- Feb 6, 2002
- 30,430
- 17,745
- 136
Probably can't. Employer is generally responsible for employee.How about some personal suits? Fucker? Hannity? Rupert?
I’m gonna guess it wasn’t in the plaintiffs best interest. Wealthy guy suing a not wealthy guy for everything he owns doesn’t look good even in the Morgan accident sense.Probably can't. Employer is generally responsible for employee.
Remember the truck driver who hit Tracy Morgan, killed someone and seriously injured him? Walmart was sued not the driver.
Don't think that conclusively demonstrates anything, as if you have a choice, why would you not sue the wealthy corporation rather than the probably asset-less employee?Probably can't. Employer is generally responsible for employee.
Remember the truck driver who hit Tracy Morgan, killed someone and seriously injured him? Walmart was sued not the driver.
And the ones who know better are going along for the ride simply because extoling whatever it is that Trump claims credit for would be just another lie anyway. The whole publicity stunt that the Repubs see as Trump's effort to "drain the swamp" is one big lie followed by even bigger ones. And now with him being out of office it seems his lies have mysteriously lost that oomph, that certain je ne sais pas that his position as POTUS once gave him.They can't even claim absence of malice (as the right-wing propaganda is claiming now) because they ADMITTED they had no evidence to report the wild claims against Dominion just as Powell admitted she believed no reasonable person would believe her claims.
It was performance theater to overthrow an election and the US government.
What is even more amazing is the dupes and rubes STILL BELIEVE IT.
Probably doesn't matter which one you sue. Under various state labor codes, the employer must indemnify the employee if the conduct was in the course and scope of employment, meaning a judgment against the employee would be paid by the employer anyway.Don't think that conclusively demonstrates anything, as if you have a choice, why would you not sue the wealthy corporation rather than the probably asset-less employee?
Curious what Murdoch's attitude is to this whole affair. His self-interest and agenda doesn't entirely overlap with that of Fox's audience, or its presenters.
Dominion had previously sued Lindell, Powell and Giuliani. Now they have added Fox News.How about some personal suits? Fucker? Hannity? Rupert?
I'm onboard with suing Hannity, Fucker and Rupert.Don't think that conclusively demonstrates anything, as if you have a choice, why would you not sue the wealthy corporation rather than the probably asset-less employee?
Curious what Murdoch's attitude is to this whole affair. His self-interest and agenda doesn't entirely overlap with that of Fox's audience, or its presenters.
New Jersey is a no-fault insurance state, so that factor likely entered into it as well.I’m gonna guess it wasn’t in the plaintiffs best interest. Wealthy guy suing a not wealthy guy for everything he owns doesn’t look good even in the Morgan accident sense.
He is an entertainer his public image has value.
However I am not a qualified legal expert and I could be wrong.
I seldom watch Fox news, mainly just see it on occasion when I visit my 74 year old mother (who is a militant Trump supporter and who believes everything Fox/Newsmax tells her like it was written by a burning bush on a mountainside somewhere).Dominion had previously sued Lindell, Powell and Giuliani. Now they have added Fox News.
Smartmatic has sued: Fox News, Maria Bartarimo, Lou Dobbs, Powell, Giuliani.
This article says that he avoided mentioning either company in those interviews.Honestly, I'm still waiting on them to sue Trump directly - I know for a fact that he personally defamed them on Fox at least twice during interviews after the election because I heard him say the words myself while trying to ignore the turd. And if I managed to hear it twice (as little as I pay attention to Fox news) I'm sure he must have been doing it a lot at the time.
Finally, they went for the 800 lb. gorilla.
Dominion is claiming harm to ther business because of the lies. Evidence seem to bear out their claimAnd there is no basis for that suit. Their lawyer already lost big time with Nunes vs CNN suit. Same lawyer, different weak ass bullshit.
Skyking was referring to the Flynn family lawsuit, not Dominion's lawsuit.Dominion is claiming harm to ther business because of the lies. Evidence seem to bear out their claim
I'm all about Fox getting sued, sorry for the mistake. Dominion and Smartmatic should go after them all.Dominion is claiming harm to ther business because of the lies. Evidence seem to bear out their claim
a self-titled news organization is somehow not responsible for the factuality of its content..... htf does it qualify as news, then?This is just pathetic. Why do we allow Fox News to stay on the air??
Fox News argues its hosts didn't need to fact-check election conspiracy theories from Trump's lawyers in response to Smartmatic defamation suit (yahoo.com)