You're really boring me now. I've given too much attention to a p.o.s. who even has the temerity to aver that Blacks and Latinos have more violence coded into their DNA than do white, as if he actually knows biology. To someone who doesn't understand "explicit" versus "implicit". To someone who is racist, dishonest, AND stupid.
its a fairly simple legal concept. settlement, just like pleading the 5th is not an admission of guilt. neither are an "implicit" admission of anything. the left was right to mock trump when he implied pleading the 5th is an admission of guilt. but suddenly we dont understand the way law works anymore? a settlement concludes the dispute such that it doesnt go to judgment in a court. its not a finding of guilt. its not atypical as roughly 50% of civil cases settle before trial. sometimes they involve some sort of admission of guilt or culpability. this one did not. i dont watch fox enough to know what they claimed about voting machines. i dont think the election was stolen. but i believe fox should be allowed to speculate about it. at any rate, fox was found guilty of nothing.
correct, which is why nobody made that claim. please try to pay attention. no admission of guilt, legal or otherwise, was made. i feel like i am repeating myself here. settlement is not an admission of guilt. let me know if you need help understanding this.
Wrong. The extremely large sum says otherwise, peabrain. Sometimes an innocent party will settle out of expediency... mere nuisance sums... that it's not worth their time or reputation to fight. But in this case the punishment was massive. Whether the punishment was mandated by the court, or agreed upon by your victim, it's still a punishment. And nobody pays massive punishments without guilt, especially when Fox certainly could absorb much more in legal expenses than can Dominion. Implicit public admission of guilt, plain and simple.
Leftest view money differently. They don't really factor in sunk costs and risk vs reward on a long drawn out legal battle that would have ended up in the Supreme Court eventually siding with Fox under the constitution. Something likely to have taken 5+ years and 3x the money.
i get it, you want to deflect to speculating about what others think as a distraction from fact that a settlement is not an admission of guilt. this is part of your strategy. say "lol" for no reason, insult, speculate about motives and shit. you do this to distract from the issue. no admission of guilt, legal or otherwise, was made. thats the fact and no amount of infantile "lol"s and accusing people of being angry or dihonest etc will work. you should learn that these attempts to deflect only result in my repeating the salient point which is in this case: no admission of guilt, legal or otherwise, was made.
also worth considering that money isnt as vital to people who have a net worth of 17.5 billion like rupert murdoch does. Fox News revenue was $14.0B in 2022.
