How Fox News works

[Homercles 10,206]

Coming soon, the esteemed voting products company D.O. Minion

[David Dennison 19,572]

1 hour ago, Bullneck said:

Just came here to post this.  Seems like Smartmatic can deal the Death Blow

And that would be . . . ?

[TwiceHorn 32,119]

7 hours ago, Pig Bellmont said:

No- the action has to arise under federal law or constitutional right. A defense invoking that won’t trigger federal jurisdiction 

 

Also, (if you have a removal right) time to remove is usually limited to 30 days after you receive notice of suit. You can’t just appeal to SCOTUS because you don’t like the result of your state trial 

This is all true, but you don't need federal question jurisdiction, or diversity, in the trial court to reach the Supreme Court.

(a)

Final judgments or decrees rendered by the highest court of a State in which a decision could be had, may be reviewed by the Supreme Court by writ of certiorari where the validity of a treaty or statute of the United States is drawn in question or where the validity of a statute of any State is drawn in question on the ground of its being repugnant to the Constitution, treaties, or laws of the United States, or where any title, right, privilege, or immunity is specially set up or claimed under the Constitution or the treaties or statutes of, or any commission held or authority exercised under, the United States.

The First Amendment aspects of actual malice/public figure doctrine are enough to potentially grant cert from the highest court of Delaware, here.

But it's probably not a real good case for it, because nutbag shitheel Thomas wants to do away with  public figure/actual malice, which wouldn't help Fox at all here.  And, unless the trial court took it away from the jury via summary judgment or JMOL, it would wind up being a less than ideal vehicle as a jury finding.

Edited April 18, 2023 by TwiceHorn

[bolverk 30,388]

Fox lies to its viewers because they want to be lied to.

 

Fox News Lost the Lawsuit but Won the War

The network will pay $787.5 million to Dominion Voting Systems as the price of retaining its audience.

By David A. Graham

It isn’t often that winning $787.5 million is an underwhelming result. But then again, the defamation case of the century doesn’t come around often.

This afternoon, when opening statements were expected in a lawsuit by Dominion Voting Systems against Fox News, the parties announced a settlement with that astronomical figure. The other terms of the deal have not been made public. Dominion had sought $1.6 billion from Fox for lies the network broadcast about the company, which manufactures election equipment, after the 2020 election.

For Fox, the result is costly but bearable. Documents produced in discovery in the case show that Fox saw the aftermath of the election as an existential threat, as members of its audience defected to competitors. Today, Fox’s primacy within right-wing media has been restored and those competitors have faded. The network lost the lawsuit, but it survived and won the war.

Dominion’s choice to settle comes as a great disappointment to many critics of Fox, and is also probably a smart financial decision. For the critics, this case was about democracy and disinformation and provided an opportunity to hold Fox accountable for years of broadcasting hogwash. For Dominion, it was primarily about business. No matter how lofty the language its spokespeople used, the company didn’t sue to fix the American media landscape.

Imagine if the case had gone to trial, Dominion had won the full $1.6 billion, and then the matter had been caught up in years of costly appeals and wrangling. At best, Dominion would have been able to recover the money years from now; at worst, the award might have been reduced or thrown out altogether. Wiser to take the cash on offer. Whether or not Fox has to make some public apology, the network will presumably be very careful not to defame Dominion again.

None of this is to dismiss the cost to Fox. The settlement is one of the largest defamation payouts in history, and amounts to nearly 6 percent of Fox’s total 2022 revenue. The last-minute sprint to settlement suggests that the company really did not want to put its stars or its executive chairman, Rupert Murdoch, on a witness stand in court. But for Fox, the nine-figure payout has turned out to be the cost of doing business and guaranteeing the network’s existence.

Before it settled, Dominion did the public a service by revealing so much about Fox’s inner workings through the lawsuit. We learned, for example, that the MAGA star Tucker Carlson “hate[d Donald Trump] passionately” and knew that the Trump lawyer Sidney Powell was “lying.” We learned that Murdoch deemed Trump’s lies about the election being stolen “crazy stuff.” Altogether, the evidence appeared to show that Fox knew well that it was broadcasting false and malicious material.

