That would appear to be exactly what Dominion are happy for Fox to claim. I would much rather have seen it go the course.
Apparently there are one or two other libel actions from other voting machine suppliers, yet to be heard. I am pretty sure Fox will settle these as well......
I suspect Dominion won't settle with Powell and Giuliani. They don't have the deep pockets Fox do, so there's little money to be made there, certainly in the context of an 800 million dollar settlement. I suspect they'll try to nail them both to the floor, as an example.
Some interesting 'bits' in the close of this piece from the Grauniad: So Dominion was the lesser case? Donn't OAN and Newsmax have some very 'opaque' funding?
They mentioned that this around 5% of the 'worth' (assets, turnover I can't remember) of Murdock's empire. This is in addition to the $1.6bn (mentioned in 2021) costs for settling UK hacking claims. I know major share holders in Murdoch's company are those fun-loving ME 'countries' - shirley this $2bn (so far) will cripple any 'normal' company...
Tbh if Fox did make an apology on air I don't think it would alter the views of the looney conspiracy theorists anyway. They would just call Fox woke lefties who are now part of the conspiracy!
And Dominion was just the horses' dooveries for Fox/News Corporation: we have the main course of Smartmatic (a mere $2.7bn claimed), the dessert of Abby Grossberg (although this will be less 'juicy' now the Dominion case has been 'settled') ending with the, self-inflicted ('Lachlan' is suing them), digestif of Crikey.
Seriously? Perhaps they do not get called woke, but many on the right still consider them as occasionally useful idiots who are as much a part of the establishment as the rest of the media.
...well that's all over now. Lachlan Murdoch drops defamation proceedings against independent Australian publisher Crikey Of course this is completely unrelated to what was happening in the US: https://twitter.com/marquelawyers/status/1649208652404867074
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
For some reason, I find "We and our client are well pleased" highly amusing in the context of a legal dispute.
Fox News fire Tucker Carlson. Sorry, "agree to part ways". Guess Rupe was a bit pissed off about the Dominion settlement.
Ha. Carlson fires Fox, if the reaction of Conservatives in the US is anything to go by. How long before the Wire or some other corporate new media picks him up? Or he goes it himself. Heck, Trump media anyone? They apparently don't like each other, but they seem to be in political harmony. Don Lemon being fired by CNN on the same day seems equally underwhelming (I don't seek out either of them, though both are regularly referenced). Somehow I don't imagine Lemon doing any better than Chris Cuomo did after getting the sack from CNN. But Carlson is a different matter. Has he walked away, is it possible, in order to run for President? Or as VP on a Trump Carlson ticket? Some would like that very much, but I am not so sure about it, other than that it would be better than Biden Harris; though I suspect the Democrats would love it - their minions being completely allergic to both. If it happens, you heard it here First. If it doesn't, please forget I said it.
It's claimed that the order came from Murdoch. Something interesting that popped up was Rachel Maddow giving a bit of 'background': But looking at the Fox News 'megastars' at the end of her piece ISTR that both Limbaugh and O'Reilly went before allegations of sexual misconduct went to court (similarly with Roger Ailes and various female staff have made some 'insinuations before they 'went'). Abby Grossberg is making similar noises: In a Lawsuit, Tucker Carlson Is Accused of Promoting a Hostile Work Environment Carlson’s former head of booking, Abby Grossberg, said that male producers regularly used vulgarities to describe women and frequently made antisemitic jokes. And one that's really flown under the radar here, is Carlson's continual insane attacks on Ray Eppes and broadcasting claims that he's an FBI mole/stooge/spy: Ray Epps, a Jan. 6 protester now at the center of a far-right conspiracy, says he relives the Capitol riot every day Which I'm assuming is going to result in some pretty expensive litigation claims...
