...Fox News and Smartamatic....now in court

Chillicothe

Platinum Member
Feb 14, 2021
9,815
6,291
938
Tonight's reportage in the Washington Post offers an interesting perspective on the judge's ruling that the lawsuit by Smartamatic can proceed, and that there does appear to be a basis for arguing that Fox New did, indeed, act with malice.....which negates their 1st Amendment defense.

Here's a taster on the reportage: (underlining by my avatar)

"
But perhaps the ruling’s most biting — and also potentially legally important — section involves (Tucker) Carlson.
In the course of laying out the legal requirements for Smartmatic to prove its case, the judge noted that the company must prove Fox met the standard of acting with “actual malice” — i.e. not merely promoting false claims, but doing so with malice.
And on that count, the judge says the best evidence that it did is Carlson.

That’s because Carlson, unlike the others, applied significant actual skepticism to the claims — and broadcast it.
It’s an episode many might have forgotten in the long ... run-up to the Jan. 6 insurrection on the U.S. Capitol. But there was a time in which none other than Carlson stepped forward to question the “stolen election” narrative that had taken hold in the Trump movement and in certain corners of his network. Carlson said on Nov. 19 that Powell’s claims were serious, but he also noted that she had yet to substantiate them. He said he had asked, over the course of a week, for the evidence and offered her his platform, but that she had declined.



(Tucker) Carlson said Powell “never demonstrated that a single actual vote was moved illegitimately by software from one candidate to another. Not one.” He said that when he invited her on his show, she became “angry and told us to stop contacting her.”
The episode alienated some Trump allies. But it also, in Cohen’s estimation, speaks to the possibility that Fox might meet the “actual malice” standard.



Here’s the section (with key parts bolded by us (WaPo)):


Ironically, the statements of Tucker Carlson, perhaps the most popular Fox News host, militate most strongly in favor of a possible finding that there is a substantial basis that Fox News acted with actual malice. ........ The same day, Carlson wrote an article stating that, for over a week, Powell had been claiming that the election had been stolen and that, if Powell were correct, it would be the greatest crime in American history, and he thus asked her to substantiate her comments.
However, Powell never provided the evidence requested by Carlson, and President Trump’s campaign advised Carlson that it knew of no such evidence. Therefore, there are sufficient allegations that Fox News knew, or should have known, that Powell’s claim was false, and purposefully ignored the efforts of its most prominent anchor to obtain substantiation of claims of wrongdoing......
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Should be an interesting case to monitor.
I hope it garners enough attention on this venue so that posters and lurkers can stay current on developments.
 
I hope the case causes Rupert Murdoch to lose billions and have a heart attack in the bathroom while jerking off to Penthouse with his little shriveled Aussie balls
Its likely to cost them. And looking forward I would expect that the insurers will have a huge influence on the stations output. Maybe the crazy will be dialled down.
 
If FNC has to pay for a fake conspiracy theory, then CNN and PMSDNC have to pay for the fake Russia Russia Russia hoax perpetuated for the entire Trump presidency.
 
More important than the 'Russia-Russia' trope..........good poster Mechanic, what did you think of Tucker Carlson's efforts....failed efforts.....to get Krakenpot Powell to demonstrate she had the goods on a manipulated election? Her refusal to show to Fox News or Tucker Carlson that there really was a there there?
 
Tonight's reportage in the Washington Post offers an interesting perspective on the judge's ruling that the lawsuit by Smartamatic can proceed, and that there does appear to be a basis for arguing that Fox New did, indeed, act with malice.....which negates their 1st Amendment defense.

Here's a taster on the reportage: (underlining by my avatar)

"
But perhaps the ruling’s most biting — and also potentially legally important — section involves (Tucker) Carlson.
In the course of laying out the legal requirements for Smartmatic to prove its case, the judge noted that the company must prove Fox met the standard of acting with “actual malice” — i.e. not merely promoting false claims, but doing so with malice.
And on that count, the judge says the best evidence that it did is Carlson.

