Fox chief Rupert Murdoch said network aired 2020 election conspiracies for the money: court documents

 

https://www.rawstory.com/fox-news-rupert-murdoch-mike-lindell/

Fox’s new Jan. 6 documentary implies 9/11 was a false flag

 

"So, FBI operatives were organizing the attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6, according to government documents," Carlson falsely claimed during a June 16, 2021, show.

 

On the screen appears insurrectionists, footage from the Capitol, and Trump, but then it shows footage of Osama bin Laden, the mastermind behind the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. It isn't clear why Carlson would choose bin Laden's image, while the voiceover claims there have been false flags in the U.S. in the past.

 

https://www.rawstory.com/tucker-carlson-fake-documentary/

DOMINION'S COMBINED OPPOSITION TO FOX NEWS NETWORK, LLC'SAND FOX CORPORATION'S RULE 56 MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

 

Feb. 27, 2023

 

https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/dominion-fox-news/54e33f20f7fb6e8d/full.pdf

 

During Trump's campaign , Rupert provided Trump's son-in-law and senior advisor, Jared Kushner, with Fox confidential information about Biden's ads, along with debate strategy. Ex.600, R.Murdoch 210:6-9; 213:17-20; Ex.603 (providing Kushner a preview of Biden's ads before they were public).

 

But, on election night Rupert would not help with the Arizona call. As Rupert described it: "My friend Jared Kushner called me saying, This is terrible, and I could hear Trump's voice in the background shouting." Ex.600, R.Murdoch 65:6-8. But Rupert refused to budge: And I said, Well, the numbers are the numbers. Id. 65:9. By this point, Rupert knew no fraud had occurred:

 

 

Ouch.

 

 

Edited February 28, 20233 yr by bamnutsak

3 hours ago, bamnutsak said:

DOMINION'S COMBINED OPPOSITION TO FOX NEWS NETWORK, LLC'SAND FOX CORPORATION'S RULE 56 MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

 

Feb. 27, 2023

 

https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/dominion-fox-news/54e33f20f7fb6e8d/full.pdf

 

During Trump's campaign , Rupert provided Trump's son-in-law and senior advisor, Jared Kushner, with Fox confidential information about Biden's ads, along with debate strategy. Ex.600, R.Murdoch 210:6-9; 213:17-20; Ex.603 (providing Kushner a preview of Biden's ads before they were public).

 

But, on election night Rupert would not help with the Arizona call. As Rupert described it: "My friend Jared Kushner called me saying, This is terrible, and I could hear Trump's voice in the background shouting." Ex.600, R.Murdoch 65:6-8. But Rupert refused to budge: And I said, Well, the numbers are the numbers. Id. 65:9. By this point, Rupert knew no fraud had occurred:

 

 

Ouch.

 

 

Perhaps Rupert hated Trump all along and waited till he knew he hadn't won before sticking the knife in. That wouldn't surprise me about Murdoch. He's not my favourite human being.

20 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Perhaps Rupert hated Trump all along and waited till he knew he hadn't won before sticking the knife in. That wouldn't surprise me about Murdoch. He's not my favourite human being.

Yeah of course, when he found himself in front of a judge he did indeed realize he hated Trump all along. If you believe that "I have a bridge I want to offer you for sale.

4 hours ago, bamnutsak said:

DOMINION'S COMBINED OPPOSITION TO FOX NEWS NETWORK, LLC'SAND FOX CORPORATION'S RULE 56 MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

 

Feb. 27, 2023

 

https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/dominion-fox-news/54e33f20f7fb6e8d/full.pdf

 

During Trump's campaign , Rupert provided Trump's son-in-law and senior advisor, Jared Kushner, with Fox confidential information about Biden's ads, along with debate strategy. Ex.600, R.Murdoch 210:6-9; 213:17-20; Ex.603 (providing Kushner a preview of Biden's ads before they were public).

 

But, on election night Rupert would not help with the Arizona call. As Rupert described it: "My friend Jared Kushner called me saying, This is terrible, and I could hear Trump's voice in the background shouting." Ex.600, R.Murdoch 65:6-8. But Rupert refused to budge: And I said, Well, the numbers are the numbers. Id. 65:9. By this point, Rupert knew no fraud had occurred:

 

 

Ouch.

