-vs-dominion-lawsuit-settle-succession-b2322414.html
Except that Fox didn't have to "admit" anything. It was probably the best possible outcome for Fox--which can easily afford to pay the award.
Did Fox present any evidence in favor of Sydney Powell's claims in order to justify a look at their source code?
You’re such a lying piece of shit.
Judge also declared that the using the defense of "Public interest", which we do have a right to, would not be allowed. the Judge took away any method of defense for FOX and the case should be appealed.
Fox paid a hefty penalty for what amounted to pretty clear gaslighting of their viewers. I still find it funny that anyone thinks corporate news is reliable or meaningful anymore.
Hopefully this settlement starts a toning down process in the industry.
I guess you’ve forgotten about Russiagate.
Based on the inference from the judge, as long as the CEO were true conspiracy believers it was fine. As long as they didn’t think the conspiracy was false no big deal. See 2nd to last paragraph. A pretty amazing stance.
Berenson is going to win big on that fact then as the cdc knew his evidence was true but pushed Twitter to censor.
I read that more in line with being able to prove that the person knew what was being asserted was a lie. Thus, being able to overcome the negligence standard for private people or the actual malice standard for public figures.
Difficulty. It was never proven a lie aside from the Venezuela claim. The judge merely declared everything a lie. Fox was not allowed discovery on source software to prove anything. They never had source software to knowingly say much, the requirement for defamation if a public figure.
Well, the fact that everyone at Fox News understood it was all a lie didn't help anything.
You are conflating terms. Opinion and knowing are two different standards.
The judge removed the actual defense arguments in pretrial instructions.
Never has a court found a public figure liable for an opinion of a newscaster against the opinion of a guest.
Opinions from people at Fox explaining how Powell and Giuliani's claims were complete crap and wholly unsupported by evidence goes to knowing, as they knew there was no evidence to assert such claims but people like Dobbs went ahead and asserted them anyway.
When the decision makers and on-air talent all explain that what someone is peddling is a lie, that is all wonderful evidence to show that someone was peddling a lie and that they knew it.
No it does not go to knowing. It goes to opinion. There is zero knowledge of how dominions code works. Except by Dominion. Opinions are not knowing. What are you struggling with here?
The only evidence that would go to knowing is the source code. Which the judge did not allow in discovery.
Dominion has even admitted to many issues with their source code prior. Democrats were pointing this out just prior to the election. All the networks aired dem politicians stating as such.
I'm not struggling with anything. You appear to be though. Fox settled this case for almost a billion dollars. If there was evidence of truth, that would not be the case. Dominion would still have the burden at trial to prove something is false. That coupled with the statements made by Fox staff was obviously more than sufficient to lead to a settlement. If Fox thought the rulings by the judge were wrong, they could appeal those rulings; they didn't.
Oh yes. Settlements are always done based on truthfulness of claims and not due to trial conditions and cost of trial. What a naive stance.
Are you aware of the pre trial standards the judge set?
Man, I just can't with this grasping nonsense. Yes, there are many reasons to settle. One big one is that your entire staff knew they were peddling lies. That's a pretty good reason too.
Yes, I was aware of the pre-trial standards. Fox was also free to appeal those standards, they did not.
What nonsense? You don’t even understand what knowing vs opinion is.
What knowledge. Be fucking specific here. It is the heart of your claim.
Can there be any knowledge without review of the source code?
Fox is not free to appeal until after the trial with money in escrow and added costs.
Settlements are always done based on truthfulness of claims and not due to trial conditions and cost of trial.
Not always, but sometimes they are, yes.
“What knowledge. Be fucking specific here. It is the heart of your claim.”
Again, you need to ask the people at Fox as they all understood these claims to be baseless.
Your argument with me is actually an argument with people at Fox.
No. My argument here in this thread is with you not understanding knowledge vs opinion.
My argument with Fox is giving to bad judicial circumstances due to pretrial instructions from the judge. They are in fact different.
Taking the 2020 election result as legitimate and believing it an accurate accounting of the American people's will is the intellectual equivalent of cutting your dick off and believing you're a woman.
You keep banging on about knowledge versus opinion, but I don't know why.
The Fox team, including their brain trust room all understood that Powell and Giuliani's claims were not true. They found no supporting evidence of the claims and Powell and Giuliani provided no supporting evidence after being aggressively asked to provide the information. This was a reason the judge removed the falsity proof as an element to be proved at trial as there was absolutely no basis to assert the claims they were asserting. This could rise to the level of reckless disregard (equaling malice) and most of the Fox crew knew that.
"Taking the 2020 election result as legitimate and believing it an accurate accounting of the American people’s will"
I mean, I don't know anyone who voted for Biden!
That's not true, the chief security officer of dominion said the code was a mess, riddled with bugs, it counded votes wrong
The illegal swing state court decisions alone discredit the election.
Let me demonstrate. 2020. Democrats go onto news sites like CNN and claim dominion vote switching.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/democratic-senators-warned-of-potential-vote-switching-by-dominion-voting-machines-prior-to-2020-election
The same fucking arguments as Trump and Fox news. Explain how they are not liable for the exact same reason.
I don't know if they are or not. But they didn't bother to sue. Only the person who suffers damages has standing to sue and they didn't for whatever reason.
What damage? All their clients are government.
Your handwaiving away a lot of issues here IS.
If everyone knew the claims were lies why were democrats on other news channels making the same claims?
I mean your claim is this was known. Not an opinion but known.
Settlements happen all the time says trials for many reasons. Using that as your evidence is laughable.
Unfriendly judge. Removal of all all defenses for Fox. Unfriendly venue. Why ever would they settle for reasons other than against claims.
Reputational damages. Lost contracts. Etc.
If everyone knew they were lies why did Dems make the same claims?
1. You need to ask the Fox staff why they all didn't believe the claims, they were the ones who clearly thought they were lies.
2. Why would politicos blame voting systems for election losses? Hmmmm, because politicians now are really good at accepting defeat I just can't figure why they would want to blame others rather than accept they were not liked enough to win an election.
My claim is it was pretty obvious that Powell and Giuliani had nothing. And that was the same assessment by most at Fox.
And the settlement coupled with the fact the entire staff at the station other than a few people knew these were lies. My god, how much water you gonna try and carry for Fox?
And back to the original argument. Belief is not knowledge which is the requirement for defamation of public figures, Dominion is, with malice.
So your 1 already undermines the suit. Belief is not knowledge. Are we agree here? You use believe and thought, not knew.
Your 2 has nothing to do with standards of defamation.
With Sandman vs CNN/MSNBC/etc the news agencies had shown the entire clip. They had knowledge of the totality of the event. Which is why they were liable. Sandman was also not a public figure.
Likewise as mentioned multiple times now the judge here set the trial standards to basically disallow any defense from Fox. And you dont question these standards to push a defendant into settlement? Why do you think Fox waited for so long and didn't just settle prior to depositions?
Youre ignoring the complete bastardization of the courts turned into legal warfare based on politics.
Sure JesseAZ. It was all another big conspiracy and the people at Fox who saw that there wasn't a shred of evidence for the claims being asserted by Giuliani and Powell were all mistaken because once they got a chance to look at the source code all the claims based on absolutely nothing would have been shown to be sufficiently true and all of Fox's lawyers didn't understand this and the whole process was completely rigged against Fox even though people at Fox all knew the claims were garbage.
Yeah.
Lol. What pathetic retreat IS. WOW.
Nothing i stated was a conspiracy. I laid out the actual facts of the discussion. You have not. So now you act like sarcamic. Lol.
The fact is knowledge was not possible. Again you misunderstand your own argument at the arguments presented. If they made claims WITH knowledge it is different than claims WITHOUT knowledge.
God damn man.
It's not a retreat, it's framing your absurdity.
Your position is that since the judge ruled falsity was established because there was absolutely no basis for the claims being made by Powell and Giuliani is somehow negated because the source code was never seen. Yet, there was no basis to even assert the ability to look at the source code as the claims by Powell and Giuliani were so baseless and unsupported, it didn't matter.
You can't claim massive lies without any basis in reality but then also claim if you had just had a chance to see XYZ of the person you defamed, you might be able to prove your completely unsupported position.