That’s because Carlson, unlike the others, applied significant actual skepticism to the claims — and broadcast it.
It’s an episode many might have forgotten in the long ... run-up to the Jan. 6 insurrection on the U.S. Capitol. But there was a time in which none other than Carlson stepped forward to question the “stolen election” narrative that had taken hold in the Trump movement and in certain corners of his network. Carlson said on Nov. 19 that Powell’s claims were serious, but he also noted that she had yet to substantiate them. He said he had asked, over the course of a week, for the evidence and offered her his platform, but that she had declined.



(Tucker) Carlson said Powell “never demonstrated that a single actual vote was moved illegitimately by software from one candidate to another. Not one.” He said that when he invited her on his show, she became “angry and told us to stop contacting her.”
The episode alienated some Trump allies. But it also, in Cohen’s estimation, speaks to the possibility that Fox might meet the “actual malice” standard.



Here’s the section (with key parts bolded by us (WaPo)):






Should be an interesting case to monitor.
I hope it garners enough attention on this venue so that posters and lurkers can stay current on developments.
So, this time the cancel culture is contending that Tucker Carlson should be taken seriously. ??

Also, wouldn’t it be a benefit to FOX News that one of its on-air staff HAD broadcast concerns about what Powell had claimed. You see, you jokers can’t have it both ways. If Fox News had acted with “malice,” you wouldn’t have heard ON Fox News such expressions of doubt about Ms. Powell’s claims and the absence of verification.
 
So, this time the cancel culture is contending that Tucker Carlson should be taken seriously. ??

Also, wouldn’t it be a benefit to FOX News that one of its on-air staff HAD broadcast concerns about what Powell had claimed. You see, you jokers can’t have it both ways. If Fox News had acted with “malice,” you wouldn’t have heard ON Fox News such expressions of doubt about Ms. Powell’s claims and the absence of verification.
Maddow and Alex Jones used the same defense that Carlson used. If it worked for them it should work for Carlson and FOX. Nothing burger.
 
Tonight's reportage in the Washington Post offers an interesting perspective on the judge's ruling that the lawsuit by Smartamatic can proceed, and that there does appear to be a basis for arguing that Fox New did, indeed, act with malice.....which negates their 1st Amendment defense.

Here's a taster on the reportage: (underlining by my avatar)

"
But perhaps the ruling’s most biting — and also potentially legally important — section involves (Tucker) Carlson.
In the course of laying out the legal requirements for Smartmatic to prove its case, the judge noted that the company must prove Fox met the standard of acting with “actual malice” — i.e. not merely promoting false claims, but doing so with malice.
And on that count, the judge says the best evidence that it did is Carlson.

That’s because Carlson, unlike the others, applied significant actual skepticism to the claims — and broadcast it.
It’s an episode many might have forgotten in the long ... run-up to the Jan. 6 insurrection on the U.S. Capitol. But there was a time in which none other than Carlson stepped forward to question the “stolen election” narrative that had taken hold in the Trump movement and in certain corners of his network. Carlson said on Nov. 19 that Powell’s claims were serious, but he also noted that she had yet to substantiate them. He said he had asked, over the course of a week, for the evidence and offered her his platform, but that she had declined.



(Tucker) Carlson said Powell “never demonstrated that a single actual vote was moved illegitimately by software from one candidate to another. Not one.” He said that when he invited her on his show, she became “angry and told us to stop contacting her.”
The episode alienated some Trump allies. But it also, in Cohen’s estimation, speaks to the possibility that Fox might meet the “actual malice” standard.



Here’s the section (with key parts bolded by us (WaPo)):






Should be an interesting case to monitor.
I hope it garners enough attention on this venue so that posters and lurkers can stay current on developments.
I am sure all you commie pukes are going to have a circle jerk.
 
The whole thing. Liars.
Ummm?
The "whole thing"?

What about the meeting with Fredo Trump, Paul Monafort, et al, with that Russian attorney in Trump's own building? The meeting where they went to get dirt on Hilary......and when the meeting got reported in the press, they then claimed ..'Oh no, it was about adoptions of orphans'.

The same meeting that Steve Bannon called 'treasonous'?

"Steve Bannon, the former White House chief strategist, calls a meeting of Trump campaign officials with a Russian lawyer in Trump Tower during the presidential campaign "treasonous" and "unpatriotic."