The discovery materials also explained why Fox did so: The company was terrified of losing its audience to smaller rivals such as One America News Network and Newsmax. In the immediate aftermath of the 2020 election, Fox was in the vanguard of reporting reality. It was the first network to call Arizona for Joe Biden, and thus to assert that he would defeat Trump. The network’s reporters, who tend to stick closer to the news than its talk-show hosts, debunked lies about fraud.

The result was an exodus of the viewers who had made Fox into the most powerful news organization in America and by far the leading cable outlet by ratings. For years, some liberals had believed that if Fox simply told the truth, its viewers would change their minds. Instead, they changed the channel.

Fox personalities and executives panicked as ratings fell. When one reporter fact-checked a Trump tweet about Dominion, Carlson called for her head. “Please get her fired,” he wrote in a text chat with Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham. “It needs to stop immediately, like tonight. It’s measurably hurting the company. The stock price is down. Not a joke.” Murdoch pushed journalists involved in calling the election for Biden out of Fox.

In their panicked state, Fox’s leaders may not have realized how costly these decisions could be—either to its own finances or to the country, as the January 6 insurrection demonstrated—but they must have understood that they were taking a risk. Fox executives calculated that they could afford to lose anything but their viewers, including a defamation case, and they seem to have been right.

As the discovery materials dribbled out, progressives crowed that Fox’s reputation would forever be damaged by the revelation that the channel was knowingly lying to its viewers. Perhaps on the margins that’s true, but hoping for widespread epiphany is naive. The people most likely to see the damaging information already distrust Fox. The network has pointedly avoided discussing the Dominion lawsuit on air (over the objections even of its top media reporter, Howard Kurtz), and many Fox viewers are so siloed that they are unlikely to hear much about the case. Moreover, it’s been clear for years to anyone who was interested in knowing that Fox lies to its viewers. The viewers either don’t care or refuse to recognize what’s going on.

If Fox can withstand the reputational damage and the monetary cost of the settlement, the real long-term damage from the suit may be that it revealed Fox to be much weaker than it appeared. One theory of Fox is that Roger Ailes recognized a latent interest in news from a conservative perspective and tapped into it. Another is that Fox has constructed a massive, nearly addicted viewership and persuaded it to adopt a particular political worldview. The truth is that these are interrelated: Conservatives were underserved by mass media, but Fox has shown its ability to whip that crowd up and to rally it around particular strains of conservatism.

But the sequence of Trump’s rise and the Dominion suit show that the network isn’t really in charge. Fox resisted Trump’s strain of conservatism at the start of his presidential run, but it was eventually forced to acquiesce. It initially resisted his election lies, but ultimately embraced them. The viewers hold the real power, and Fox is at their mercy. If even upstarts like OANN and Newsmax, with low production values, amateurish personalities, and shoddy content, could threaten Fox’s hold on its audience, then the channel remains vulnerable to challenges from further to the right.

That scares executives far more than any cadre of fancy defamation lawyers ever can—and the lengths that they might go to avoid losing their viewers should scare everyone else.

 

[TwiceHorn 32,119]

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

1 - Fox was going to be found liable.  That was a done deal.

2 - that doesn't mean that Dominion's damages model of $1.6 billion was a surefire winner.  In fact, the DAMAGES portion of the case actually did have plenty of holes that Fox could have poked in it.  So, Dominion easily could have had a result where they won on liability but got far less than $1.6 billion, including something well below $787 million.  

So, in terms of civil litigation (which this was), it's pretty damned close to a home-run for Dominion.  At least a standup triple.

Did we get the public humiliation of Fox by a final judgment that we wanted?  Nope.  Did we get the admission of liability that we wanted?  Nope.  But civil suits are, in the end, about money.  And Dominion just got a LOT of money.  A LOT.  Dominion is now perhaps the most successful voting systems company in history, by virtue of this judgment.

I wish we'd have seen Rupert skewered on the stand, and Fox found liable by public judgment.  But even Fox was smart enough that it was never gonna happen.

I'd be willing to bet Susman had this on some form of modified contingency, so cha ching for them as well.

[TwiceHorn 32,119]

3 hours ago, The Royal We said:

Right. In the same way that a fart in a tornado makes up a "degree" of the wind speed.