The fact of the matter is Fox hosts lied to the audience in the face of massive amounts of internal pushback (from the fact checking team even) and no evidence whatsoever to make such claims.
The best defense that Fox had was that Dobbs and Bartiromo never once claimed they knew it was all a lie but pushed it anyway. That's where Dominion's case was weakest.
At the end of the day though, it's very clear Fox lied overtly to its audience in order to prevent more from rushing off to Newsmax. And in doing so, pushed that line of defamation. Was the case a slam dunk for Dominion? No. But it is a case with strong chances based on the actions of people at Fox.
Your link doesn't mention anyone going on CNN and claiming vote switching. It refers to letters sent to private equity firms connected to vote tech vendors. Did you read the letters?
“Belief is not knowledge which is the requirement for defamation of public figures”
You're splitting hairs, if someone says “JesseAZ’s claims are full of shit” that’s evidence that they knew your claims were false. The law isn’t talking about some cosmic sense of knowing. In fact, SCOTUS has held that the malice requirement is met when a defendant “entertained serious doubts as to the truth of his publication” but published it anyway (St. Amant v. Thompson (1968)). So, as Squirrel says, the fact Fox expressed strong doubts about the claims and published them anyway was quite bad for them.
Is your claim no media reported on those claims? The link provides examples of other politicians from the DNC making those claims. They were aired. What the fuck is your argument? Those claims were made publicly.
Let’s start with this: “Democrats go onto news sites like CNN and claim dominion vote switching.”
Yet you provided no evidence of them “go[ing] onto” CNN or any other news sites, have you? Your link only cites a letter.
You don't think "media reported on something"="going onto CNN and saying" do you?
But much more importantly, you seem to have demonstrated a key misunderstanding of the law in this area.
“The law isn’t talking about some cosmic sense of knowing. In fact, SCOTUS has held that the malice requirement is met when a defendant “entertained serious doubts as to the truth of his publication” but published it anyway (St. Amant v. Thompson (1968)). So, as Squirrel says, the fact Fox expressed strong doubts about the claims and published them anyway was quite bad for them.”
Comment?
Berenson is going to win big on that fact then as the cdc knew his evidence was true but pushed Twitter to censor.
You probably think this decision proves the elections were free and fair too don't you? 🙂
Why do you think I forgot about Russiagate?
Sorry.
Not really,Trump sued Clinton on that, the case was dismissed and the Trump lawyers were sanctioned.
And Covington.
Sullivan laughs in your face.
My face, or Fox’s face?
That assumes Fox News was telling the truth when they said that they told a lie. They could have been coerced by Biden's FBI into admitting guilt in order to cover up the truth.
Yet your dumb ass believes everything they say about the election...
No, I just don't believe is the stolen election garbage. And apparently neither did most people at Fox.
You say believe here, but knowledge above. Which is it?
I see you've activated your attack dog mode.
Anyway, you appear to be conflating stolen election versus the specific claims against Dominion. That said, based on all the evidence, it is clear the election wasn't stolen. Additionally, based on the statements of the people at Fox, it's clear the claims about Dominion were basically gaslighting.
You responded to me first. And you called my clear logic progression nonsense despite it being clear and consistent.
It is you who refuse to admit to conflating terms and standards being defensive lol.
Basically gaslighting or not believing a claim is not a standard of public defamation. Full stop. You are gaslighting in defense of this settlement now.
Libertarians should be angry over this. Utilization of courts for silencing political beliefs. Even wrong beliefs should be defended. See the old ACLU and the Nazis.
But it is apparent from your responses youre okay with this because you dislike fox news.
None of your arguments have been consistent for a legal stance for defamation. Just excuses why it is no big deal.
I'm not a libertarian. I find defamation/libel laws to be appropriate. But this discussion was about what happened, not what I think the basis of the law should be.
And this isn't a situation like Skokie. One had to do with political beliefs, this had to do with maligning a company and its people with false statements. These things are different.
And again, your issue seems to be with the people at Fox who all understood the lies being promulgated by Powell and Giuliani and the awfulness of the legal team for Fox.
And my arguments are completely on point as to a defamation case. You just don't like it so you're here doing your normal attack invective responses.
It is about the standards of law which you dont care about based on your arguments. You see someone you dont like, so you don’t care standards were broken.
Your arguments are completely wrong as you still don’t understand knowledge vs opinion.
Pulling a full sarcamic tonight it seems.
Every news room and citizen should be frightened by this as it is another step to liabilities against wrong think.
Stop with claiming I see someone I don't like so I don't care about standards argument. It's lazy and intellectually devoid.
To claim my arguments wrong in the face of Fox capitulating to almost an $800 million settlement when countless experts have asserted that Fox is in a tough spot is just tired and droll.
And this dog with a bone thing you have going with "knowledge vs. opinion" is beginning not even to make sense. Fox had the knowledge that the claims were false because they couldn't verify anything being asserted. They had no evidence of the claims being made. Their own independent internal team told the anchors and executives there was no evidence of the claims being asserted and said so many times.
At the end of the day, the two main issues at trial would have been whether you can impute the knowledge of the rest of the staff at Fox news on two anchors who never acknowledged the falsity of the information and what actual damages were.
So you can make accusations about me but I can't about you? Lol.
And yes. Knowledge vs opinion is an entirely well adjudicated standard for defamation. Why do you deny this?
I didn't make accusations about you.
And I didn't deny that.
Your straw man attack dog style is so tiring.
Maybe you should have petitioned to be on the Fox legal team. You seem to know a heck of a lot more than they did.
I didn’t make accusations about you.
And I didn’t deny that.
Your straw man attack dog style is so tiring.
That's why I've got the piece of shit on mute. Every reply to him must start off by refuting all of his lies before making a point which he will ignore before responding with more lies. The fuckwad doesn't have an honest bone in his body. He should do the world a favor and take a long walk in the desert without any water.
"Libertarians should be angry over this. Utilization of courts for silencing political beliefs. Even wrong beliefs should be defended. See the old ACLU and the Nazis."
So you are really bothered by Trump's calls to make defamation suits easier then?
Whoops! Misread those marching orders, apparently...
No, Jesse is right, and you’re wrong. Just take the L and let it go.
He just refuses to acknowledge courts have always stated opinions are not defamatory, public or private.
Why courts have stated calling trump a Russian agent is an opinion and not actionable for defamation reasons.
IS doesn’t understand this required difference of the law.
Imagine cops suing BLM for saying All Cops Are Bastards and cops being able to sue on the grounds their parents are married. A court would never give them a civil declaration based on opinion. Yet here IS is fine with a judge declaring an opinion as knowingly false.
Saying sarc sucked sqrslys cock yesterday and I saw it vs sarc is a cocksucker. If I knew sarc had never sucked sqrslys cock yesterday and never saw it, defamatory. Saying he is a cocksucker as a matter of opinion, not defamatory.
Because this case isn't about opinion. It's about asserting falsity as fact, which is what happened.
So, maybe stop calling statements of fact opinion. You're just falling into the trap of claiming everything is opinion, which isn't the case in this case.
No it didn’t. At no point did Fox declare it as fact. What the fuck?
The statements YOU brought up from the fox execs said they didn’t BELIEVE the statements. Not that they knew for a fact they were false. The ones making the statements were not fox execs but people om their shows such as Powell.
When these statements were made there was zero knowledge of the source code. It had not been given to anybody to examine. Any claims on the source code at that point are opinion.
Fox settled because the judge ruled on the assumed facts of the case.
Okay man, whatever you say.
Squirrel, you seem very confused.
Since he's not, I won't take the L. But thanks for your opinion!
See what I did there.
You believe the same as a castrated tranny believes he's now a woman.
Again with the adult comments. I need to put you back on mute.
You need to slit your wrists
I wouldn't count on it, judging by the number of shrill right wingers on here trying find any excuse to continue not believing reality.
This penalty is just proof that the election fraud was much deeper than we think.
I've made $1250 so far this week working online and I'm a full time student. I'm using an online business opportunity I heard about and I'AM made such great money. It's really user friendly and I'm just so happy that I found out about it. Here's what I do,for more information simply.
Open this link thank you.................>>> http://www.jobsrevenue.com
yawn
Dominion does fraud, it's the point of their company and the never allowed to be examined machines.
Dominion is owned by the Chinese Communist party through shell corporations.
