Trump floated naming Sidney Powell as special counsel for election fraud investigation: reports

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

7 hours ago, laylalex said:

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/media/2020/12/19/lou-dobbs-debunk-fact-check-smartmatic/

 

What I get out of reading that is that Fox News realizes that it is in for a world of pain if it doesn't retract "opinions" that aren't based on facts.

 

 

The company will have to prove first that what Fox said is actually libel if not fraud. 

[laylalex 7,300]

6 minutes ago, Cyberfx1024 said:

The company will have to prove first that what Fox said is actually libel if not fraud. 

What Fox has done though is a retraction -- that's exactly what you do when you want to avoid getting sued. One of the summers I worked at my dad's office he handled a slander case, it was pretty interesting (to me at least). My dad was representing a woman who had allegedly cussed out her cousin at church in front of a bunch of fellow parishioners, accusing her (male) cousin of cheating her out of thousands of dollars, sleeping around, and giving another churchgoer gonorrhea. You don't forget these details!  Anyway, the cousin asked her to make it known that it was all lies, and she doubled down and said that's the truth, no way. So the cousin's lawyer sent her a letter and told her to make it known or she was going to get sued. Nope. She got sued, and my dad got it to settle before it went to trial (she paid some money and apologized at church for upsetting people but didn't admit she was wrong -- I personally think she was making it up). 

 

Anyway the point is that Fox is doing the right thing and covering its butt. The retraction makes it harder for the voting machine company to sue, and it's very possible that the company won't now, as Fox did what was asked. But why would Fox make such efforts if they weren't concerned about their potential liability? The simplest explanation is that they don't know that the statements were true. They make a retraction and they do what's necessary to avoid a lawsuit. It was a smart move in my opinion.

[Dashinka 24,848]

8 hours ago, laylalex said:

What Fox has done though is a retraction -- that's exactly what you do when you want to avoid getting sued. One of the summers I worked at my dad's office he handled a slander case, it was pretty interesting (to me at least). My dad was representing a woman who had allegedly cussed out her cousin at church in front of a bunch of fellow parishioners, accusing her (male) cousin of cheating her out of thousands of dollars, sleeping around, and giving another churchgoer gonorrhea. You don't forget these details!  Anyway, the cousin asked her to make it known that it was all lies, and she doubled down and said that's the truth, no way. So the cousin's lawyer sent her a letter and told her to make it known or she was going to get sued. Nope. She got sued, and my dad got it to settle before it went to trial (she paid some money and apologized at church for upsetting people but didn't admit she was wrong -- I personally think she was making it up). 

 

Anyway the point is that Fox is doing the right thing and covering its butt. The retraction makes it harder for the voting machine company to sue, and it's very possible that the company won't now, as Fox did what was asked. But why would Fox make such efforts if they weren't concerned about their potential liability? The simplest explanation is that they don't know that the statements were true. They make a retraction and they do what's necessary to avoid a lawsuit. It was a smart move in my opinion.

I don't discount your example, but I think the bar for slander/libel for public entities is much higher then for private citizens.  I am sure Fox News is doing some form of damage control, but on the other hand if Dominion does pursue a lawsuit, then they need to go above and beyond proving their damage and I believe that would include opening up their source code to forensic analysis by the group(s) they may sue.

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

10 hours ago, laylalex said:

What Fox has done though is a retraction -- that's exactly what you do when you want to avoid getting sued. One of the summers I worked at my dad's office he handled a slander case, it was pretty interesting (to me at least). My dad was representing a woman who had allegedly cussed out her cousin at church in front of a bunch of fellow parishioners, accusing her (male) cousin of cheating her out of thousands of dollars, sleeping around, and giving another churchgoer gonorrhea. You don't forget these details!  Anyway, the cousin asked her to make it known that it was all lies, and she doubled down and said that's the truth, no way. So the cousin's lawyer sent her a letter and told her to make it known or she was going to get sued. Nope. She got sued, and my dad got it to settle before it went to trial (she paid some money and apologized at church for upsetting people but didn't admit she was wrong -- I personally think she was making it up). 

 

Anyway the point is that Fox is doing the right thing and covering its butt. The retraction makes it harder for the voting machine company to sue, and it's very possible that the company won't now, as Fox did what was asked. But why would Fox make such efforts if they weren't concerned about their potential liability? The simplest explanation is that they don't know that the statements were true. They make a retraction and they do what's necessary to avoid a lawsuit. It was a smart move in my opinion.

This is also why Fox has been losing viewership to OAN and Newsmax.  If you even delve into the numbers objectively you can see everything doesn't add up at all, and now it they are trying to cover stuff up. So good luck Fox

[laylalex 7,300]

So what is OAN and Newsmax's endgame then? I mean, if we see Fox's move as "oh no, we messed up" and Fox is a FAR better capitalized operation than either of them are, able to withstand litigation, why not make the same move? Fox is a leader, not a follower here.

[Bettie Page 118]

Something tells me that the stuff they peddle on OAN and Newsmax will be harder to monetize. There are only so many dollars in MyPillow's advertising budget and they will probably stick to the right wing stuff with the most eyeballs

[laylalex 7,300]

I guess Rudy and Pat Cipollone been told to prepare to be sued too: 

Quote

 

A defamation law firm representing Dominion Voting Systems has sent letters to White House counsel Pat Cipollone and President Donald Trump's personal attorney Rudy Giuliani instructing them to preserve all records related to the company at the center of Trump's conspiracy theories and warning Giuliani that legal action is "imminent."

Through two well-known defamation attorneys, Dominion Voting Systems sent letters to Cipollone and Giuliani Tuesday, demanding Giuliani stop making "defamatory claims against Dominion" and ensure there is "no confusion about your obligation to preserve and retain all documents relating to Dominion and your smear campaign against the company." The attorneys told Cipollone their preservation request is vast and includes conversations White House officials had with attorneys like Giuliani or Sidney Powell regarding Dominion.

 

https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/23/politics/dominion-voting-trump-campaign-lawsuit-imminent/index.html?s=09