Hey, there really was election fraud, but on the Republican side.  Funny how it keeps turning out that way.

Did Rupert just throw his (News) anchors under the bus by acknowledging that they made false statements?( I put news in parentheses because I don’t believe they are a legitimate news organization)perhaps as a strategy to save his company?

On 2/22/2023 at 1:41 AM, thaibeachlovers said:

I never had tv access to any of the others listed, but I watched CNN occasionally for a laugh. I certainly never took it more seriously than Fox, but neither IMO were a source of serious news. IMO the crown for serious news belongs to Al Jazeera, the one widely available news source not beholden to advertisers.

It's not beholden to advertisers because it's funded by the dictator oops emir  of Qatar.

Schumer, Jeffries ask Murdoch to stop Fox hosts lying about 2020 election 

 

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.) have sent a letter to Fox Corp. Chairman Rupert Murdoch asking him to stop Fox News personalities from “spreading false election narratives,” warning they could lead to “further acts of political violence.”  

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/3878929-schumer-jeffries-ask-murdoch-to-stop-fox-hosts-lying-about-2020-election/

Fun time! ????

Trump rages on ‘MAGA hating globalist RINO’ Rupert Murdoch, calls Fox News hosts that ‘endorsed’ election ‘brave and patriotic’

 

"If Rupert Murdoch honestly believes that the Presidential Election of 2020, despite MASSIVE amounts of proof to the contrary, was not Rigged & Stolen, then he & his group of MAGA Hating Globalist RINOS should get out of the News Business as soon as possible, because they are aiding & abetting the DESTRUCTION OF AMERICA with FAKE NEWS. Certain BRAVE & PATRIOTIC FoxNews Hosts, who he scorns and ridicules, got it right. He got it wrong. THEY SHOULD BE ADMIRED & PRAISED, NOT REBUKED & FORSAKEN!!!” Trump stated on Truth Social."

 

https://americanwirenews.com/trump-rages-on-maga-hating-globalist-rino-rupert-murdoch-calls-fox-news-hosts-that-endorsed-election-brave-and-patriotic/

31 minutes ago, candide said:

Fun time! ????

Trump rages on ‘MAGA hating globalist RINO’ Rupert Murdoch, calls Fox News hosts that ‘endorsed’ election ‘brave and patriotic’

 

"If Rupert Murdoch honestly believes that the Presidential Election of 2020, despite MASSIVE amounts of proof to the contrary, was not Rigged & Stolen, then he & his group of MAGA Hating Globalist RINOS should get out of the News Business as soon as possible, because they are aiding & abetting the DESTRUCTION OF AMERICA with FAKE NEWS. Certain BRAVE & PATRIOTIC FoxNews Hosts, who he scorns and ridicules, got it right. He got it wrong. THEY SHOULD BE ADMIRED & PRAISED, NOT REBUKED & FORSAKEN!!!” Trump stated on Truth Social."

 

https://americanwirenews.com/trump-rages-on-maga-hating-globalist-rino-rupert-murdoch-calls-fox-news-hosts-that-endorsed-election-brave-and-patriotic/

When you lie down with dogs you get fleas.

Has Rupert Murdoch already set up a fall guy for Dominion debacle?

 

Fox News owner Rupert Murdoch's testimony in Dominion Voting Systems' civil lawsuit revealed that the right-wing media mogul believed that many of his network's own hosts went off the rails with false election conspiracy theories.

 

CNN media reporter Oliver Darcy speculates that Murdoch may have used his testimony to essentially set up Fox News CEO Suzanne Scott to take the fall should Fox lose its case against Dominion.

 

Darcy notes that "astute media observers know that Murdoch is the person actually calling the shots" but he adds that "it’s not hard to see how the company could advance this narrative."

 

https://www.rawstory.com/rupert-murdoch-dominion/

This CNN story is just that - the only link that opened went to a 2022 midterm article. All hearsay with no evidence. No surprise there I suppose. 

5 hours ago, candide said:

Fun time! ????