The American government, especially under Biden, are very happy to sell out American land and treasure to the CCP
Dominion gets its pick for judge and it's already obviously a railroad job.
anyone who doesn't see this is a shill
Damn, that is die hard!
Another of the Faux News tinfoil hat crowd who won't admit the truth even when their oracle admits they lied.
yawn
the judge was openly biased and issued a factless summary judgement in favor of Dominion disallowing any submission of evidence by FOX in defense of their claims
it's becoming common for Democrat judges to disallow the defendants to even present a defense. Same thing happened to Alex Jones.
all for the headlines and dopey shills like you
You’re arguing with a retarded, lying Marxist. You won’t get any useful interaction there. AB should be euthanized. Just like every other rabid animal.
You sound like a pretty fucked up human being.
No, I just place no value on people actively working to destroy my freedom and prosperity. I’m also smart enough to know that existential enemies such as Marxists should be eliminated before they do the same to me.
So you’re either blind, or one of their fellow travelers.
You're pretty fucked up.
Well, odds are he's just playing a character on the internet who is pretty fucked up.
If he were actually that fucked up, he would probably have a lot of trouble functioning in society, and we'd have read about him in the news.
The roubles are enticing to a certain type.
We don't need to examine the machines or their code to compare the results of the machine counts to hand count audits. I have seen many reports where these audits confirmed the machines' counts. Have there been any that revealed fraud? Surely massive vote switching/dumping in 2020 would have revealed itself by now.
audits count the fraud ballots as well.
silly shill.
Hey, wasn’t this goalpost over there just a couple of hours ago?
What goalposts were moved? There has been a call for a full forensic audit since the outset. Idiots like you think facial recounts are that when they are not.
1) How is a "forensic audit" different from the regular, ole' audits that they did?
2) When did this term "forensic audit" come into existence in relation to election results, anyway? I'd heard of "forensic accounting" before, but that is something different.
3) The original goalpost: voting machines were hacked and/or programmed to rob Trump! Reply: hand counts of ballots lined up fine with machine counts. New goalpost: The ballots themselves are fraudulent, so that doesn't matter!
Claiming that the machines were rigged and that the ballots themselves were rigged are completely different claims that require different kinds of evidence. And, nearly 2 1/2 years later, no credible evidence of either has emerged.
A recount isn’t a fore sic audit shit for brains.
Imagine the IRS only being able to add up the numbers provided by someone during an audit and not requiring any other evidence. Lol.
Stopped reading after that idiocy.
I will even give you 3 examples. Ga, number of double voters. Ga chose not to charge them. Votes were not modified. Find the pictures of signature comparisons in Arizona, not even close to matching. Most states at historically low signature rejects. Arizona again, current lawsuit for AG race, thousand votes tosses out from voters who voted every election.
A facial audit will recount fraudulent votes. At forensic audit looks at vote sources to check validity.
Won't even get into the more than a dozen of completed court cases regarding violations of election laws or the nursing homes with 100% voting including from patients that have legal guardians due to advanced mental issues yet somehow voted.
Listening to their bullshit is just painful after awhile. If it happens again in 2024, time for talk will be over.
A recount isn’t a fore sic audit shit for brains.
And I started by asking what a forensic audit is and how it is different than other audits. Recounts aren't the only thing that they do routinely. What do you think happens when they canvas election results?
I will even give you 3 examples. Ga, number of double voters. Ga chose not to charge them. Votes were not modified. Find the pictures of signature comparisons in Arizona, not even close to matching. Most states at historically low signature rejects. Arizona again, current lawsuit for AG race, thousand votes tosses out from voters who voted every election.
Is this supposed to be an answer to a question I asked? What am I supposed to do with this? Chase down each of them and spend who knows how long for you to simply switch to something else if I show any reason not to buy into them as a significant problem? That is exactly what I am not going to do, since you didn't acknowledge the goalpost shifting I outlined.
That is exactly what he wants you to do. Such fun!
A facial audit will recount fraudulent votes. At forensic audit looks at vote sources to check validity.
I agree that the claim that fraudulent ballots were cast is harder to prove/disprove and I'll refrain now from addressing that now.
My original point above (the one where the goal posts moved) is that proving/disproving that the voting machines are miscounting the ballots is easy to prove/disprove. You just compare hand counts to the machine results. So far there is no evidence that the voting machines are switching or dumping votes as the recounts have been within the expected error. This is not fraud that could be hidden for 2 years.
So what the hell do people in nursing homes have to do with Dominion? What the hell do fraudulent ballots have to do with Dominion? What the hell do "violations of election laws" have to do with Dominion?
All you're doing is throwing more lies out there to avoid dealing with the fact that the Dominion lie was 100% unsupportable by any evidence.
In ga there were 2 discoveries of miscoubted votes by the machine. Dominion itself admitted to errors.
https://trib247.com/articles/in-lawsuit-documents-dominion-employees-admit-voting-equipment-riddled-with-bugs
Here are the feds discussing vulnerabilities just last year.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/28/politics/dominion-voting-system-software-vulnerabilities/index.html
Your first link is a story which merely says that according to "court documents" (which are not linked to in the article) two Dominion employees complained about "bugs."
Your second literally says "The vulnerabilities have never been exploited in an election."
He's a true believer. Anything you refute will not be acknowledged and will simply be replaced by something else.
True believer, Kremlin shill, who can tell?
Nearly a billion dollars?
Holy crap! How much has the dollar been devalued??
^+++
Not as much as it will be.
Just because Dominion wasn't part of the conspiracy doesn't mean the conspiracy doesn't exist, right?
Don’t you have a pistol to eat?
Consider this Sarckles, the judge forced this statement as part of the settlement: "We acknowledge the Court's rulings finding certain claims about Dominion to be false."
The same judge who didn't allow discovery and ruled on falsity of facts.
And yet you don't even see a problem with this. The judge pretty much wore a bright yellow t-shirt saying "I'm corrupt as fuck, and you can't do anything about it". No wonder Fox and their insurance company decided to settle instead of letting that judge rule.
Actual libertarians would be horrified, but not Sarcasmic.
Whats really funny is above they are claiming the recounts proved there were no errors when 2 counties had preloaded numbers in GA only caught after the recounts. Most voting districts did not even do a recount.
So no, the software was not found to be clear of any issues.
"2 counties had preloaded numbers in GA only caught after the recounts."
?
The only issue with voting machines were the ones caused by Trump voters.
How many socks are you going to run today, Shrike?
Whats really funny is above they are claiming the recounts proved there were no errors when 2 counties had preloaded numbers in GA only caught after the recounts.
I'd love to learn more about this, but I can't find anything.
recounting with the same machine is not the same as a hand recount and that is all that they ever did. Also not excluding all the false signature votes which is a separate issue from the fact that the voting machine software was updateable at any time which means the software can be changed at any time so even if you have source code it would prove little to nothing. Yes some of teh conspiracies were looney but there is still enough shown variance to show that there was something wrong
"recounting with the same machine is not the same as a hand recount and that is all that they ever did."
Really? I found many articles about hand recounts confirming voting machine results. Fake news?
"The same judge who didn’t allow discovery and ruled on falsity of facts."
Do you have a citation to back up this claim?
Also, of course even if this judge were biased there are appeals courts aplenty.
Fox was likely threatened by the Biden administration. They do that a lot.
This comment is as irrelevant as it is paranoid.
"Do you have a citation to back up this claim?"
Not only is Shrike running four, but even White Mike's socking. This narrative must be super important.
Are you sure you want to rest your entire argument on the allegation that the judge "didn't allow discovery"?
There is an actual public record of what the judge did or did not do, you know...
It doesn't matter. The point isn't to make an actual case that persuades people open to considering facts and forming an opinion. It's to present a bunch of lies the kool-aid drinkers can choose to accept uncritically in order to give them something to cling to. Ironically, that's exactly what Fox have just copped to doing, and settled for a billion dollars.
Not only that, but because Fox News got their viewers all riled up and emotional about election fraud, facts and logic won't change their minds. That's why this court ruling won't make a difference. The people who insist that the machines were rigged will continue to insist they're rigged because you can't reason someone out of what they feel to be true.
No, it means that the conspiracy is so deep and powerful that no evidence can be surfaced to prove it's true. But us really clever imbeciles "know" it's true, so it must be true.