The only way this could potentially move the needle for people lost in the FNC sauce of bullshit was to see their nightly entertainers on the stand being grilled about purposeful lies. And that probably wouldn't even have done anything.

Fuck everything.

They wouldn't have seen that.  Fake news, deep state, all that shit.

As the article above points out, they're so siloed and inured to the truth nothing would matter except financially destroying Fox, and this wouldn't have done that under any circumstances.

[TexArcher 39,080]

1 hour ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

Yep.  This will not change a single aspect of their lying.  They’ll know to not put everything in emails and texts next time.

Dominion fucked our democracy by settling.

I don't get it.  I thought Dominion was out for blood.

Agree with others that this wouldn't have ruined Fox by any stretch.  Even the full $1.6B would have been affordable.  I just don't get settling for half when they could've gotten the whole number and embarrassed the shit out of the company that ruined their company.  I mean, they were right.  And they were gonna win.  Right?

[scottsins 2,047]

I don't get it.  I thought Dominion was out for blood.
Agree with others that this wouldn't have ruined Fox by any stretch.  Even the full $1.6B would have been affordable.  I just don't get settling for half when they could've gotten the whole number and embarrassed the shit out of the company that ruined their company.  I mean, they were right.  And they were gonna win.  Right?

Who knows if the damages model would have been validated y a jury…and then a judge…and then various appellate attacks, which by the way, would drag out any payment for many, many years, while incurring even more expenses for Dominion.

It’s weird, but not surprising, that so many people are substituting their judgment and analysis for those esteemed litigation professionals who made the call here.

[Brisketexan 107,053]

I don't get it.  I thought Dominion was out for blood.
Agree with others that this wouldn't have ruined Fox by any stretch.  Even the full $1.6B would have been affordable.  I just don't get settling for half when they could've gotten the whole number and embarrassed the shit out of the company that ruined their company.  I mean, they were right.  And they were gonna win.  Right?

They were going to win on liability. The damages theory to get to $1.6 was a stretch. It may not have worked with a jury, and not held up on appeal. A guaranteed $787 million vs a speculative $1.6 billion? Take the guaranteed money. Always.

[Captainant 28,613]

13 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

I don't get it.  I thought Dominion was out for blood.

Agree with others that this wouldn't have ruined Fox by any stretch.  Even the full $1.6B would have been affordable.  I just don't get settling for half when they could've gotten the whole number and embarrassed the shit out of the company that ruined their company.  I mean, they were right.  And they were gonna win.  Right?

They're a for profit corporation. They're out for profit. 

Never forget that. 

To them, profits matter more than democracy and truth. 

[TexArcher 39,080]

Okay, fair enough.  

So, Fox gets to keep lying to the public and help put Trump back into the Oval Office to precipitate the end of the world.

Cool.

[David Dennison 19,572]

3 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

Okay, fair enough.  

So, Fox gets to keep lying to the public and help put Trump back into the Oval Office to precipitate the end of the world.

Cool.

How would a trial have changed that? 

 

[burntorangebongos 10,826]

I heard the dominion CEO on NPR calling Fox news execs liars and being against democracy so the settlement did not include a non-disparagement agreement, that is for sure.

[StassneyHorn 6,790]

I haven’t paid too much attention, but Dominion’s lawyer is Justin Nelson, 2018 AG candidate against Ken Paxton. Lost by 3.5%. Austin resident.

[Beau Vine 55,901]

36 minutes ago, scottsins said:

It’s weird, but not surprising, that so many people are substituting their judgment and analysis for those esteemed litigation professionals who made the call here.

I have innate legal talent.  People are always coming up to me with tears in their eyes, and they say, "Sir, if you were a lawyer, you would the greatest bannister the legal profession has ever known."

[HornOnTheBayou 9,075]

7 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

I have innate legal talent.  People are always coming up to me with tears in their eyes, and they say, "Sir, if you were a lawyer, you would the greatest bannister the legal profession has ever known."

What does keeping people from falling off stairs have to do with your legal talent?

[Dnaguy 12,724]

1 hour ago, bolverk said:

Fox lies to its viewers because they want to be lied to.