Trump rages on ‘MAGA hating globalist RINO’ Rupert Murdoch, calls Fox News hosts that ‘endorsed’ election ‘brave and patriotic’

 

"If Rupert Murdoch honestly believes that the Presidential Election of 2020, despite MASSIVE amounts of proof to the contrary, was not Rigged & Stolen, then he & his group of MAGA Hating Globalist RINOS should get out of the News Business as soon as possible, because they are aiding & abetting the DESTRUCTION OF AMERICA with FAKE NEWS. Certain BRAVE & PATRIOTIC FoxNews Hosts, who he scorns and ridicules, got it right. He got it wrong. THEY SHOULD BE ADMIRED & PRAISED, NOT REBUKED & FORSAKEN!!!” Trump stated on Truth Social."

 

https://americanwirenews.com/trump-rages-on-maga-hating-globalist-rino-rupert-murdoch-calls-fox-news-hosts-that-endorsed-election-brave-and-patriotic/

Now I know Trump isn’t currently a Congressman or Senator but there are plenty in the GOP who are (Marjorie TG for example) who continually push the “election was stolen” lie. My question is why are they still allowed to do this? In the UK, MP’s are held to a strict code that would see them at least lose their seat with a distinct possibility of criminal prosecution if it was particularly egregious. Is the 1st amendment so sacrosanct that it even allows US politicians to keep lying about such serious matters or is it something else that I don’t know about?

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misleading_of_parliament

41 minutes ago, johnnybangkok said:

Now I know Trump isn’t currently a Congressman or Senator but there are plenty in the GOP who are (Marjorie TG for example) who continually push the “election was stolen” lie. My question is why are they still allowed to do this? In the UK, MP’s are held to a strict code that would see them at least lose their seat with a distinct possibility of criminal prosecution if it was particularly egregious. Is the 1st amendment so sacrosanct that it even allows US politicians to keep lying about such serious matters or is it something else that I don’t know about?

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misleading_of_parliament

It's crazy hard to successfully sue in the US for defamation, especially against "journalists" (quotes are for Fox specifically).  You can't be sued just for being wrong.  You have to be wrong, know that you're wrong, and intentionally lie with malice.  There's also the issue of damages--how can your prove damages, i.e., how much financially did you suffer because of said lies. 

 

This Fox case is the strongest case I've seen, with nearly all of the elements present to prove Dominion's case.  If Fox manages to weasel out of this one, it will demonstrate to the world that media companies in the US can lie with impunity and will never be held accountable.  So there's quite a bit on the line.

Tucker Carlson is the Republicans sniveling lap dog! Total goose!

1 hour ago, johnnybangkok said:

Now I know Trump isn’t currently a Congressman or Senator but there are plenty in the GOP who are (Marjorie TG for example) who continually push the “election was stolen” lie. My question is why are they still allowed to do this? In the UK, MP’s are held to a strict code that would see them at least lose their seat with a distinct possibility of criminal prosecution if it was particularly egregious. Is the 1st amendment so sacrosanct that it even allows US politicians to keep lying about such serious matters or is it something else that I don’t know about?

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misleading_of_parliament

The former.

10 hours ago, nauseus said:

This CNN story is just that - the only link that opened went to a 2022 midterm article. All hearsay with no evidence. No surprise there I suppose. 

If you do an internet search on "Murdoch testimony election" you will get a lot of news links that say pretty much the same thing as the CNN story.  For example:

 

https://news.yahoo.com/murdoch-testified-fox-commentators-endorsed-222614792.html

 

https://news.yahoo.com/dominion-fox-filings-expected-defamation-210521102.html

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/rupert-murdoch-admits-fox-news-hosts-endorsed-false-election-fraud-cla-rcna72436

It’s time to revoke Fox News’ press credentials

 

The political media world has been rocked by the bombshell court filing by Dominion Voting Systems as part of their $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit against Fox News.

Top executives from Rupert Murdoch on down, and on-air personalities of the network knew the allegations of voter fraud made by Donald Trump and his team were false, yet pushed the “Big Lie” on the air, regardless.

 

Worse, the most influential “talent” privately acknowledged in emails and texts among themselves that the allegations the election was stolen from Trump were not just false, but extremely harmful.

