delaware was going to have an ability to stick a price on a district court loss todominion. and that even though fox thought the damages that dominion had were overstated, that they will be hit with a billion dollar judgment. and that was going to be too much for their stock price. even if they were going to win two, three, four, five years later, it would be too damaging to the stock price in the years to have a billion dollar judgment hanging over their head. and that is what pushes them to settle. joyce, what happens is that they lose and i take the thinking for what it is. that they might have lost at these levels, but they believe that it would be overturned by the supreme court and they might be right. we ll never know. but they lost on the law early fast and decisively. they loud on news worthiness of the claims. they lost so much that all a
obviously famously did a profile of him and called white supremacy power our. i don t think anyone, any single individual, with the exception of the murdaugh family perhaps, has had more of an influence on terms of enraging people who feel as though they are being replaced, in the case of one of the themes on a show, white replacement theory. and of course, through repeating the blithely election was stolen, he contributed to what happened on january 6th. and it s just such a shame that fox is not gonna have to apologize for telling that significant lie. josh, how do you see it? i think there was a lot of talk last week, people of the disappointed about the settlement payment, seeing it as capitulation. i think people had this vision that if this had gone to trial, if fox, lost they would ve been forced to apologize and everyone would ve had to admit they re lying about this. and that s not how it, works even if you win a multi billion dollar judgment, you don t get to force the de
massive 1.4 billion dollar judgment against alex jones fo the money that he made spreading lies about the attac and the harm incurred by the families who were terrorized b believers of the lies that ale jones told joining us now is chris matt who served as the lead trial counsel for the sandy hook family chris, good to see you again thank you for being with us. good to see you thanks for having me i want to ask you about these two cases. the remington case and the ale jones case you can start with whichever one you want to. they were historic and tha they were the first time tha level, either a gun company or a liar on mass media was hel to account in that way tell me how you got to that. how did you get those successes? well, it all started with the courage of the familie that we represented number one they were not content to jus
lawsuit is about, said i could have, but i did not. in any other civil case, that would be an admission of liability that the defendant could not survive. but with that admission under oath, the only thing standing here between rupert murdoch and the billion dollar judgment against him in court, it s the first amendment. fox defense so far, it rests entirely on the first amendment journalistic principle that what donald trump was saying about the election was newsworthy, and fox had a first amendment right to cover it uncritically. dominion needs to prove that rupert murdoch and fox executives, in the fox entertainers, on television, they knew it was all a lie, and they pushed it anyways. dominion has taken the discovery process a long way to proving that everybody at fox knew that it was a lie.
rupert murdoch, testifying under oath by lawyers. when asked why he did not stop the lies about dominion, the lawsuit is about, said i could have, but i did not. in any other civil case, that would be an admission of liability that the defendant could not survive. but with that admission under oath, the only thing standing here between rupert murdoch and the billion dollar judgment against him in court, it s the first amendment. fox defense so far, it rests entirely on the first amendment journalistic principle that what donald trump was saying about the election was newsworthy, and fox had a first amendment right to cover it uncritically. dominion needs to prove that rupert murdoch and fox executives, in the fox