 

Fox News Lost the Lawsuit but Won the War

The network will pay $787.5 million to Dominion Voting Systems as the price of retaining its audience.

By David A. Graham

It isn’t often that winning $787.5 million is an underwhelming result. But then again, the defamation case of the century doesn’t come around often.

This afternoon, when opening statements were expected in a lawsuit by Dominion Voting Systems against Fox News, the parties announced a settlement with that astronomical figure. The other terms of the deal have not been made public. Dominion had sought $1.6 billion from Fox for lies the network broadcast about the company, which manufactures election equipment, after the 2020 election.

For Fox, the result is costly but bearable. Documents produced in discovery in the case show that Fox saw the aftermath of the election as an existential threat, as members of its audience defected to competitors. Today, Fox’s primacy within right-wing media has been restored and those competitors have faded. The network lost the lawsuit, but it survived and won the war.

Dominion’s choice to settle comes as a great disappointment to many critics of Fox, and is also probably a smart financial decision. For the critics, this case was about democracy and disinformation and provided an opportunity to hold Fox accountable for years of broadcasting hogwash. For Dominion, it was primarily about business. No matter how lofty the language its spokespeople used, the company didn’t sue to fix the American media landscape.

Imagine if the case had gone to trial, Dominion had won the full $1.6 billion, and then the matter had been caught up in years of costly appeals and wrangling. At best, Dominion would have been able to recover the money years from now; at worst, the award might have been reduced or thrown out altogether. Wiser to take the cash on offer. Whether or not Fox has to make some public apology, the network will presumably be very careful not to defame Dominion again.

None of this is to dismiss the cost to Fox. The settlement is one of the largest defamation payouts in history, and amounts to nearly 6 percent of Fox’s total 2022 revenue. The last-minute sprint to settlement suggests that the company really did not want to put its stars or its executive chairman, Rupert Murdoch, on a witness stand in court. But for Fox, the nine-figure payout has turned out to be the cost of doing business and guaranteeing the network’s existence.

Before it settled, Dominion did the public a service by revealing so much about Fox’s inner workings through the lawsuit. We learned, for example, that the MAGA star Tucker Carlson “hate[d Donald Trump] passionately” and knew that the Trump lawyer Sidney Powell was “lying.” We learned that Murdoch deemed Trump’s lies about the election being stolen “crazy stuff.” Altogether, the evidence appeared to show that Fox knew well that it was broadcasting false and malicious material.

The discovery materials also explained why Fox did so: The company was terrified of losing its audience to smaller rivals such as One America News Network and Newsmax. In the immediate aftermath of the 2020 election, Fox was in the vanguard of reporting reality. It was the first network to call Arizona for Joe Biden, and thus to assert that he would defeat Trump. The network’s reporters, who tend to stick closer to the news than its talk-show hosts, debunked lies about fraud.

The result was an exodus of the viewers who had made Fox into the most powerful news organization in America and by far the leading cable outlet by ratings. For years, some liberals had believed that if Fox simply told the truth, its viewers would change their minds. Instead, they changed the channel.

Fox personalities and executives panicked as ratings fell. When one reporter fact-checked a Trump tweet about Dominion, Carlson called for her head. “Please get her fired,” he wrote in a text chat with Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham. “It needs to stop immediately, like tonight. It’s measurably hurting the company. The stock price is down. Not a joke.” Murdoch pushed journalists involved in calling the election for Biden out of Fox.

In their panicked state, Fox’s leaders may not have realized how costly these decisions could be—either to its own finances or to the country, as the January 6 insurrection demonstrated—but they must have understood that they were taking a risk. Fox executives calculated that they could afford to lose anything but their viewers, including a defamation case, and they seem to have been right.

As the discovery materials dribbled out, progressives crowed that Fox’s reputation would forever be damaged by the revelation that the channel was knowingly lying to its viewers. Perhaps on the margins that’s true, but hoping for widespread epiphany is naive. The people most likely to see the damaging information already distrust Fox. The network has pointedly avoided discussing the Dominion lawsuit on air (over the objections even of its top media reporter, Howard Kurtz), and many Fox viewers are so siloed that they are unlikely to hear much about the case. Moreover, it’s been clear for years to anyone who was interested in knowing that Fox lies to its viewers. The viewers either don’t care or refuse to recognize what’s going on.

