Wilmington, Del. — According to court documents in a $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit against the network, Fox News hosts have grave worries regarding charges of voter fraud in the 2020 presidential election made by associates of former President Donald Trump.
Tucker Carlson told a producer on November 16, 2020, that attorney Sidney Powell is lying about having evidence of election fraud, according to an exhibit excerpt that remains under seal.
The internal correspondence was contained in a redacted summary judgment brief filed by Dominion Voting Systems attorneys on Thursday.
In a correspondence, Carlson also referred to Powell as a “unguided missile,” and “dangerous as hell.” In the meantime, fellow host Laura Ingraham informed Carlson that Powell is “a real freak. Nobody wants to work with her. Identical to Rudy “Using former New York City mayor and Trump supporter Rudy Giuliani as an example.
According to Dominion’s petition, Sean Hannity stated in a deposition that he did not believe the entire narrative that Sidney was promoting.
Dominion, which sells electronic voting technology and software and is headquartered in Denver, is suing both Fox News and its parent firm, Fox Corporation. Dominion asserted that certain Fox News employees reinforced false accusations that the company influenced votes in the 2020 election, and that Fox News provided a forum for guests to make false and defamatory statements.
In a Thursday unsealed rebuttal, attorneys for the cable news company said that the lawsuit violates the First Amendment. They stated that Dominion had adopted “novel defamation theories” and is pursuing a “staggering” damage amount to generate headlines, stifle protected speech, and benefit Staple Street Capital Partners, Dominion’s private equity owner.
The complaint claims, “Dominion brought this lawsuit to punish FNN for reporting on one of the biggest stories of the day- allegations by the sitting President of the United States and his surrogates that the 2020 election was affected by fraud,” The mere fact that these claims were made was newsworthy.
Fox’s attorneys stated in their own summary judgment brief that Carlson questioned Powell’s allegations repeatedly during his broadcasts. “When we kept pressing, she got angry and told us to stop contacting her,” Carlson informed viewers on November 19, 2020.
Dominion’s own public relations firm expressed skepticism in December 2020 as to whether the network’s coverage was libelous, according to counsel for Fox. They also cite an email from Dominion’s director of product strategy and security, dated October 30, 2020, only days before the election, in which he lamented that the company’s products were “just riddled with bugs.”
Fox’s attorneys stated in their complaint that while voting-technology companies refuted the charges made by Trump and his surrogates, Fox News broadcast the denials, while certain Fox News hosts provided protected opinion commentary regarding Trump’s assertions.
The basis of Fox’s lawsuit is New York’s “anti-SLAAP” law. The purpose of these statutes is to prevent individuals exercising their First Amendment rights from being intimidated by “strategic lawsuits against public participation,” or SLAPPs.
Fox attorneys wrote: “According to Dominion, FNN had a duty not to truthfully report the President’s allegations but to suppress them or denounce them as false,” “Dominion has a fundamental misunderstanding. Freedom of expression and freedom of the press would be illusory if the winning side in a public disagreement could sue the press for giving the losing side a forum.”
Attorneys for Fox warn that scaring the firm with a $1.6 billion judgment may cause other media outlets to reconsider their reporting. In addition, according to the documents submitted in the case, Dominion has incurred no economic injury and has not lost any customers as a result of Fox’s election coverage.
Mid-April is when Superior Court Judge Eric Davis is slated to preside over a trial, although giving summary judgment to either party would eliminate the necessity for a five-week jury trial.
Dominion said in its 192-page brief that the judge should rule in its favor because “no reasonable juror could find in Fox’s favor on each element of Dominion’s defamation claim.” The attorneys for Dominion further claim that no reasonable juror could decide in favor of Fox’s “neutral reportage” and “fair report” defenses.
Dominion’s lawsuit argues that “Recounts and audits conducted by election officials across the U.S. repeatedly confirmed the election’s outcome, including specifically that Dominion’s machines accurately counted votes,” This evidence alone suffices to grant summary judgment on the falsehood of the claims that Dominion rigged the election and that its software influenced vote tallies.
Attorneys for Fox News argue that the network’s coverage and commentary did not constitute defamation.
The attorneys wrote, “Even assuming, for the sake of argument, that Dominion could point to any statement that could be actionable defamation, this court should grant Fox News’ summary judgment motion for the independent reason that Dominion lacks clear and convincing evidence that the relevant individuals at Fox News made or published any statement with actual malice,”
For the purposes of the defamation lawsuits, Judge Davis determined last month that Dominion is a public figure. This indicates that Dominion must establish by a majority of the evidence that the Fox defendants acted with actual malice or reckless disregard for the truth.
Advocates for Fox Corp. joined the brief filed by Fox News, while also arguing that the parent company is entitled to summary judgment on its own merits because Dominion has not provided sufficient evidence to hold it accountable.
»Fox News anchors disbelieved 2020 election fraud concerns, lawsuit alleges«