Fox News Trial Starts with . . . Fox News Hiding Evidence

... See that?! .... looks like a Gentleman's agreement
to forget the trial. .... Fox-News mighta won!

#### Salty

Lol. Ridiculous interpretation. Nearly 800 mill and an acknowledgment of making false statements. Ok Salty.

You would never win when you settle for around 800 million. That is called we fucked up make this go away money.

Nearly 800 million. Hmmm. If they had evidence of voter fraud they really shoulda put that out there because 800 million is a lot of money to pay if you’re telling the truth.

Shit, they coulda just paid up from the outset and avoided all the embarrassment of depositions and exposed text messages and essentially admitting they promoted a pretty dumb lie after the election.

What’s the chance they’ll change their ways and actually report the news and shoot down stupid conspiracies from the right wingnuts. I know I’d be pissed if I had to cough up 800 million and then have the likes of Hannity and Lying Tucker go right back out and cost me more money over some other bullshit. Originally Posted by 1blackman1

If it were me, I’d be waiting on this. More easy money in the next case when you already have court rulings that the defendant lied. Personally, I would have liked to seen the whole bloodbath in one round, but I’m sure Dominion is sitting on “go” waiting for Fox’s next fuck up. Cab-Ching

Based on info Dominion Voting Systems gave to Dunn & Bradstreet, and based on public records, the company had revenues of around $35 million to $40 million a year back in 2017 to 2019:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamand...h=a23c1f620f5f

Their net profit margin might be 25%, tops. It's probably a lot less. So say at the most $10 million net profit after tax annually. Before legal fees and taxes, they pocketed around 20 times sales, and probably over 80 times net income!

They took Fox to the cleaners!

Now the Forbes article quotes a study that estimated Dominion's revenues were higher, $100 million in 2018. But any way you look at it, this settlement is probably worth a lot more than Dominion's business.

Lol. Ridiculous interpretation. Nearly 800 mill and an acknowledgment of making false statements. Ok Salty. Originally Posted by 1blackman1

... Thanks, mate...

And YOU did tell us all that Dominion would win.
So lemme say that YOU do deserve some credit.

... 'Course we Australians do have a rather trite
and true saying - "One man's diamond is another man's turd"...

Prolly has something to do with the fact that Fox
has a lot more money $$$$ than what they paid.

They will weather this just fine.
Prolly make another 12 BILLION $$$$$ this year. ...

#### Salty

Fox makes about 1 to 1 and a half Billion a year. They just paid out nearly a year of revenue. Think about you having to give up a year of earnings out of pocket in a suit.

Next up, Smartmatic…, seeking more $ and has the Dominion evidence and rulings as precedent.

Anand Giridharadas, an MSNBC commentator, had a great idea on Morning Joe today. He said billionaire Democrats should pay Smartmatic to settle with Fox for no cash, and instead demand that the Murcoch Family and Fox shareholders shut down Fox News.

Incredible! Right now, in television news, you have CNN and MSNBC which spout the straight Democratic Party line. And NBC, CBS and ABC, which are left of center. So Giridharadas wants to shut down the only significant right-of-center television news channel, Fox.

Here's a summary of Dominion's claims, from two CNN reporters:

https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/17/media...ons/index.html

If you take a look through it, most of the claims related to comments Rudy Giuliani and Sydney Powell made while being interviewed. The President's attorneys were making claims that voting machines were rigged, and Fox isn't supposed to interview them? How much sense does that make, in a country where we cherish Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press?

The only real claims against Fox News hosts related to Lou Dobbs. A couple were Tweets. I'm not sure why Fox should be liable for Tweets of an employee. And, in Broadcast 17 (see the link), yes, Dobbs does say, on the air, he'll "gladly put forward your evidence that supports your claim that this was a Cyber Pearl Harbor."

So who listens to Lou Dobbs anyway? I didn't know he was around since he left CNN.

This $788 million settlement, given that Dominion's revenues were around $100 million (or maybe much less -- see my previous post in this thread), is ridiculous. I don't know what their profit margin is, but their net profit would probably be a small fraction of $100 million. The $788 million is probably multiples of what a buyer would have paid for Dominion, before the 2020 brouhaha.