Don't know about the rest, but the Epps thing is a thing. The guy is the only person on video seen and heard saying "We're going into the Capitol", is present at several of the breaches of the Capitol barriers, and admitted in testimony that he himself breached the Capitol. He appears in several videos, used in prosecutions of others, prior to breaches, whispering in the ears of people who went on to pull down the barriers. He may or may not be s conspirator. He may or may not be a provocateur on behalf of the government. But I see no problem with pointing out that for some reason the guy is as innocent as new fallen snow, in the Dems eyes, despite being the person asserting the most demonstrable level of deliberate influence on the event. People are being held and prosecuted on far less evidence. Literally, the only reason you appear to be exonerating this guy is becauseyou are being told to. If he was presented as a MAGA loon, which is his own reported reason for being there, you guys would be saying he is bang to rights.
Gotta love those peaceful Capitol protest attendees. This whopper heralded by Trump at a recent rally is perfectly rational. She's just calling for Pence and every member of Congress who certified the 2020 election to be executed for treason: https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brie...at-campaign-event-calls-for-pences-execution/
Incredible, the turgidity of what gets a comment out of you these days. It would be akin to me making some faux comment about how peaceful and non-violent a trans whopper was after they killed three kids and three teachers at a Catholic school, after being spurred on by the Biden administration. Disappointingly cheap.
Seditious conspiracy convictions for some members of the Proud Boys. https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-us-canada-65486602
Not that I have any interest in standing up for Trump's lawyers, but that was actually presented by the prosecution, not the defense. The argument was that Trump confused Carroll for his ex-wife, who he was obviously attracted to at some point, therefore his argument that she was "not his type" was clearly a lie. That said, this entire trial appears to be going very, very badly for Trump and it's looking increasingly likely he will lose.
He may well. But there will be an appeal. The judge has been making his own objections, when the prosecution didn't say a word, and Trump's defence, having recognised the judges behaviour and asked for him to cease, are now simply backing down every time he, the judge, says something extra-ordinary. It is not being scared off, it is demonstrating to the appeal court that the judge is behaving in a certain way (bolstering evidence in a way unasked by the prosecution), and that they are simply going through the motions, in order not to antagonise the court (it certainly seems that the intention is to goad Trump's defence in to some kind of problematic reaction), so it may be examined on appeal. The evidence that anything happened, which Trump continues to deny, relies entitely on the word of Carrol, who can't remember the year it happened, let alone the day or date, and there is not a single witness other than herself to the event, which took place in a New York department store with customers and staff milling about. If Trump assaulted her, he should have been done for it thirty years ago, when it happened, and when evidence would have been readily available. Speculation from it not happening at all to it was consensual is entirely fair. And accusations that it is being prosecuted now for political reasons are 100% accurate. I am afraid that many people following this trial will be feeling very sorry for this woman, and not for the reasons she would like. She is a tragic case, and she is being made to look like a mad old bat so people can get to Trump.
At least 8 of the Georgia "fake electors" flip, taking an immunity deal. That's horrendously bad news for Trump. https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/05/politics/georgia-trump-fake-electors-immunity/index.html
This is interesting. The headline could equally have read “Trump found not to be guilty of rape.” But the decision does appear to be something of an anomaly. There was only one witness to what happened, Carrol herself, and she said that he raped her, and only described him raping her. She is adamant. No other witness either contested her claim or described what happened, and no evidence was presented to describe why she may have been mistaken. So, factually, the jury found that the only witness was a liar, but they decided that Trump sexually assaulted her anyway. Even then, they decided on punitive damages, for the sexual assault, of only $20,000. He could have expected massively more if he had been proven to slap a person in the face. Indeed, the defamation element to the case was punitively dealt with far more harshly, with over a million in damages. Could it be that one could not follow without the other? Therefore they had to find him guilty of the first. It is quite stunning. “We don’t believe the witness, but we do believe you did something that no evidence was presented to describe.” I hope none of us ever have to be tried on such a paucity of evidence, in such a hostile court.
I suspect Trump supporters will lap up the "witch hunt" angle and his support will remain strong. If anything, each prosecution just proves to them that the "elites" are out to get him so he must be supported in his fight against them. It's the very reason why he and his supporters spend so much energy undermining the judiciary. See "enemies of the people" as an example here of the same thing.
