Fox settles admitting they provided fake news about Dominion

[protectionist]

You have an opinion only. Nothing more. The court does rule, and you do drool.

Oh, that's where you're wrong. I have FACTS - are you ready to be quizzed about them ?

 

[protectionist]

Actually, I don’t know anyone who has made such a fool of himself as you have.

Let us know when you are ready to accept the challenge. It will still be there.

 

[Faun]

You live in Delaware ?

Does he also get a scantily clad young pretty girl to fan him with a big feather, as pharoahs in Egypt used to ?

Idiot - I already disposed of your lame "let him be deposed elsewhere and recorded to be played in court.", having posted the exact words of the judge (Eric Davis), who said exactly the opposite of that.
See post # 1068.

Poor gramps, the reason the judge said he would compel Murdoch to appear is because he's not infirm...

https://www.npr.org/2023/03/29/1166691744/fox-news-dominion-rupert-murdoch-travel-to-testify

The Delaware judge overseeing a $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit against Fox News on Tuesday did not seem to buy the argument that founder Rupert Murdoch was too infirm to testify at trial next month.

The judge told Fox's attorneys not to make him "look like an idiot."

The remarks came at the outset of a pre-trial hearing when Judge Eric M. Davis noted that he previously had received a letter stating that the 92-year-old Murdoch "couldn't travel" to the trial in Delaware because of COVID.

"I also have people telling me that he's done some things recently that [show] he's hardly infirm," Davis said, noting that Murdoch had recently announced his engagement to be married for the fifth time and plans to travel between his homes in Los Angeles, Montana, New York and London.​

And if he was, a doctor's note would get him out of appearing in court.

And again, it's common to have witnesses wait outside the courtroom.

And again, you failed to show anyone dying from sitting on a wooden bench.

And again, you fail because you're a failure.

 

[Faun]

Good, me too. So you think you're knowledgeable about courts and law, do you ? Do you drive a vehicle ?

Sure, gramps.

 

[Faun]

So you're in Florida but you know all about how they do things in Delaware, huh ? Even things most Delawarians don't know. That's awesome (if it were true)

LOL

You don't think people can learn about other states on the Internet? Maybe you can't.

 

[Faun]

Thanks for showing you have no answer for >> "They don't write articles about it. Doesn't mean it hasn't happened".

Means you're making up shit ya can't prove.

 

[Vrenn]

You said "facts" are against me. Yeah ? You ready for a QUIZ about those "facts"? (your word, not mine)

You obviously are going off the deep end. I never said anything to you or about you except that you are an Internet Rambo wannabe.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

Yup, seems to be a pretty smart monkey.
But is he the equal of protectionist ?

Is he … “the greatest musician / artist / poet in U.S. history”?




Does he claim to be able to sue and beat Dominion in a …(human) Court of Law?

 

[protectionist]

Yup, seems to be a pretty smart monkey.
But is he the equal of protectionist ?

Is he … “the greatest musician / artist / poet in U.S. history”?




Does he claim to be able to sue and beat Dominion in a …(human) Court of Law?

No need to accept DEFEAT twice. Once was enough. Silly insults don't qualify as challenge acceptances.

Again, Let us know when you are ready to accept the challenge. It will still be there.

 

[dudmuck]

Oh, so you are in charge of the courtroom, and you are setting all the rules, right, Fraud Faux Fault ?

And YOU are the joke. Sitting in a courtroom with hard wooden benches, is a far cry from your comfortable living room recliner, with your feet up, watching television, and a home health care nurse at your side.

Dominion had no case at all, didnt have a leg to stand on, even Alan Dershowitz said that. They could have easily been defeated, and I challenge them to sue me, and I'll go to the court, and dissassemble them in 5 minutes.

Dershowitz was unable to prove malice, in an attempt to sue CNN. Demonstrating is misunderstanding of defamation. And then spreads misinformation on the subject.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

No need to accept DEFEAT twice. Once was enough. Silly insults don't qualify as challenge acceptances. Again, Let us know when you are ready to accept the challenge. It will still be there.

