Delaware judge sanctions Fox News lawyers in Dominion lawsuit

submitted by ActuallyNot from cbsnews.com

all 6 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Fox News' lawyers seem to have been hiding evidence that should have been made available during discovery.

[–]SoCo 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Abby Grossberg, who hates Fox and quite awhile back, makes everyone aware of recordings no one knew about.

Crazy, activist judge, who already effectively summarily ruled Fox guilty, before the jury is even selected, will do like the other activist judges do, when using the justice system as a political weapon.....accept/make excessively unrealistic court requests for documents/evidence, some from parties not even involve. Give them with unrealistic deadlines...because this has to be timed for the election and news cycles...then wait for something to come too slowly or be missed....then sanction sanction sanction.

...but why?

Because when they appeal later and the Judge's grossly mishandled ruling that no defense is allowed is to be scrutinized...then calling them obstructionist and uncooperative, may give you plausible deniability, some ability to project fault on them, and it gives the corporate media something to propagandize.

This is because the days of halfway honest DOJ have ended. Trials are tried in the court of public opinion and that is done with corporate propaganda, censorship, and controlling/framing the information the public is allowed.

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Abby Grossberg, who hates Fox and quite awhile back, makes everyone aware of recordings no one knew about.

Grossberg alleges that Fox has access to both the recordings and they transcripts.

Grossberg filed a lawsuit against the network, its executives and lawyers last month, and in an amended filing Tuesday alleged Fox had access to the recordings and transcripts, but did not provide them to Dominion during the discovery process in its defamation lawsuit against the cable news network and its parent company.

Since it's part of a lawsuit allegation, we will probably find out who is wrong about that. My money is that Fox are lying.

Give them with unrealistic deadlines...because this has to be timed for the election and news cycles...then wait for something to come too slowly or be missed....then sanction sanction sanction.

The case was filed in March 2021. Is two years really too short for discovery?

Judge Davis is correct to be concerned that Fox's lawyers are lying. "Oops" doesn't appear to cut it.

Because when they appeal later and the Judge's grossly mishandled ruling that no defense is allowed is to be scrutinized..

They're allowed a defence. They're not allowed to conceal evidence.

[–]SoCo 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

The case was filed in March 2021. Is two years really too short for discovery?

When you find out about more evidence last month, probably yeah.

But really, they had to dig up thousands of emails, documents, for dozens of employees on multiple layers of administration. This is a massive amount of stuff a government agency would take 10 years to produce and is something one would expect to take 2 or 3 year and be missing some stuff at first, simply due to the massive and complex task. They really got all the info on the whole news corp to snoop through.

They're allowed a defence.

...not really. The judge ruled what their interviewed guest said was unequivocally false. The judge ruled that they are responsible for airing it. The judge ruled that they cannot take the defense of freedom of speech or journalistic coverage of a topic of public interest in his summary judgement....he did the jury's job already without even having all the info, apparently. The only thing the jury is left to do, is determine if they aired that interview with malice, but I'm not sure he'll even allow them to do that. The judge seems to be pushing that since they questioned some of the interviewer's assertions, that the journalists and news station should be considered to know unequivocally that the statements they were interviewing were false. This, as if stupid news personalities have any clue. I don't know about you, but I don't want corporate talking heads deciding anything about an election; just bring the info and let the public decide. There is also a well planned effort to twist the statements of the news company members into being about interest in revenue, while they were discussing how their viewers were very interested in coverage of election concerns, which they were not providing...pretty much no one was providing it. They pointed out how News Max was covering it and the public was flocking to them to get the information they wanted.

This will damage all journalism, if this crazy and unrealistic stretch of a case is railroaded through by this activist judge. I can't believe New York Times and the other big players, who spent nearly a century fighting against journalism attacks like this aren't speaking out...even despite their dreams coming true. Especially for as many false things as they publish, even get away with calling people murders for 2 weeks, then doing and "oops" retraction...and the court sides with journalism...not but a hand full of years ago.

This is truly bonkers wold bullshit for anyone not just waking from a coma.

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

But really, they had to dig up thousands of emails, documents, for dozens of employees on multiple layers of administration.

I can search my email based on a word or phrase. I know what my documents are related to by where they are stored.

The judge ruled what their interviewed guest said was unequivocally false.

I missed that. Can you link me to the ruling?

[–]SoCo 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

A multi company corporate conglomerate has a little more effort to do, than hit search in an email box.

I've linked some coverage of the reprehensible summary judgement as well as the ruling document its self here, along with going some pertinent parts.

https://saidit.net/s/politics/comments/alqa/dominion_antijournalism_lawsuits_judge_make/