Was there any proof that Dominion was not part of the conspiracy, or did Fox News just admit to not having proof? Those are completely different things. The conspiracy could still be true because Dominion hasn't proved their innocence. All that happened was Fox News couldn't prove their guilt.
Not that I ever saw. Heck I didn't even see a half-*ss pretend investigation into the matter. I saw a lot of evidence that just got swept under the rug by name-calling it all a 'lie'. No one I heard of ever presented the running software or had it analyzed/investigated. No one pulled an IP log to counter the IP log by pillows.
Nope; The evidence was all countered with just name-calling, finger-pointing and labels.... What a great justice system we live in. Another viewing of the movie 'idiocracy' anyone?
Sarc is a true libertarian. Truth is determined by narrative and government. Cleanest election ever. No fraud ever.
I actually want to hear from one of these guys explaining why election software should be proprietary.
Why shouldn't it be? You're going on about "true libertarians." I'd a thought such would think people can protect their property even if government uses it.
Using that narrative as anything libertarian is laughable. As there is nothing libertarian about exempting a plaintiff from discovery based on hiding IP.
You do know IP stands for Intellectual Property, right? Protecting property is kind of a libertarian thing.
I've been using IP for Internet Protocol.
As I recall, conservative commenter Steven Crowder tracked a few addresses of mail in ballots and found nothing. Literally, as in these were not places people lived. Now this doesn't mean anything regarding Dominion as their machines can't tell whether a ballot is invalid or not.
thats similar to what the Muller report about Trump and Russia concluded that the left relies on. Muller couldn't prove there was collusion but there could be what piece of shit that was.
Humorously; Russia advertising for a US political campaign radars above election integrity in lefty mainstream media. The Muller case was a F'En joke to begin with. OMG! public advertisements from Russia! The horror! /s
Better find a doctor you can trust, because a lot of them have proven they have 0 ethical integrity
https://twitter.com/RapSheet/status/1648404829079838725?t=skuMYX5o2upED0rx6YJVNQ&s=19
"Commotio cordis is the leading cause of death in youth athletes across all sports. That's something that I personally will be taking a step in to make a change."
#Bills S Damar Hamlin announces his comeback, details his condition & vows to help others:
[Link]
https://twitter.com/OliLondonTV/status/1648368835982925824?t=3t6VfVDTpD32-dIfuca4mg&s=19
Colorado becomes TRANS TOURIST safe haven.
New laws signed by the states democrat Governor Jared Polis mean that teens under the age of 18 from across the U.S. can travel to the state and undergo gender reassignment surgery and hormone replacement therapy without their parents or state being able to stop them.
Colorado law will now override the laws in a child’s home state meaning their parents or their home state will have no legal option to sue or file a lawsuit to prevent them from changing gender.
Source: Daily Mail
Jared Polis... so dreamy.
They'll cut off your kid's dick without telling you and brag about a "cabal" actively conspiring to "fortify" the election, but they'd never manufacture votes...
Joe Biden was totes the most popular political candidate in US history!
Wokie progtards were coming out in record to cast votes for the oldest white male in presidential election history. It really revved up voting participation when the old senile Pedo rapist hid in his basement for 99% of the general election. Versus a guy that was overflowing stadiums daily around the country who got 12 million more voted that the first time around. And it wasn’t at all suspicious when an incumbent got way more votes and still ‘lost’ when nothing close to that has ever happened.
It never occurs to you that Trump was polarizing and so his opponent could be an empty suit with a "Not Trump" sticker on his lapel and do very well? And of course the candidates got more votes, there was a pandemic thing and voting was easier than ever.
I was delighted Trump was polarizing to you. It meant he was over the right target.
So, here's the actual Daily Mail article (interestingly, the twitter link didn't supply it).
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-11983099/Colorado-state-OK-teen-transgender-treatment-tourism.html
It doesn't mention parents at all.
"teens under the age of 18 from across the U.S. can travel to the state"
How would a minor travel from across the country without a parent?
And that my friends is how you ensure your BS.....
When someone calls you a cheater; just poke a Gov-Gun at them in retaliation and call them a liar.
No need to prove anything. Projection sells; just ask the Democrat party.
1:36:00 video https://leadstories.com/hoax-alert/2021/02/fact-check-mike-lindell's-absolute-proof-video-promising-to-expose-election-fraud-is-full-of-false-and-unproven-claims.html
The Fact-Check….. Exactly as it was with Biden’s laptop…. “Lead Stories covered that article and explained how easily the screenshots !!#$!#@$??????could?????!#$@ be fabricated.”? What the F is that? Maybe it was just fabricated???
Russia fabricated!!!! /s No need to pull actual IP logs or determine it really is Hunter Bidens laptop at this time. /s
Tort law is pointing the Gov-Gun?
What's truly hilarious about this is that Fox itself thinks your "cheating" claims are silly, they *said so.* They literally said they would feed you what they thought was stupid because you'd like it. And you are mad at those who called them out for it!
Are you that fatfuck, Groomer Jeffy? You sound like one of his socks.
Keep your weird internet rivalries to yourself. I've made my points.
It's White Mike. He was sealioning upthread.
"claims are silly" ...................... BECAUSE "Fox said so".
Surely that's plenty enough evidence to SUE someone. /s
Holy crap ur retarded.
I would think that this might set an interesting precedent for news organizations that willingly carry false messages, buuuut I'm thinking not so much.
The rule of law was destroyed in 2020.
There is only friend or foe, kill or be killed now.
Yes. Far more money than that settlement can be made telling people what they want to hear, whether it is true or not.
And the physical evidence? Seems the only one's just doing the 'telling' on this subject are those running around calling all the evidence a 'lie' without even a pinch of physical evidence to back it up.
Physical evidence of what?
Pillows IP record. Suit-cases under tables. Mid-Term firmware updates. Live TV count drops. After hours counting.
But hey; why bicker over little details. EVERYONE saw a landslide In-Person victory get trampled by mail-in votes when all along mail-in voting was established as authentic because it matched in-person votes.
And what gets used to counter all that "Physical Evidence"??? Name-calling it all a lie.
Pillows IP record. Suit-cases under tables. Mid-Term firmware updates. Live TV count drops. After hours counting.
More Gish Gallop nonsense. I don't even know what "Pillows IP record" is supposed to mean. Some kind of reference to the pillow king?
Yeah... "Labeling" (name-calling) the evidence is definitely justice being served. /s
No actual effort to explain what you mean, then? When you list off a bunch of random things like you did, where I seem to be expected to already know what you are talking about, that isn't evidence. It's an attempt to overwhelm an opponent with things that they couldn't possibly be able to figure out and counter in an amount of time equal to what it took you state them. That's the point of what you're doing. Make me spend 30 minutes on each statement it took you 30 seconds to write, not to mention the need to even figure out what you are referring to.
And again; The logs
1:36:00 video https://leadstories.com/hoax-alert/2021/02/fact-check-mike-lindell's-absolute-proof-video-promising-to-expose-election-fraud-is-full-of-false-and-unproven-claims.html
Tailed by an article of the same ol BS...
"But, but, but; It could've been fabricated..." Therefore it's a 'lie'.
Name-calling justice at work.
It's right there in the article.
“Lead Stories covered that article and explained how easily the screenshots !!#$!#@$??????could?????!#$@ be fabricated.”?
Those logs exist somewhere and if those aren't them; It as easy as pie to pull them. NAW... Forget that... Just call these logs "could" be fabricated and call them a 'lie' from there... DECEITFUL NARRATION in the making.
Is this the same data that arbitrators ruled that Robert Zeidman proved "unequivocally did not reflect November 2020 election data" and ordered Lindell to pay the $5 million he had promised to anyone at his symposium that could prove him wrong? (Zeidman was the only expert that actually signed up for this contractual challenge at the symposium.) Probably not. What you are referring to was probably a different bit of random numbers put together with no indication of where it was supposedly coming from or how it was collected and analyzed. You know, things that would be fairly important to know if was actually going to be considered evidence by anyone even slightly skeptical.