So, maybe you say, since this is America, with a long tradition of freedom of speech and freedom of the press, Fox shouldn't be criminally charged for interviewing Giuliani and Powell. But it's fair game filing civil law suits on them. Bull shit. In this day and age, where the plaintiffs' attorneys are out of control, a lawsuit can be worse than a criminal penalty. They can bankrupt a company. Which is exactly what Anand Giridharadas and many other Democrats hope will happen.

So Tiny, do you think there were instances where Fox promoted the idea that the election was stolen even when they knew it wasn’t. Is that how NEWS should get disseminated by News organizations. We are not really talking about presenting a different perspective on the facts but instead on promoting lies that are easily discovered as false, purely because the audience wasn’t happy with them presenting what could be stated to be objective truth. That’s what the real rub is.

It’s easy for folks on the right to claim that conservatives are being treated unfairly, and if it was only a matter of looking at the objective facts from a different view. Unfortunately, what it’s come down to is the promotion of “alternative facts” which from the objective viewer are simply falsehoods and lies. I don’t fault anyone for having a different view, but when you lie about the facts that not a difference in opinion or conclusions drawn from the facts . Instead it’s simply lying.

That’s what happened with Fox. They knew the things being presented were false. Guiliani and Powell admitted in pre-interview they had ZERO proof of their claims. In fact, Powell admitted her source was a time traveling ghost. Everyone that worked for Trump knew the allegations were lies told for political and fundraising. Yet, the Fox News Channel and other right wing outlets promoted time and again the lies.

If you think that should be ok for outlets that claim to be NEWS then no wonder righties and trumpies are so dumb and will remain that way. Maybe it’s time for the GOP to just die off and maybe some other party will. Rise from the ashes next decade.

Take a look at the CNN article Blackman. The claims against Fox sound to me mostly like bull shit. If you take the time to look at it, I'd be curious to know why you think they're not.

I saw some of the interviews and public pronouncements of Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell. Yeah, it was obvious that Sidney and Rudy were in lala land. But it was news. And it was entertaining, to me at least.

This is the United States of America. Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press are enshrined in the First Amendment to our Constitution. Few other countries have protections for speech and for the press as strong as ours. You can't go around suing people for defamation willy nilly and win huge amounts of money, like in the United Kingdom.

That said, if you maintain Fox should have to pay something for serving as a forum for Powell, Giuliani, Lindell and Dobbs, I wouldn't necessarily disagree. But not $788 million. And the owners of Fox certainly shouldn't be given an ultimatum to either withdraw from television news or go bankrupt, as the MSNBC commentator proposes.

Read the judge’s determination on the MSJ and you’ll likely have a better view. It points out specific instances of Fox News personalities making false statements about the election and dominion. Not bad or soft interviews, statements deemed to be false. It gets no clearer than that.

You’re think Fox paid 785 for a bullshit case. Their lawyers told them they were gonna lose.

And who cares about some commentators opinion. Now, what i think is that they should stop pretending to be a news outlet. I’d actually say about the same for all the “political news channels” the biggest issue is likely that 99% of viewers think people like Hannity Carlson Maddow etc are reporting news and facts when they are only proving their political talking points. Maybe a disclaimer telling people “we are an echo chamber designed to feed you BS should scroll on the bottom ticker, we repeat, these are not facts and please don’t take it as such, we get paid to just confuse and rile you up so you’ll keep tuning in”.

Defamation laws are as old as talking. And they should be. Truth is an absolute defense. The way to avoid getting sued for defamation and libel is to tell the truth. If you choose to lie, that’s not protected speech.

You’re think Fox paid 785 for a bullshit case. Their lawyers told them they were gonna lose. Originally Posted by 1blackman1

My impression is the American legal system is a lottery. For a long while, private planes weren't made in the USA because attorneys had sued the manufacturers out of existence. Or at least made it where "made in America" wasn't profitable. And how about Dow Corning, which made silicone breast implants which were perfectly safe. They were bankrupted. And so, in our youths, we had to put up with rock hard or squishy ta ta's. Then there were the many companies unfairly bankrupted by asbestos suits.

Yes, Fox could be wiped out by bullshit cases.