If Fox can withstand the reputational damage and the monetary cost of the settlement, the real long-term damage from the suit may be that it revealed Fox to be much weaker than it appeared. One theory of Fox is that Roger Ailes recognized a latent interest in news from a conservative perspective and tapped into it. Another is that Fox has constructed a massive, nearly addicted viewership and persuaded it to adopt a particular political worldview. The truth is that these are interrelated: Conservatives were underserved by mass media, but Fox has shown its ability to whip that crowd up and to rally it around particular strains of conservatism.

But the sequence of Trump’s rise and the Dominion suit show that the network isn’t really in charge. Fox resisted Trump’s strain of conservatism at the start of his presidential run, but it was eventually forced to acquiesce. It initially resisted his election lies, but ultimately embraced them. The viewers hold the real power, and Fox is at their mercy. If even upstarts like OANN and Newsmax, with low production values, amateurish personalities, and shoddy content, could threaten Fox’s hold on its audience, then the channel remains vulnerable to challenges from further to the right.

That scares executives far more than any cadre of fancy defamation lawyers ever can—and the lengths that they might go to avoid losing their viewers should scare everyone else.

 

 

[bolverk 30,388]

Saw some speculation that we ought to expect a bunch of shareholder suits against Fox over this whole imbroglio and loss of $800 million.

[Hmbre97 6,337]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

They wouldn't have seen that.  Fake news, deep state, all that shit.

 

I'm not sure why everyone is up in arms about this. The real damage is all the boomers in this country hypnotized to ALL the bullshit Fox puts out there and even if they would have gotten destroyed in court/have to admit to lying/etc, those folks would just dismiss it as a deep state plot. 

It's the same with Trump. He's been caught red-handed doing all kinds of shit and it gets dismissed. This trial wouldn't have changed a thing.

[YGIFS 19,458]

20 minutes ago, HornOnTheBayou said:

What does keeping people from falling off stairs have to do with your legal talent?

Shut up, Floyd! Oh, barrister? 

[Rimbo 27,093]

Man, if y'all want to see some insanely bad takes on this, head over to Reddit. We're talking "This is a win for the Cubs" levels of bad.

[WhatTheBuck 28,943]

24 minutes ago, Dnaguy said:

 

 

[Dnaguy 12,724]

4 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

 

 

[The Dog 44,874]

[Gil Bang 26,269]

 

[horn4life 3,840]

Seems like today the only certainly about Fox News watchers is when it comes to Republicans, the clearly most likely scenario must be questioned.  And when it comes to Democrats the most unlikely is presented as possible fact.

I looked on Fox News  website for news of the biggest fucking settlement in media history... and way down the page there was an lie saying the Judge said both sets of Lawyers performed admirably... and no mention of a dollar amount.

Fox News hasn't been anything more that anti-American propaganda for a while.  But it will get you death threats for poll workers from... real Patriots...

[Bullneck 19,604]

2 hours ago, David Dennison said:

And that would be . . . ?

Different reasons altogether. . .

 

[Blotto 24,045]

1 hour ago, StassneyHorn said:

I haven’t paid too much attention, but Dominion’s lawyer is Justin Nelson, 2018 AG candidate against Ken Paxton. Lost by 3.5%. Austin resident.

Justin Nelson, a partner in the Houston law firm Susman Godfrey who also teaches at the University of Texas law school, was the 2018 Democratic nominee for Texas attorney general to challenge incumbent Republican Ken Paxton. 

 

 

Edited April 19, 2023 by Blotto

[atomheartbevo 90,692]

43 minutes ago, bolverk said:

Saw some speculation that we ought to expect a bunch of shareholder suits against Fox over this whole imbroglio and loss of $800 million.

They do have a bunch of Fox News emails and text messages from the evening personalities in the public record, that would show they were fucking around and openly pushing insane shit that led to the lawsuit.

[The Dog 44,874]

15 minutes ago, Gil Bang said:

 

It’s a big reason why they settled you stupid bitch. 