You also keep referring to "name-calling", which is fairly rich coming from someone that has referred to people as "leftards" here.
it all depends on who is doing what lying now, not wether it is or is not factual or if its even of public interest to hear non factual stories
I like many who watch fox saw some of the conspiracies and determined for my self they were not supportable but at least FOX allowed them their say. when you don't allow some people their say you only increase the validity of said conspiracy.. and that is what I fine so bad about this outcome it is literally the silencing of opposing views and this will get carried over into the next pandemic or even the next election. the left has already said we don't have to debate the opposition just by calling them Liars or racist etc. Kari Lake already proved that.
when you don’t allow some people their say you only increase the validity of said conspiracy..
Actually, it can be a no-win scenario. Engage with conspiracy theories and that gives them attention they don’t deserve. Don’t engage with them, and they claim that their truth is being suppressed.
To be clear, a conspiracy theory is when an extraordinary claim is made AND part of the claim is that there are nefarious powers trying to hide the truth. Someone making a testable claim that then accepts that there could be facts that disprove it isn’t engaging in conspiracy thinking.
One day I think you’ll come around to realize that not airing allegations of conspiracy is always a net loss. I understand your concerns about giving them attention they don’t deserve. It’s the same reason we care about truth in reporting. Someone sees the initial story but not the correction.
However, this isn’t 1500. News doesn’t take months to travel. People can search for information within seconds. I don’t buy the argument that people will make themselves ignorant after hearing a single source. The internet is forever. You can’t eliminate dissent.
That forever-ness is the primary reason for allowing even the most unhinged conspiracies the light of day. Sunshine is the best disinfectant, but better yet, forever applies to both information and suppression. As soon as you start suppressing people who make untrue claims, you can’t take that back. They will point to that every time and harden people’s hearts with it. This is how Neo Nazis are made online. The reality of the Holocaust is one of the easiest arguments to make. It is arguably the best documented event in human history, but as soon as you suppress someone for questioning or denying it, they can say “you can’t believe their arguments because they won’t let us make ours.”
Censorship is a self defeating enterprise. It poisons the well we all drink from. Censorship is one of the only things on things on this planet that instantly transforms a serial liar into a truth teller. If someone truly is lying, please do not give in to the impulse to censor. Once you do, then can say you censored them for the rest of their lives. These might be the only true words to ever come out of their mouth, but they're the only true words that need to.
I don’t buy the argument that people will make themselves ignorant after hearing a single source. The internet is forever. You can’t eliminate dissent.
The internet is forever, but it is also a place where people can find exactly what they want to believe and dismiss what they don't want to believe. It isn't that people will make themselves ignorant after hearing a single source. The problem is when people pick a source because of some emotional or tribal association and exclude other sources from consideration. That is how conspiracy theories grow. People want to believe them, so they do despite all evidence and argument that they are false.
Long story short, I would never say that we should "suppress" conspiracy theories or other ideas. But we don't have to give everyone a megaphone, either. If they can obtain a megaphone on their own, that is their business. We also don't have to listen to them. We don't have to debate them if we think it would be a waste of time.
I've spent enough time debating creationists, climate change skeptics (and outright deniers), and others online that I come across the same false and fallacious arguments over and over again. Those people have had all of the opportunity in the world to correct their false beliefs. We don't need to give someone a platform to argue that there are no transitional fossils, thus evolution is false. That is not suppression. That is such and old and easily debunked argument that even bothering to engage with it is a waste of time.
If creationists want to make those claims on their own websites, post comments in public forums like this one, have their creationist museums, and what have you, even post on social media, that is their right and prerogative. But no one has to agree to debate them. No one has to publish their letters to the editor or opinion columns in their newspapers. No one has to have creationists on their talk shows.
It is not suppression or censorship to ignore a conspiracy theory and refuse to give it the legitimacy of engaging with it.
Not giving them a megaphone is suppression. You really don't dive into the dark corners of the internet, do you? You really think Neo Nazis are telling each other that they aren't being targeted because Twitter didn't formally ban them? Way too naive.
"Those people have had all of the opportunity in the world to correct their false beliefs."
This shows that your debating with these people is more centered around yourself and not who you're talking to. You're speaking to people anonymously online. You don't know who they are or their circumstances. If you really care for truth, why even inject subjective valuation into the process? I do not judge anyone for being incorrect. I address their claims fairly and directly because above all else, I want them to understand that no matter where they are mentally, I am not their enemy.
"The problem is when people pick a source because of some emotional or tribal association and exclude other sources from consideration. That is how conspiracy theories grow. People want to believe them, so they do despite all evidence and argument that they are false."
If this is how you approach someone who is misinformed, you become the reason conspiracy theories grow. The other person has no reason to trust or listen to you. You add another layer to the wall. You can't include people by excluding them.
Not giving them a megaphone is suppression. You really don’t dive into the dark corners of the internet, do you? You really think Neo Nazis are telling each other that they aren’t being targeted because Twitter didn’t formally ban them? Way too naive.
People that claim to be suppressed because someone won't hand them their megaphone can act like victims all they want. It won't make it true. It turns the right to free speech from a negative right (such as, the government can't limit your speech) into a positive right (someone must provide you with the means to distribute your speech). Libertarians generally don't agree with the existence of many positive rights, instead preferring to believe that people have rights that can't be interfered with. I sympathize with that, at least.
This shows that your debating with these people is more centered around yourself and not who you’re talking to. You’re speaking to people anonymously online. You don’t know who they are or their circumstances. If you really care for truth, why even inject subjective valuation into the process? I do not judge anyone for being incorrect. I address their claims fairly and directly because above all else, I want them to understand that no matter where they are mentally, I am not their enemy.
It depends on the details of the interaction. I see someone post something expressing disdain for "evolutionists" because they are evil, anti-God commies and talking about how they didn't come from monkeys because there are still monkeys, I'm not going to waste my time with any kind of response at all, because they have already shown that they will only ever see me as an enemy. My only hope would be that remaining civil will show their ridiculousness for what it is.
On the other hand, if I have no reason to form a judgement yet of their thinking or intention, I may engage civilly to see how it goes. Or I might move on to something else depending on what else I have to do with my time.
So, of course it is centered around myself. It is my time to use as I choose, so I will only use it in a way that satisfies something I want. One of the things I want is for people to be more informed about science and to use skeptical thinking more often in all contexts, and to challenge myself to see if I am as informed and rational as I think I am. That is my motivation when I engage in any discussion online. I hope that I leave them with something positive, but like every person everywhere, I still look to myself and my wants and needs first.
If this is how you approach someone who is misinformed, you become the reason conspiracy theories grow. The other person has no reason to trust or listen to you.
No, it is about priorities. No one can change my mind on anything, not because I am not open, but because it is my mind. Only I can change it. I am just recognizing the reality of human psychology here.
You are suggesting that I meet someone halfway that hasn't yet shown a willingness to move an inch in my direction. A far better use of my time is to expend that energy on someone that is ready to actually meet me in the middle. Then they will be in a better position to influence those farther away from my thinking, if I can at least convince them to consider my point of view sincerely.
The various government entities in the US have outsourced vote counting to a private company, Dominion. Since fair elections are one of the most important obligations of any democracy, the contract with Dominion should require full transparency of Dominion's vote counting algorithm, i.e. a full audit. Cancel the contracts and start over.
With a full and honest audit of the source code at least some faith can be restored in the process.
Remember Athens
So few do
What is a vote counting algorithm? "If the ballot scan indicates a vote for Trump, add 1 to the total for Trump. If the ballot scan indicates a vote for Biden, add 1 to the total for Biden..."? I assume you think that the machines were programmed to give Trump votes to Biden instead, and that examining the machines will prove that.
https://youtu.be/urglg3WimHA?t=73
Surely you posted the actual code to show your claims. Right?
Why would I have access to the code? I am making an assumption that the 'algorithm' for counting the results as the machine scans them is to simply tally the results, because that is what it needs to do. I suppose there could be some other error-checking data being collected simultaneously, but I don't know. And I don't know because the code would need to be secure, duh. You all really should think about what your claims actually are and how anyone could tell whether they had any credible evidence to back them up. If you really believe that there was super-secret code built into the software running the machines to rob Trump, then how would you prove that?