Aside: Many here believe you're Evil Incarnate, because you're a Democrat. I believe you're doing God's work, defending big corporations from bull shit like this. Most of your fellow Democrats would disagree. Come out of the cold Blackman. Acknowledge your Stockholm Syndrome and seek treatment for it.

And who cares about some commentators opinion. Now, what i think is that they should stop pretending to be a news outlet. I’d actually say about the same for all the “political news channels” the biggest issue is likely that 99% of viewers think people like Hannity Carlson Maddow etc are reporting news and facts when they are only proving their political talking points. Maybe a disclaimer telling people “we are an echo chamber designed to feed you BS should scroll on the bottom ticker, we repeat, these are not facts and please don’t take it as such, we get paid to just confuse and rile you up so you’ll keep tuning in”. Originally Posted by 1blackman1

Fair enough. I'd add Lawrence O'Donnell, Chris Hayes, Don Lemon, Joy Reid, and Laura Ingraham to the list.

Defamation laws are as old as talking. And they should be. Truth is an absolute defense. The way to avoid getting sued for defamation and libel is to tell the truth. If you choose to lie, that’s not protected speech. Originally Posted by 1blackman1

And so who's going to determine what's the truth and what's a lie? Maybe for Fox a judge and jury in Delaware composed entirely of Democrats? Or for some other media company or Democratic politician, Republicans in Texas?

Well, at least we're not talking about criminal charges. There are a lot of countries where the elites in power put people who disagree with them in jail, or worse, for "lying."

Truth is something you can prove or put forth credible evidence of. I’ve tried cases in almost every jurisdiction in Louisiana conservative to liberal, in Texas, New Mexico, Florida, DC, Baltimore and California. Dont ever be fooled into thinking that juries just find for people they like or agree with politically. That’s only rhetoric from political folks. Mostly juries try to follow the evidence presented and make the right decision, mostly.

The election fraud lies were shown over and again to have ZERO credible evidence to support the allegations. As I noted. The source for Sydney Powell’s allegations were a time traveling ghost. When Fox producers heard that from her, they should have included that in every interview of her and anyone else that relied on her information. Instead they tried to bury that. Guiliani was asked and he stated he had no proof of any fraud allegations, that’s what’s newsworthy far more so than allowing him to make allegations on air to essentially spread the lie.

In Tiny’s America, a person with significant means could defame his enemies, opponents and competitors without regard for the truth as long as he has the money to get the lie aired constantly on TV and in print. If the things stated are true, the law says, go ahead. But if it’s a lie, the law says you can be sued into bankruptcy. That’s the beauty of the system, a person can decide not to tell lies in print or on the air and there won’t be a lawsuit. I thought we liked people making choices and living with consequences. Or does that not apply to conservatives and the conservative media?

I defend some of the best and worst of the corporate world. I also tell them, hey you fucked up when you did X Y and Z. It’s gonna cost ya. My job isn’t to get you out of the trouble and a free pass. The other side has smart lawyers to that will find the shit you did. And, you did it so you’ll have to pay. My job is to mitigate the overall exposure. The more reluctant you are to get it settled the more it’ll end up costing you in the end. No matter, we lawyers are gonna get paid so let’s get to work getting you the best deal possible. That is a conversation every lawyer worth their salt has with a client whether it’s a corporation or a personal matter.

It’s irrelevant whether Fox does a service by being a conservative News voice. Personally I applaud that part and watched them frequently when that’s what they were 15 years ago (when Obama became president they just became anti-Obama TV). They made some choices over the past three years that will end up costing them billions. I suspect Smartmatic’s suit will settle for somewhere in a similar range as the Dominion suit. I’m not sure why they sued for a greater amount by about a billion but if that is somehow a proveable number the settlement value could pass a billion and make the total between the two suits in excess of 2 Bil.

Ultimately, the question really is, was it worth the lies being perpetuated to have to come back 3 years later and payout 2 billion dollars. If they get bankrupted from that, then, I suppose we know the answer.

... No worrys, mates.

... The lawsuit legal game for FALSE statements
is NOW open for business!

And DOWN goes BUZZ-FEED! ... Gettin' out o' towne before sundown.
And will the Huffington Post be far behind??... all those constant
lies about Trump and what-not.... "Russia Collusion!!"

Money $$$$$ Money $$$$$ MONEY! $$$$$ ...

#### Salty