(Not you Gil)

[Rimbo 27,093]

Definitely lots of bad takes about this on the internet.

[Cairn Horn88 8,503]

I believe it would have been very advantageous for this to go to trial, instead of having Fox admit telling lies and just writing a check. However, Fox got out easy. Just think what would come out when we get to hear Carlson, Hannity, Ingraham and Murdoch taking the stand and having to admit that they knew the election wasn’t stolen, that Dominion machines weren’t switching/flipping votes, that Biden did have more votes than Trump, and that this big lie was just that. What was Fox’s audience gonna think if Fox anchors actually told the truth? Well, they knew they’d lose a lot of audience share. 

By settling, writing that check, many Fox viewers probably will still have no idea that they were lied to. What a shame for settling. Fox now can just continue business as usual. But…truth has no agenda. 

[atomheartbevo 90,692]

7 minutes ago, Cairn Horn88 said:

Fox now can just continue business as usual. But…truth has no agenda. 

Maybe.  But they still have a lawsuit or two to face, and if they start doing the same shit, Dominion probably won't settle this time around.

[tx 3 putt 78,794]

14 minutes ago, Rimbo said:

Definitely lots of bad takes about this on the internet.

Texags claimed Fox News had this case locked up, dominion should have been forced to pay for the fox lawyers. But the settlement is a huge fox victory also 

Edited April 19, 2023 by tx 3 putt

[Bookman 4,769]

7 hours ago, Pig Bellmont said:

You’re not picking up the nuance. NYT v Sullivan was granted cert because the freedom of the press allows a news organization to report on what someone else said. For example if Fox could be sued under Delaware law for simply reporting “Trump said X”. That’s not what the Delaware law provides- instead the law is consistent with the first amendment and requires a finding of actual malice, where the Alabama case didn’t. Look I know this SCOTUS doesn’t respect precedent but there’s no first amendment claim here because Delaware’s defamation laws permitting suits against news organizations are not out of bounds. It’s not just because there’s a potential verdict for liability that could give grounds for SCOTUS review. Nothing is impossible but SCOTUS review of a verdict would be stunning.

For the life of me, I can't understand why you think any of this is relevant.

[Fudge Nuggets 19,486]

3 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

Did we get the public humiliation of Fox by a final judgment that we wanted?  Nope.  Did we get the admission of liability that we wanted?  Nope.  But civil suits are, in the end, about money.  And Dominion just got a LOT of money.  A LOT.  Dominion is now perhaps the most successful voting systems company in history, by virtue of this judgment.

That's just fucking peachy keen for Dominion.  For our democracy it sucks fucking ass.

[Stilicho 1,422]

5 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

They’re hoping to pick up viewers from the Fox audience who just wants to be told what they want to hear. Just don’t lie about anyone who can afford to sue. That’s the only lesson here.

Anyone who gets their “news” from any of these networks, and that includes America’s Voice, is a moron.

This is the part that I don't get. Yeah, it sucks that we're not going to see the lying fucks squirm on the stand, but was there really an "a-ha" moment coming at the end of this?

Was anyone that actually watches Fox or their shittier, fascist(ier?) competition for news really going to admit that they'd been duped? These people weren't going to stop being Christian fundamentalist assholes just because Tucker Carlson admits on the stand that he hates Trump. 

Feels like the battle lines to this thing have been drawn. Who the hell is claiming to be a "neutral voter" that can be swayed one way or the other on the basis of whether Sean Hannity thinks Trump is full of shit?

[StassneyHorn 6,790]

This is something that can and should come up at presidential debates, with more viewership.

[TwiceHorn 32,119]

1 hour ago, bolverk said:

Saw some speculation that we ought to expect a bunch of shareholder suits against Fox over this whole imbroglio and loss of $800 million.

Yep, their stock price is down and probably going down further and this is something more easily laid at exec's feet than the usual shareholder derivative class action every time the stock price drops.

[TwiceHorn 32,119]

33 minutes ago, Stilicho said:

This is the part that I don't get. Yeah, it sucks that we're not going to see the lying fucks squirm on the stand, but was there really an "a-ha" moment coming at the end of this?