Unfortunately they don't do that, ironiclly otherwise there would be no programing required would there, so why is there programing then. You may want to ask yourself that question
Obviously, the corrupt judge prevented Fox from conducting any discovery:
"Beyond opening up its books, answering dozens of interrogatories, and producing millions of pages of its business records, Dominion provided its source code to Fox's expert Dr. Seth Nielson, as well as its own expert Dr. Aviel Rubin. Following review of that source code, Dr. Rubin concluded: We were unable to detect any mechanism or functionality for switching votes, deleting votes, or manufacturing additional fraudulent votes.
Vote manipulation algorithms or interfaces for users to manually
change votes were not found in any of Dominion's tabulation software (ICC, ICP and ICX) which count votes and generate election results.
In response, no Fox expert has identified any vote-manipulating algorithm in the source code or any other Dominion document because none exists."
https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/redacted-documents-in-dominion-fox-news-case/dca5e3880422426f/full.pdf
You didn’t catch that that review was done by Dominion’s expert huh?
Dominion provided its source code to Fox’s expert Dr. Seth Nielson, as well as its own expert Dr. Aviel Rubin
Dr. Rubin concluded….. What happened to Dr. Seth Nielson?
Sorry, I'm not going to do all the research for you. What I quoted was from Dominion's filing (which I linked to), not Fox's. I have no idea what Nielson's findings were, apart from what Dominion's filing said: "no Fox expert has identified any vote-manipulating algorithm in the source code or any other Dominion document because none exists."
Feel free to dig it out and share it with us.
Surely you see the logical error in making an argument where the only standard of truth you accept is one that nobody is capable of providing, lest for Dominion who is not obligated to provide complete access and did no such thing.
Was the source code provided to this supposed Fox expert even the source code in effect during the election?
Read about J. Alex Halderman.
What are you on about? Dominion wasn't the only party doing discovery. I've seen the public docket--Fox deposed several Dominion employees, so if Fox had any complaints about the discovery process I'm sure they would have raised them before trial. I didn't see any of that.
We have to assume, therefore, that Fox had all the access to Dominion's files and information that Dominion had of Fox's (which was a shed-load). There's no reason I've heard to believe that Fox's expert did not have all the access to the Dominion source code Fox had asked for. But if Fox didn't ask, well, that's the way the adversarial court system works in the US: if you snooze, you lose.
And yet none of this information is available and none of the claims will be aired for the public record. Curious that.
I think everyone is committing a grave logical error in projecting weakness on Fox for settling. Why did Dominion accept a settlement in the first place? If you think that's a sign of a weak case, that goes both ways.
Like I said above, actually making the "source code" public would be a security threat in itself. I would expect that anyone seeking that other than government agencies that explicitly have the authority to examine voting technology, would have to show that there was already a strong reason to doubt that the machines were accurate. Such as, by there being hand counts that differed from the official machine counts by more than pre-determined acceptable margins.
The Antrim County results that concerned one of the early fraud claims, showed the certified results (Dominion machine counted) of 15,949 votes cast to within 0.07% of the hand recount of all ballots. (Differences can be from things like stray marks on ballots interfering with the optical scan, so no machine is going to be perfect. Mandatory hand recounts are triggered in most states when a race is within 0.5% or so anyway, both to double check machine errors and human errors.)
Murdoch has embarked his lawyers to New Zealand to be fed to the Kraken.
Fuck off Shrike and quit sockpuppeting.
When a judge is so obviously corrupt that he blocks discovery and rules on falsity of facts, your only option is to settle before he gets to rule.
You Trump Cultists just cannot break free from the Lure of The Dotard.
You worship him. He is your idol, your reason to exist.
You’re a pedophile who is a lapdog for George Soros. So go kill yourself.
You can always spot a leftard by their bully mentality.
No point, no subject, nothing worthwhile to say; just name-calling.
Because for them; It's not about principles. It's all about the [WE] mob RULES!
By "so obviously corrupt" I assume you mean anyone not a right wing shill like Kacsmaryk.
How was Kacsmaryk a right-wing shill, British Shrike?
Your own fucking link disproved that lie yesterday.
Do you have more "lines to read between" for us? Are there more secret dogwhistles that only you can hear?
Uhh... what link?
And that judge wrote a "decision" that no one is trying to defend. Except you apparently.
Maybe you don't think "opening up its books, answering dozens of interrogatories ... producing millions of pages of its business records, [and] Dominion provid[ing] its source code" qualifies as "discovery"?
I am amazed that Fox held out as long as they did. It seemed pretty clear from the information leaking out that Fox was in a bad position. I think their mistake was holding out. Fox lawyers were at the deposition and knew what the card were, they could have settled earlier and saved the company some embarrassment.
Just obey the the state like the little bitch that you are.
Obeying the state might be embarrassing, but obeying Fox after it said you were stupid?
They held out until the judicial requirements of trial declaring what the facts would be during trial. They were disallowed any form of defense. But clap along like a trained seal.
Many of us called this outcome when the judges orders were issued.
Waaa, that means judge based decisions on facts and not righteous political anger!
Care to share those... So far the 'facts' have been nothing at all except endless name-calling..
The facts are, as internal emails and depositions show, is that FoxNews knew there was no election interference, or vote fraud, or rigged election. But they kept spreading the lie anyway to people like you.
The Faithful have switched the burden of proof. Doesn't matter that The Steal cannot be proven. What matters is that there's no proof that it didn't happen. Because that is an impossible bar to meet, The Faithful will never be convinced that The Steal did not happen.
Heck; I'd just be happy on the pillows subject if another person besides Pillow pulled / got a hold of the IP-logs during the election and shows pillows ?could? of fabricated it.
It would so easy for any legitimate person to counter the pillows logs yet they don't WHY????? All they do is keep insisting that physical evidence is just a 'lie'... That' it... That's all they've been doing is calling everything (physical evidence) a lie without a single piece of physical evidence to counter-claim it.
You might want to consider not putting bourbon in your coffee. 😉
"that FoxNews knew there was no election interference, or vote fraud, or rigged election"
How does Fox News know that? Did they investigate the claims?
Not that I've ever heard of...
Funny how there's so much faith in Fox News all of the sudden from the same BS'ers that keep knocking it all the time.
They held out until the discovery process (which you think never happened) revealed things Fox had withheld from Dominion's lawyers.
Actually, it was a separate lawsuit filed by a former Fox employee which revealed that Fox had withheld material information from Dominion's lawyers during this lawsuit.
Once that came to light last week, Fox settling the Dominion lawsuit became even more likely.
Fox was not allowed to access the code.
The premise of the case--that Dominion had not falsified results was taken as granted, without proof. Fox was denied discovery on the matter.
How can a case of defamation over false election results even be had when the judge refuses the question being allowed in the first place?
Another loyal member of the "denied discovery" brigade climbs over the top...
Happy reading!
“Beyond opening up its books, answering dozens of interrogatories, and producing millions of pages of its business records, Dominion provided its source code to Fox’s expert Dr. Seth Nielson, as well as its own expert Dr. Aviel Rubin. Following review of that source code, Dr. Rubin concluded: We were unable to detect any mechanism or functionality for switching votes, deleting votes, or manufacturing additional fraudulent votes.
Vote manipulation algorithms or interfaces for users to manually change votes were not found in any of Dominion’s tabulation software (ICC, ICP and ICX) which count votes and generate election results.
In response, no Fox expert has identified any vote-manipulating algorithm in the source code or any other Dominion document because none exists.”
https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/redacted-documents-in-dominion-fox-news-case/dca5e3880422426f/full.pdf
I've made $1250 so far this week working online and I'm a full time student. I'm using an online business opportunity I heard about and I'AM made such great money. It's really user friendly and I'm just so happy that I found out about it. Here's what I do,for more information simply.
Open this link thank you.................>>> http://www.jobsrevenue.com
The LURE of The Dotard......
https://twitter.com/MysteryGrove/status/1648473942947155968?t=hmZFE7QGCvJ56G3cPgdyjg&s=19
Zero arrests made for this btw, it's unlikely there was even a police investigation for organized arson and rioting. Meanwhile in Charlottesville they're charging people for carrying tiki-torches 6 years ago.
Literally every lib supports this arrangement btw
[Link]
Holy shit, the "Literally every lib supports this arrangement btw" is right there in the first comment!
Fatass Donnie - "COVID is a hoax, 1% GDP is the greatest economy ever, I won the 2020 election" and his Cult hangs on every word while worshipping him like Second Coming of Jeeby.