Bupka, you really want to continue making a fool of yourself?

Let me just repeat your own words once again:

“I am the greatest musician / artist / poet in U.S. history.”

“I am the greatest musician / artist / poet in U.S. history.”

“I am the greatest musician / artist / poet in U.S. history.”

“I am the greatest musician / artist / poet in U.S. history.”





You really do … “make my day”!



P.S. Nobody here gives a fuck who you are.

 

[protectionist]

Bupka, you really want to continue making a fool of yourself?

Let me just repeat your own words once again:

“I am the greatest musician / artist / poet in U.S. history.”

“I am the greatest musician / artist / poet in U.S. history.”

“I am the greatest musician / artist / poet in U.S. history.”

“I am the greatest musician / artist / poet in U.S. history.”





You really do … “make my day”!


P.S. Nobody here gives a fuck who you are.

Maybe nobody EXCEPT YOU (since you sure have involved yourself in this discussion)

I'll revise my original statement to say that I am ONE OF the greatest musician / artist / poet in U.S. history.”....and I really can't think of anybody who combines all 3 of these arts to a very high degree, though there proabably are a FEW.

One who I'd say is comparable is Bob Dylan who has excellence in poetry and music, on a variety of instruments, and is a fine painter too, although I think his nice paintings are a notch below mine.

Would you agree about the paintings ? (or do you not have the foggiest idea what you're talking about ?)

 

[protectionist]

Dershowitz was unable to prove malice, in an attempt to sue CNN. Demonstrating is misunderstanding of defamation. And then spreads misinformation on the subject.

But with regard to Dominion he is spot on. They relied upon the judge and Murdoch's physical condition, not the evidence or facts of the case.

 

[protectionist]

You obviously are going off the deep end. I never said anything to you or about you except that you are an Internet Rambo wannabe.

Looks like short term memory loss. In Post # 1089, you quoted me, and said this >>> "Dominion won in a court of law. You can attempt at deflecting that but facts are against you." (my emphasis)

Then, in Post # 1095, you again quoted me, and you said this >>>
"You don't make enough, you don't have enough assets and you are just a pissant." (my emphasis)

Never said anything to me, or about me ? Looks like the deep end is all yours.

 

[dudmuck]

But with regard to Dominion he is spot on. They relied upon the judge and Murdoch's physical condition, not the evidence or facts of the case.

Fox's lawyers could have taken care of that, vs paying $787 million.
The reason is all those texts between fox's anchors proving their lies on air.

 

[protectionist]

Fox's lawyers could have taken care of that, vs paying $787 million.
The reason is all those texts between fox's anchors proving their lies on air.

I have not seen any so-called "lie" from Fox, posted in this forum. If anybody thinks they have one, post it. I'll take a look, and be objective.

And I'm not sure what you mean by "taken care of". The $787 M was a settlement.

 

[dudmuck]

I have not seen any so-called "lie" from Fox, posted in this forum. If anybody thinks they have one, post it. I'll take a look, and be objective.

And I'm not sure what you mean by "taken care of". The $787 M was a settlement.

The massive payout reflects the fact that Dominion had put together a strong case that Fox had acted with “actual malice,” a high bar under defamation law that has historically been difficult for plaintiffs suing media outlets to satisfy.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Oh, that's where you're wrong. I have FACTS - are you ready to be quizzed about them ?

You have nothing to quiz anyone about. But if you do, contact the DA.

 

[protectionist]

The massive payout reflects the fact that Dominion had put together a strong case that Fox had acted with “actual malice,” a high bar under defamation law that has historically been difficult for plaintiffs suing media outlets to satisfy.

No. I think that's far from what happened. Dominion had no case. There are experts galore, whose words could have been used against them, Some of them I posted right here in this thread.

 

[protectionist]

You have nothing to quiz anyone about. But if you do, contact the DA.

See Posts #s 589....590.....591.....592....594.....595.....596....all in this thread.