I’m surprised Fox News settled, they seemed to have an ironclad defense strategy.
I assume this clip was their primary defense.
So how long until the narrative begins where Fox is totally innocent and Dominion is just extorting them so they can steal the next election for Biden again? (Fox may be smart or at least smarting enough not to try this but that doesn’t mean others won’t think of it.)
Tested and confirmed today with daffy landlord.
To a small extent, a version of that is already happening. Since the news of the settlement earlier today, I’ve been checking in on a primarily right-wing message board. A few of the posters there have been wondering if Dominion plans to use the settlement money on software development, to make their voting machines fully capable of cheating for Democrats without ever getting caught. “Next election, if Dominion machines are used, results will be 99% Democrat; 1% Republican,” as one poster put it.
Bizarrely, some of the excuses have started even here in the UK.
For example, the once-neutral BBC’s analysis, was that FOX settled because Rupert Murdoch didn’t want to testify.
Which of course is totally plausible.
I mean, if FOX had not lied, he’d have nothing to be afraid of from testifying, indeed he should relish it. But, like, the weather forecast said it might rain, so it was better for him to play safe and pay the $800,000,000 instead.
ETA: This was the analysis on the radio anyway. I hope that the TV news will not purely run cover for FOX.
The Fox settlement story is getting plenty of coverage now by almost every outlet…except Fox.
According to Lawrence O’Donnell last night (Tuesday) this was probably the nail in the coffin.
He also made the (what seems to me) good point that this may be one of the most inept civil case defenses in history. If Murdoch and his lawyers had settled before discovery, none of what we now know about Fox’s inner workings — including how they really felt about Trump — would have been made public. Now the entire steaming, sordid mess is out there for all to see. It won’t make a rat’s ass to the MAGAsses, even if they were to hear of it; but you can bet your last farthing that Smartmatic et.al. have been taking notes.
Well, by settling now they did avoid having even more of the mess emerge. There is probably more crazy stuff that didn’t come out.
Not remotely a lawyer or legal analyst, so I would like to know this:
What are the chances Fox attempts to delay or renege on the settlement? How long can they delay payment.
And if so, what are Dominion’s options and likely response? Can they decide to press their suit again if they think they’re being jerked around?
Normally I wouldn’t be thinking along these lines, but considering the misbehavior all around on the Fox News side, it wouldn’t shock me if it was all part of a stalling tactic to draw things out to the point they never pay up.
They can but then they have to pay interest, more as time goes on. And get the bad publicity. At this point I think Fox News would be best to cut their losses.
Are they smart enough to do that? I dunno.
I’m normally a fan of Mr LOD, but I would call BS on that.
Murdoch has already had to answer questions for his deposition, and his testimony in this trial was not going to be televised. So what’s the difference?
The difference was the realization that they were in the wrong, they were going to lose, and the scale of the loss could be an existential thread to the channel (not just the settlement itself, but ripple effects on shareholders).
I would agree with this though. I put it down to overconfidence. Defamation is hard to prosecute in the US, and even if they lost they might have thought they could argue Dominion’s damages were only on the low end, like $50 million.
However, that long-term strategy should not have stopped them from realizing how serious and damaging things were getting. Of course, I am glad they didn’t realize this, it was good that these details came out.
(And, IMO, in a sane implementation of the first amendment, there should be repercussions for this quite independent of the harm to Dominion, but this is a tangent from this thread).
Although not nearly as big a case I had that happen to me as a juror. It was a drunk driving case. During the voir dire process the defense attorney made a big deal over whether the testimony of a cop was more believable than a defendant and after we were seated, the judge cautioned us against doing an independent investigation, specifically naming a nearby major intersection, and that it had been changed since th offense anyway.
We were released for lunch then cooled our heels for nearly an hour after we’d been told to come back. When we were let back into the courtroom only the judge was there who said the defendant had copped a plea, commented, “Too bad. It was going to be an interesting trial,” and thanked us for our service. I suspect the reality of having the twelve of sitting there, looking at him made him change his mind.
As I said in the Lying Fucks thread, “What am I gonna do with all this popcorn?”
Over in MAGA land this am one of the claims getting some traction was that this was proof of the deep state’s influence over media and courts. This was proved by the fact that Mike Lindell couldn’t find a lawyer to take his defamation case that would prove election fraud.
#1, I was unaware that Lindell ever claimed defamation, much less tried to find representation to bring suit
B, It isn’t clear to me how proving election fraud and defaming Lindell are the same thing
III, Just goes to show that making sense isn’t at all required in the current political climate.
FWIW, stock in Fox News’ parent company is down one whole fucking point on this news. It’s essentially unchanged since mid-March.
Investors had already priced in the amount Dominion got - the writing was on the wall months ago. The aphorism is “stocks drop on bad rumour, rise on fact”. In this case, stocks dropped on bad rumour and then didn’t rise at all.
Not really. Going back a year it’s roamed between 30 and 40 and is now close to the middle of that range. I haven’t taken the time to compare it to other media stocks, but my cursory analysis is that Wall Street never thought this suit would materially hurt the company, and they were right.
The special master assigned to oversee the discovery dispute is no longer on the case.
(WAG)
I think there’s a big difference between being ordered to pay damages in court, and settling out of court, with, counter-inuitively, the latter having more teeth.
If a judge orders you to pay someone you can always claim not to have the money, and it can take time to establish whether there is any truth to such a claim. And the more money you have, the better lawyers and mechanisms for hiding money are available to you.
Whereas an out of court settlement is based on signing a contract that you can and will pay and exactly when this will happen. There’ll be no room in the contract for stalling. FOX pays in full or it goes to trial.
I agree with your basic point, but not the last part. Generally, the remedy for not paying a settlement is not going back to the original suit, but a motion to enforce the settlement and/or seizing assets to satisfy the contract.