Back to lying in general I see.
His cult would crucify Jesus again if he actually did return to earth.
What's that? The 'cult' of De-Regulation? The 'cult' of the Land of the Free instead of a Nazi-Empire?
The cult of trump that lives in an alternate reality.
The reality of where the USA is isn't some 'alternate' universe.
Leftard projection 101.
https://twitter.com/feelsdesperate/status/1648463552515289089?t=YdzixSypZ-mr5tbxj0K49Q&s=19
The media narration and production is totally predictable.
The specificity of the inciting event is essentially meaningless; they are constantly looking for something that can be shoe horned into a favored ideological tableau.
…
…
A lot of *news* feels staged, like they have everything set up and are ready to go, but are just waiting on a real world event with sufficient circumstantial fidelity.
…
…
Sometimes the events are real or true and sometimes they’re fake.
But even if unrealities are revealed the ideological monotony will continue unabated:
‘America is a racist country that kills Black people!’
…
…
I’m not inured to violence and tragedy.
We’re supposed to be countrymen and to care what happens to each other.
But gnashing teeth and rending garments over these little spectacles?
While we ignore and dissemble over Philly and Chicago approaching 30 year murder highs?
…
…
Is it me or are they pursuing the apocryphal Stalin thing, ‘one death a tragedy, a million a statistic,’ in earnest?
…
…
If you want to make a case for a systemic cause of the murder of black people in 2023, the obvious answer is willfully ignoring where these murders mostly occur and forgoing what can be done to prevent them.
[Link]
I certainly hope all the lefties taking victory laps over this settlement also agree that WaPo and CNN knew they were lying about the interaction between Eric Sandmann and the drum-beating Vietnam War veteran at the Lincoln Memorial and that those outlets lied with malicious intent, right? Otherwise they wouldn't have settled out of court, right?
Right?
That would seem a reasonable supposition to me. I watched the Sandman videos and it seemed obvious to me what had happened (which was contrary to how various lefty news companies had portrayed it).
Man alive, that is some powerful koolaid when you freely admit your favorite television news station peddles information which everyone involved knew had no basis in truth but you still go to bat for them because you've concocted an alternative definition of the word "lie" in your mind requires affirmative knowledge of falseness. Bertrand Russell would like to sell these people a teapot.
How's it everyone knew?? Nothing has countered the presented evidence at all. This is ridiculous.
Everyone at Fox knew (or had reckless disregard for the truth). They said so. In discovery. Repeatedly.
Perfect illustration of the "slope" mentality: allow absolutely no adverse facts to penetrate your skull. Remain asleep, or to put it in colloquial terms, remain "slope".
Fox said so....... Everything Fox says is iron clad!!! /s
Just a big fat NEVER-MIND to any actual evidence being shown.
Ah, you probably were never told what Fox’s “on-air personalities” said off air.
"In a text on November 9, Carlson referenced Powell’s Dominion claims, commenting, “The software shit is absurd.” (Carlson then said on television that night, “We don’t know anything about the software that many say was rigged. We don’t know. We ought to find out.”)"
Here’s some fun reading (esp. p.23-28):https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23731963-dominion_3-21-23_hearing_slides-used-at-hearing_redacted
Fox said so……. Everything Fox says is iron clad!!! /s
Apparently you don't mind when your favorite news station out and out lies to you, as long as the lies conform to whatever you want to believe, but lying in a courtroom to a judge (i.e. under oath), is a crime. Everything you say in that context must be iron-clad. Our legal process does not deal in "alternative facts".
Just a big fat NEVER-MIND to any actual evidence being shown.
There is no actual evidence. That is the root of the controversy, but not the ripe element in this case, because Fox freely admitted there was no evidence. Both parties agreed before the case began that there was no evidence. The only matter in question was whether it met a standard of "actual malice". That particular part was never litigated, so we'll never know which way that would have flipped, but the lack of evidence isn't and has never been in controversy.
There *is* actual evidence all over the place. Not only one's mentioned in my other comments but by the very fact In-Person voting ran at complete odds with mail-in.
Bigoted Ignorance is all your selling.
And the comment above you; all "he said, she said" hearsay arguments.
ZERO legitimacy presented by either replies.
There was and is no "presented evidence". That's why Fox settled. If they had actual evidence, they'd have produced it and laughed all the way to the bank as they collected attorney fees from Dominion.
Because something is not proven does not mean it has been dis-proven. Everything possible was done to keep those voting machines from being audited. There was also lots of other stuff. Ballot stuffing, ballot curing, lost USB drives, shredded ballots, voting for incompetents.
Why is any voting machine hooked up the the Internet? A voting machine should do one thing, have one function, to total votes. That is it.
Just because the prosecution hasn't proven guilt doesn't mean the accused didn't do it. Best to keep them in jail until they can prove their innocence. That's what lovers of liberty do.
Oh I know... Sue the accusers instead... Yeah; That will definitely prove innocence right? right? It's all but a deflection case.
If Dominion was legitimate they'd present their innocence to the public. The fact they refuse to present any authentication but instead chose to attack the accusers is deflection 101 and most of the time deflection is a knee-jerk response of a guilty party.
You're switching the burden of proof.
There's a reason why people are considered innocent until proven guilty. That's because it is impossible to prove innocence because the person demanding proof will drag the goalposts to infinity.
Dominion provides service and part of that service is to show the job is done to the customers satisfaction. It's a completely manipulated and false-narrative to pretend it's innocent until proven guilty. It's guilty of not providing proof of authentication.
If Dominion provided proof of authentication, idiots like you would just move the goalposts and demand something else. It's smarter to just ignore you fools.
Have you stopped beating your wife?
Liberty Lover you speak as one with no real knowledge of the voting process. You have no idea if the work done to insure a safe and accurate vote count. I suggest you volunteer to work the polls as many other in you community do and learn something of the process.
BTW - no liberty lover would want to do away with the election system and just appoint a President.
It's done so well just one recount had a disparity of over 6,000 votes...
Yeah; keep selling that sh*t./s
Got a citation for that recount? Most recounts change the vote less than 500, usually by a lesser number.
Here https://www.ajc.com/politics/recount-finds-thousands-of-georgia-votes-missing-from-initial-counts/ERDRNXPH3REQTM4SOINPSEP72M/
Dominion over US
You can’t make this stuff up. Do they laugh in our faces? Was the name Dominion chosen to prove their dominion?
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/dominion-over-us
Spamalicious comment there, "ScientificRegress"!!!
Excellent example of how the crosschecks employed by election workers detect and correct human errors. Thanks for bringing it to our attention.
Only after a recount was ordered.
This is true. There are people from both parties present throughout to watch each other. They might team up to fuck third parties, but they leave each other alone.
Not sure how we have devolved into a one-sided justice system. Example after example it is very apparent that the left is given a pass and the right is targeted.
I observe this as an independent, so I don't have any vested interest in either side of the uni-party. I dislike both sides, but I'm also not blind to the joke our justice system, our corporate media and politicians have become.
Even before the pandemic and the surge of authoritarian policies, we were headed down this disastrous path. If we continue down this path we will become a dystopian nightmare.
Reason: The championing of "democracy". The ideology of [WE] mob RULES! while completely ignoring the Supreme Law.
Guaranteed to establish gangland politics.
Example after example? Please share 3 with us. I double-dog dare you to try to find that many.
Here’s Fox’s own coverage of the settlement:
https://www.foxnews.com/media/fox-news-media-dominion-voting-systems-reach-agreement-over-defamation-lawsuit
I like how they made the focus of the story about the judge praising Fox’s lawyers for their professionalism.
Boaf sidez!
The judge didn't single out Fox's lawyers, but I'm sure they were pretty good if they saved their client from blowing multiple billions on a full jury trial--likely to go against Fox.
So Fox paid for the mistakes it made. Other media never pays for what they do daily.
But in all honesty it must be pointed out that at least Fox used their own money. The Bidens use tax money, yours and mone, to pay off Ukraine for Hunter's corruptness.
Forget it, Bo, it’s D.C. Town.