Was anyone that actually watches Fox or their shittier, fascist(ier?) competition for news really going to admit that they'd been duped? These people weren't going to stop being Christian fundamentalist assholes just because Tucker Carlson admits on the stand that he hates Trump. 

Feels like the battle lines to this thing have been drawn. Who the hell is claiming to be a "neutral voter" that can be swayed one way or the other on the basis of whether Sean Hannity thinks Trump is full of shit?

The 1/6 Committee changed so many minds.  So many that Fox itself tries to construct an alternative narrative in the last 60 days, with the assistance of the Speaker of the House.

[TwiceHorn 32,119]

42 minutes ago, Stilicho said:

This is the part that I don't get. Yeah, it sucks that we're not going to see the lying fucks squirm on the stand, but was there really an "a-ha" moment coming at the end of this?

Was anyone that actually watches Fox or their shittier, fascist(ier?) competition for news really going to admit that they'd been duped? These people weren't going to stop being Christian fundamentalist assholes just because Tucker Carlson admits on the stand that he hates Trump. 

Feels like the battle lines to this thing have been drawn. Who the hell is claiming to be a "neutral voter" that can be swayed one way or the other on the basis of whether Sean Hannity thinks Trump is full of shit?

In the final analysis, Dominion really needed vindication to solve their problems, along with a shitpile of money.

I think they came to the realization that the trial, for all its glorious public revelation of buttfuckery, lying, and general mopery, was not going to deliver the vindication they wanted and needed.  So they had to accept an amount of money in all likelihood greater, particularly considering present value, than they'd get at trial.

They may get some more "actionable" form of vindication from the original liars themselves, Powell, Giuliani, Lindell etc.  They might not get much money, but they can probably extract confessions.

Edited April 19, 2023 by TwiceHorn

[elfenix 34,798]

59 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

Texags claimed Fox News had this case locked up, dominion should have been forced to pay for the fox lawyers. But the settlement is a huge fox victory also 

we've always been at war with eastasia

[shakahorn 1,660]

1 hour ago, The Dog said:

It’s a big reason why they settled you stupid bitch. 

(Not you Gil)

Just not this time.

[Captainant 28,613]

20 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

They might not get much money, but they can probably extract confessions

Confessions of what? Apparently non criminal activity to overthrow our democracy? Fuck, we can't even disbar Powell for lying because we """don't have enough evidence"""

[Brisketexan 107,053]

That's just fucking peachy keen for Dominion.  For our democracy it sucks fucking ass.

No argument from me.
But Dominion’s lawyers represent and owe a duty to Dominion, not to you and me.
I wish someone was fighting for our democracy. Doesn’t really seem to be.

[Pato del Muerto 53,609]

3 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Confessions of what? Apparently non criminal activity to overthrow our democracy? Fuck, we can't even disbar Powell for lying because we """don't have enough evidence"""

Or was it because we misnumbered our evidence, can’t just proceed anyway, and couldn’t be arsed to correct it?

Edited April 19, 2023 by Pato del Muerto

[The Dog 44,874]

49 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Yep, their stock price is down and probably going down further and this is something more easily laid at exec's feet than the usual shareholder derivative class action every time the stock price drops.

I need to find it but the shareholder revolt has already begun. Lawsuits are inbound.

[Pig Bellmont 8,888]

1 hour ago, Bookman said:

For the life of me, I can't understand why you think any of this is relevant.

Now that I think about it- You’re right. I’m sure there’s an issue that would let SCOTUS grant cert based on a first amendment issue. It’s *just* like this case you learned about in law school 

[ChiTownDoc 21,362]

Newsmax can’t even afford to settle for 5M lol.  Their ass is so puckered…

[atomheartbevo 90,692]

33 minutes ago, The Dog said:

I need to find it but the shareholder revolt has already begun. Lawsuits are inbound.

I can't imagine what they are thinking about how the Smartmatic lawsuit turns out, given everything in the public record now.

5 minutes ago, ChiTownDoc said:

Newsmax can’t even afford to settle for 5M lol.  Their ass is so puckered…

Maybe Dominion can take over  Newsman and OAN and just have chyrons running 24/7 stating that the election wasn't stolen and Trump, Sydney Powell, etc. were wrong.