Now, the good poster Justice Hammer, says that meeting and Bannon's comments were fake?

What about those 13 Russians?
Were they fake too?

"WASHINGTON (CBSNewYork/AP) -- Thirteen Russians and three Russian entities were charged Friday with an elaborate plot to interfere in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, federal prosecutors announced Friday.
---------------------------------------------------------


Methinks the poster Justice need do a little more due diligence.
This is, after all, Adult Swim.
One is expected to at least hold his own head above water.
 
If Fox News had acted with “malice,” you wouldn’t have heard ON Fox News such expressions of doubt about Ms. Powell’s claims and the absence of verification.

Well, good poster Again, read all that article quoted above, and then maybe do a little due diligence. There is more 'evidence' the judge described as underpinning due cause for the lawsuit to proceed.

The cake is baking.
Should be fun to watch.
 
Well, good poster Again, read all that article quoted above, and then maybe do a little due diligence. There is more 'evidence' the judge described as underpinning due cause for the lawsuit to proceed.

The cake is baking.
Should be fun to watch.
Well, inept poster chiliconfuzed: learn a little about the legal meaning of”malice” as it pertains to news reporting. Try your best to be objective for a refreshing change of pace. Ask an adult to assist you with that concept.
 
Ummm?
The "whole thing"?

What about the meeting with Fredo Trump, Paul Monafort, et al, with that Russian attorney in Trump's own building? The meeting where they went to get dirt on Hilary......and when the meeting got reported in the press, they then claimed ..'Oh no, it was about adoptions of orphans'.

The same meeting that Steve Bannon called 'treasonous'?

"Steve Bannon, the former White House chief strategist, calls a meeting of Trump campaign officials with a Russian lawyer in Trump Tower during the presidential campaign "treasonous" and "unpatriotic."

Now, the good poster Justice Hammer, says that meeting and Bannon's comments were fake?

What about those 13 Russians?
Were they fake too?

"WASHINGTON (CBSNewYork/AP) -- Thirteen Russians and three Russian entities were charged Friday with an elaborate plot to interfere in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, federal prosecutors announced Friday.
---------------------------------------------------------


Methinks the poster Justice need do a little more due diligence.
This is, after all, Adult Swim.
One is expected to at least hold his own head above water.
You can show them anything. It's all "fake news" to them.

How simple is that!
 
Well, inept poster chiliconfuzed: learn a little about the legal meaning of”malice” as it pertains to news reporting. Try your best to be objective for a refreshing change of pace. Ask an adult to assist you with that concept.
Looks like you are whining to the wrong person.

Seems it's the judge that you need to whine to.

I am sure he will appreciate the advice of an uneducated slob.
 
Looks like you are whining to the wrong person.

Seems it's the judge that you need to whine to.

I am sure he will appreciate the advice of an uneducated slob.
If your offering him advice, try to be accurate for once, Farty. I wasn’t whining. I was responding. Big difference, but you’re too stupid to grasp the obvious difference. I don’t need to offer the judge any advice, either. You truly don’t understand thing one about the legal system. You poor retard. 😂
 
You can show them anything. It's all "fake news" to them.
How simple is that!
Yes, I know, poster '58. I know.
But I post for me, not the Duped & Snookered.
I've been visiting this venue for about 13 months.
I've seen much of the fan base.
So I ain't here to persuade them.
I write here in order to organize my thoughts for when I stop by the DewDropInn for an 8oz shorty of TwoHearted Ale every now and then......and then inevitably have to 'debate' with the corner-regulars.

Once, on this venue, out of mere curiosity (and time on my hands) I counted 18 "douchebag" shout-outs in 20 posts by the same poster. I forget his avatar handle at the moment.
Another poster, went like 8 posts in a row....and every one had one or more f-bombs.
So, yeah, I've seen much of this fan base.


In fact, there are a couple of pairing of avatars that I suspect may simply be the same guy......just alternating avatar names on his postings. The syntax is the same, the punctuation is the same.......the simplistic Duped & Snookered ideology is the same. In fact, there may be several pairs of those posting on here. I forget their avatar handles, at the moment.
 

Forum List

Back
Top