Remodeling $700 on a daily basis with my telephone part-time. currently I’ve gotten my fifth record for $19,632 and each one I’ve created has over up duplicating and pasting pictures online. Fv10 This trade builds american kingdom able to make further money daily for clear aiming and jobs and additionally the quality earnings are simply awesome…
See this article for more information————————>>>usdtpay
Trump doesn't use his own money, either. He uses yours!
The Trump for 2024 Campaign Committee called. They want you to send another donation so they can keep using your money.
Fox shouldn't have settled. What the hell were they thinking? Fox still may have lost at trial, but unlikely it would be anywhere near that amount, and what's worse is that their enemies will hold this over their head at every turn.
I looked over the list of statements that Dominion considered defamatory. The worst of them were made by guests on Fox News, like Rudy Giuliani, not by the hosts. So Dominion should have been suing him instead, but they figure Fox News has a lot more money.
If you think a jury would have restrained itself from sticking the boot into ol' Rupert, well, okay...
Dominion did sue Rudy, and Mike Lindell and Sydney Powell. Both cases are still working their way through the courts.
It's fortunate for Fox that you don't run their legal department.
You know how damages work, right? If you ignore early attempts to settle a case you obviously aren't going to win, you're going to pay for it when you lose.
At the point where it is established that there is no point going to trial because you don't have a defence, it's best to settle. Going on after that leads to exemplary damages, sanctions, costs awards, and so-on.
If Fox went to trial (and lost, obviously, that's unquestionable at this point), Dominion would have ended up owning Fox.
I understand why they settled from a business perspective, but it sets a very dangerous precedent of using lawfare to dismantle 1A. Ironically, the settlement makes Dominion even more suspect because they have repeatedly politicized the process and failed to acknowledge their imposition. If the company truly cares about free and fair elections and the ever nebulous “democracy,” this assault on 1A isn’t how you preserve those institutions. It’s especially weird how they’re spinning a settlement as Fox admitting wrongdoing when it did no such thing. When corps get this defensive and this political, they’re breaching fiduciary duty. I wouldn’t be surprised if these highly political attacks by Dominion become another Streisand effect and cause additional investigations and allegations against them.
Dominion alleged that Fox knew the information was inaccurate and is liable. That requires such a flagrant intrusion into ones mind that it calls the entirety of 1A into question. We have now established that if we’re convinced something is incorrect, that alone is grounds to compel speech and demand corrective action. Keep in mind that the issues regarding Dominion are not settled science. They are allegations of conspiracy that are near impossible to prove and unfortunately, the necessary investigations have not, cannot, and will not take place any time soon.
The fact that this is a case, but none of the networks were held liable for the Russia hoax and pissgate, is all you really need to know. I’m willing to give the TDSers a fair shake and say they just really hated Trump. It’s hard to accept limited information when you distrust the source, but as evidence mounted, their TDS blinded them from the truth. I am not suggesting these networks should be held liable for the past, but certainly could be under this precedent.
The outcome is very chilling and should scare anyone who cares about 1A. 1A doesn’t say “free speech but only for statements universally accepted as truth, subject to change.” It is a complete perversion of a free press to demand that the press operate on limited, public information and then be liable to civil, reputational, and potentially criminal punishment because the sole party who possesses such information is under no obligation to provide it. This is literally saying investigative journalism is not protected speech. Very sad that Fox didn’t fight and even sadder that you can beat the press into submission with money and lawfare.
Side note: it's really creepy how many people these days use settlements as evidence of proof. Even Snopes can't say Trump did anything with Stormy Daniels other than be in the vicinity of her and take one picture in public.
Anyone with half a brain that has ever conducted even rudimentary research on defamation knows that the specious claims against Trump, a politician, are a different matter than the specious claims against Dominion, a private corporation. Trump is a pubic figure. Please do a bit of research before commenting and embarrassing yourself again.
Completely missed the point. I'm talking about the spirit of 1A. There shouldn't be a difference at all. Please use your brain before dismissing the reality that a news organization was forced to pay for airing content it did not fully agree with.
They are legally a different matter in the US.
Whether that ought to be the case is a different question.
It seems to me that people should be treated equally under the law, regardless of whether they are famous or not.
In fact, defamation of a politician not only harms the politician, it harms the public. And courts would be a good place to get at the truth of statements about politicians.
Private persons are not subject to the 1st Amendment; Dominion's case proceeded under the existing Supreme Court rules on defamation. And even if it had been some new "lawfare" attack on the 1st Amendment, this case was settled, so it sets no "precedent" in any way.
When you say, "the sole party who possesses such information is under no obligation to provide it," you seem to be under the convenient impression that Dominion was not subject to discovery, thus denying Fox the ability to prove what Dominion was doing.
You might wish to read up on civil discovery in US federal courts. The parties are not allowed to conceal any evidence which the other party considers relevant to the case, and a magistrate judge is on hand to make sure that they don't. A party found to have done it anyway can be sanctioned, and any lawyers found to have participated in it risk being disbarred.
Don't be so literal. I didn't use precedent in a legal sense. I mean it in a real world sense. You don't think pressuring Fox into settling doesn't create an expectation that other news organizations can be subjected to the same standards? That's naive.
Dominion was subject to discovery, but it's a matter of public record that the judge did not allow Fox to argue that the allegations were newsworthy.
The underlying legal question was whether Fox knew the information was not true. Fox could not have known it was not true as it did not possess the necessary information at that time. That's what I meant about the party that possesses the info (Dominion) is not obligated to provide it. Discovery is meaningless here. I know how it works. Besides, earlier on, the judge sanctioned Fox for the very same reason you described. I'm not talking about discovery. Dominion is a private company. They only had to provide certain information once legal proceedings reached that point. At the time the allegations were aired, they were under no obligation to provide information.
This is why I feel this is a major 1A issue. Defamation requires understanding of one's state of mind when speaking. The only reason we're here today talking about this trial is because those claims were made in the first place. This near-trial and hefty settlement will make any news organization think twice before airing contested claims.
Two of the things the Judge said, and I quote, is "Just because someone is newsworthy doesn't mean you can defame someone" and "It's a publication issue, not a who-said-it issue." He can't be any more wrong about the spirit of 1A in these two statements. If this is going to become a legal standard, it means you can't have guests you disagree with. It also means that you can't discuss contested claims because the necessary facts are not known at the time. Does this mean you can sue a news organization for reporting your arrest, even if the charges are later dropped or you are exonerated? Could Al Capone claim defamation? After all, we only got him on tax evasion.
They weren't lying after all !!!
Dominion over US
You can’t make this stuff up. Do they laugh in our faces? Was the name Dominion chosen to prove their dominion?
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/dominion-over-us
Dude, give the number of your dealer. I want some of the dope you're taking.
Surely the biggest threat to Dominion is showing for a fact that they are authentic. So much of a threat they find the need to witch-hunt accusations.
That alone should be all one needs to know about the ?integrity? of Dominion.
#BelieveAll
WomenRight-WingNewsChannels?Wow, the contortions of some of the commenters to turn this Fox face-plant into something other are pretty funny. Of course this payment is a drop in the bucket for Fox. They'll go on doing whatever gets them ratings with their audience. Propping up the existing beliefs of your audience gets the best ratings on any side. Fox just has to lie more than most other media outlets (they all distort to some extent) to reinforce the beliefs of their audience.
Here's an excerpt about where Sydney Powell got some of her voter fraud theories:
"Trump-allied lawyer Sidney Powell sent Fox an email full of wild claims from a woman claiming to be a decapitated time-traveler, according to a recent court filing.
Excerpts of the message formed part of a filing from Dominion Voting Systems released on Thursday in its defamation case against Fox.
Bartiromo said during her deposition for the case that she was aware of the email, and called it "nonsense," per Dominion's filing.
During that November 8 appearance neither Powell nor Bartiromo mentioned the email, but gave credence to the allegation that election fraud was taking place and Dominion was helping."
A legal settlement under the circumstances tells you nothing about "the truth" about voting software; Fox had little choice but to settle, they were severely hampered even in discovery.
While I don't think that the specific allegations of fraud against Dominion were correct, I know of no information about any of the voting software companies that would make me want to trust them.
The truth is that using software, let alone closed source software with dubious user interfaces, in supposedly free and fair elections is an outrage.
The truth is that anybody who defends the use of such software is an enemy of a free society based on the rule of law.
Yes, Jacob, that means you.