Works for me, in this case.
I thought court proceedings were generally public (barring some circumstances that would make secrecy a thing in the public interest).
A secret court battle over an intrafamilial dispute strikes me as paradoxical.
It’s probably still in the evidence discovery and motion practice stage, with lots of sensitive business data and likely inflammatory personal animadversions happening. At this stage sealing the docket is not all that unusual. When (if*) it comes to trial most if not all evidence will be public.
*Or it might stay secret if they come to an out-of-court settlement, perhaps via mediation.
I swear I’m so tired right now I read that as “meditation” and thought, that’s a novel approach.
This is a response to the lawyers winning. My grandmother told me a story from the early 1920’s in her small town. A farmer murdered a traveling salesman for messing with his daughter. In those days she was referred to as “retarded”. A jury of his peers acquitted the guy but he lost the farm because of the lawyer fees.
The precedent of Jarndyce v Jarndyce may apply here.
On the other hand, this could be a good thing. Maybe.
Quoting the article:
Citing the court documents, which CNN has not independently seen, The Times reported that Murdoch was concerned that interference from his other three children – who are more politically moderate than Lachlan and their father – could influence the companies’ editorial stance.
Three sane, moderate adults and one frothing asshole bent on destroying democracy.
I have no idea about the actual political stances of the other three, but ‘more moderate than Lachlan and their father’ leaves a lot of space before you get to ‘moderate’.
Jesse Watters is evil. Also stupid.
“I heard the scientists say the other day, when a man votes for a woman, he actually transitions into a woman.”
Which scientists exactly, Jesse?
This is a very short clip. I saw another somewhere that had more context, and I think it’s clear he was attempting to be funny.
Failing, obviously. But I don’t think he’s trying to make a serious point.
Who can tell? He regularly says things that are equally ridiculous but intended seriously.
Still a long way to go to top Laura Ingraham’s attempt to drink a steak stuffed with lightbulbs through a plastric straw, though.
From Watters article:
Of course, so obvious.
Well, um, no - not to your average brainwashed Fox viewer - shit no.
This “was just joking” shit is getting tired. The GOP and its servile news outlets throwing spaghetti to the wall to see if it sticks, and if it doesn’t - whoops, backtrack a little.
It’s about as disturbing a defecation on journalism as it can get.
Watching too much Fox is bad for you, apparently?
Or “medication”.
I am totally going to start using the term Foxmania.
“Just a bunch of Foxmanic assholes.”
Foxmentia?
I’ll buy that as appropriate language once I see it offered as an official legal defense.
Smartmatic is still fucking with FOX.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/12/27/media/smartmatic-fox-murdoch-family-succession-trust/index.html
BTW, the latest season of the Slow Burn podcast is about the creation of Fox News. I’m only through 4 episodes, but it is interesting so far. Fuck Fox News and Roger Ailes. My parents and inlaws are slaves to this brain rotting bullshit.