 

https://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/ny-oped-its-time-to-revoke-fox-news-press-credentials-20230303-2incfhr3hnbkdjs3azwspfbfza-story.html

On 3/3/2023 at 3:01 PM, johnnybangkok said:

Now I know Trump isn’t currently a Congressman or Senator but there are plenty in the GOP who are (Marjorie TG for example) who continually push the “election was stolen” lie. My question is why are they still allowed to do this? In the UK, MP’s are held to a strict code that would see them at least lose their seat with a distinct possibility of criminal prosecution if it was particularly egregious. Is the 1st amendment so sacrosanct that it even allows US politicians to keep lying about such serious matters or is it something else that I don’t know about?

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misleading_of_parliament

IMO we either have free speech or we don't. Can't pick and choose based on our own personal likes or dislikes.

23 hours ago, 2baht said:

Tucker Carlson is the Republicans sniveling lap dog! Total goose!

Excellent and informative post. Keep 'em coming.

On 3/3/2023 at 3:48 PM, Berkshire said:

It's crazy hard to successfully sue in the US for defamation, especially against "journalists" (quotes are for Fox specifically).  You can't be sued just for being wrong.  You have to be wrong, know that you're wrong, and intentionally lie with malice.  There's also the issue of damages--how can your prove damages, i.e., how much financially did you suffer because of said lies. 

 

This Fox case is the strongest case I've seen, with nearly all of the elements present to prove Dominion's case.  If Fox manages to weasel out of this one, it will demonstrate to the world that media companies in the US can lie with impunity and will never be held accountable.  So there's quite a bit on the line.

IMO it only matters if we think the "media" are normally truthful, which I don't.

Local media is IMO so biased and "woke" that I no longer watch the so called "news".

3 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

IMO it only matters if we think the "media" are normally truthful, which I don't.

Local media is IMO so biased and "woke" that I no longer watch the so called "news".

So enlighten us, where do you get your news?

8 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

IMO we either have free speech or we don't. Can't pick and choose based on our own personal likes or dislikes.

How about truth and outright lies?

On 2/18/2023 at 12:20 PM, BangkokReady said:

This could probably be said about most of the mainstream media and politicians. 

Yes, the left stream media is the most dishonest. I am very surprised if anyone with a I.Q over 50 watch it. Fox news and Newsmax are the best as you will see in time.

1 hour ago, vandeventer said:

Yes, the left stream media is the most dishonest. I am very surprised if anyone with a I.Q over 50 watch it. Fox news and Newsmax are the best as you will see in time.

Which is why they are in court.

1 hour ago, vandeventer said:

Yes, the left stream media is the most dishonest. I am very surprised if anyone with a I.Q over 50 watch it. Fox news and Newsmax are the best as you will see in time.

We have hard proof provided by Fox itself that its hosts lied about 2020 election fraud. And Fox News is the best? Are slogans and catchphrases all  you've got?

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

IMO we either have free speech or we don't. Can't pick and choose based on our own personal likes or dislikes.

Well, in fact there are all sorts of limitations on speech. For some, criminal penalties apply. One such  summed up example is, "You can't shout fire in a crowded theater"

Another limitation is fraudulent commercial claims. Here civil penalties apply. Or libel or slander.

Members of Congress are protected from any sort of penalties in regards to their speech so long as they say it while actually physically present in the Senate or House. Outside of those precincts they operate under the same limitations as does any other citizen.

There are other ways free speech is limited. For instance wealthy parties can stifle criticism or unpleasant revelations by bringing lawsuits against those with more limited financial means. I can think of one particularly prominent party who has a history of abusing the legal system by this method. Against those persons who persist anyway despite the attempt at discouragement, his lawsuits have a history of repeatedly failing.

Edited March 4, 20233 yr by placeholder

2 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Which is why they are in court.

Lets hope they don't have a lefty judge!!!

1 hour ago, vandeventer said:

Lets hope they don't have a lefty judge!!!

Delaware Governor (D) nominated the judges and the senate (majority D) appointed them. You need prayers not hope. What I hope is that Dominion gets their 1.6 billion which they richly deserved.