it s okay when they do it. not okay when others do it. that would seem to legally uncut the last leg of defense the judge would allow, which was newsworthy stuff. there s a larger legal problem that their newsworthy defense was a vladimir putin waiting before their eyes. in fact, sorry, the judge did say they couldn t even make that defense. i m sorry, which defense? they could not claim newsworthiness as a they lost that as part of their defense in the lead up to the trial. right, what they had left wuss we re doing this, i should say, as news, and it was the news process we are trying to basically do this as a good faith mistake is the best way you could put it, that it wasn t malicious defamation, and a jury s going to look at all this evidence of saying by the way, with you don t know from the redacting which messages would go, with you didn t get the trial but the jury would be presented with a lot of material that would make you say, i think this was
course of the last few months has contributed to this settlement today, and we are proud of our colleagues at dominion and dominion itself for holding fox to the standard of truth that it should have had held itself to. um we do believe that from our perspective, although we understand the newsworthiness of today s events for us, it s a little bit of the tail wagging the dog because abby s case to case is actually one in delaware that sounds and civil conspiracy where fox and its attorneys essentially sought to escape goat abby and have her pressure her to tell foxes lies in a court of law, which he wasn t willing to do. uh and she s is she stood up forcefully and courageously and i think that s part of what brought up brought about the settlement today, so that suit is continuing and many of the issues in the dominion suit
newsworthiness of that absolve them from liability for defamation. why is it significant that he has ruled that out? i is it significant that he has ruled that out? ~ is it significant that he has ruled that out? ,, ., , that out? i think fox s greatest otential that out? i think fox s greatest potential defence was - that out? i think fox s greatest potential defence was always l that out? i think fox s greatest - potential defence was always going to be, potential defence was always going to be, look, we were not saying this stuff was to be, look, we were not saying this stuff was true. we were merely reporting stuff was true. we were merely reporting a what others were saying and so reporting a what others were saying and so they reporting a what others were saying and so they were going to try to use that as their and so they were going to try to use that as their key defence to suggest they are that as their key defence to suggest they are not responsible because the
case can be settled today or tomorrow. as case can be settled today or tomorrow. as a matter- case can be settled today or. tomorrow. as a matter of fact it could tomorrow. as a matter of fact it could be settled tomorrow. as a matter of fact it could be settled at the - tomorrow. as a matter of fact it| could be settled at the trial, and that s could be settled at the trial, and that s not so could be settled at the trial, and that s not so unusual. could be settled at the trial, and that s not so unusual. i- could be settled at the trial, and that s not so unusual. i think- could be settled at the trial, and i that s not so unusual. i think that fox wants that s not so unusual. i think that fox wants to that s not so unusual. i think that fox wants to spirits that s not so unusual. i think that fox wants to spirits of that s not so unusual. i think that fox wants to spirits of the - that s not so unusual. i think that| fox wants to spirits of the ordeal, the embarras