network that have said things. they just swept up in a story, and like all of us, sometimes that story takes you too far. too far. same thing with cnn same thing with fox. then when they make mistakes, you hope they come back and say, boy, okay, we got that wrong. we ve done that on this show i have to do it every three minutes on this show we have the ticker for you. by the way, yeah we re not perfect. 6:31, i ll be making an apology for something i said over the last 31 minutes. no. the difference here you re being very fair. i ve already said it. the difference here, they knew what they were saying was a lie. right. because they said it themselves when they were not on the air, that this story about a stolen election was a lie. that s what separates this from the mistakes we make, the new york times makes, cnn makes, the bbc makes, other news gathering operations make.
to have more depositions, more interrogatories, more discovery, more news. who is running this place, is what they have to be asking themselves because things haven t gotten better for fox over the past two days their exposure hasn t been lessened although, they are more exposed today than ever before because they just showed they were willing to pay almost $800 million to not have their hosts and rupert murdoch testify that will not change with smartmatic it s not like they re saying, okay, we ll be fine with it. no smartmatic knows this. i ve just got to again ask, what the hell are the people who are running fox news thinking? and the question will be, does fox news, does news corp, learn from what just happened with dominion, which is to say, as you point out, they went through the worst part of it everything got spilled out into the public everything was exposed, the lies, the fact that many of their hosts and executives didn t believe a word what they
they have $4 billion i m used to talking in government money. $4 billion. they have $800 million less now after sm and after smartmatic, they ll have at least $800 million less then fox, they ve been number one for the most part since 1999 they ll continue to be number one, i m sure. because their viewers won t know. but there will be adjustments. there will be adjustments. there has since roger ailes left there s been no guardrails at fox news i know this personally, whatever hosts wanted to say, they said it everybody in the front office was afraid to stop em from saying it. when tucker carlson suggested many times that i was a murderer, you know, if any other if it were running like a normal network where there were guardrails, you d have roger ailes saying, stop,
were telling their audience, but they were trying to appease the audience with the conspiracy theories that all spilled out, and they still had to pay they settled in the end. the guess the question is, joyce, do they look and go, okay, this time, we don t want to putd ou ourselves through th, our hosts. it ll hurt, but let s cut a check to smartmatic, who is suing another billion more than dominion any time you go to trial in a case like this, you have the risk of punitive damages we get a number from these folks when they sue. that s the compensatory damages, the business loss they say they can move the jury is entitled to also impose damages that are purely punishment for perceived misbehavior. fox looks like a pretty good candidate for punitive damages in this case with the right jury that has to be part of their cal calculus you saw the important information in the statement
really had no legal defenses the judge, you ll recall, had already ruled that the jury didn t have to even consider whether fox was lying to its viewers. the judge decided as a matter of law that that was the case the only real question left open was whether fox knew or recklessly disregarded the truth. the evidence got worse andwors in that regard in the days approaching trial. smartmatic is now the beneficiary of all that evidence, and it seems very unlikely we ll ever see any trials take place in this matter you know, willie, the thing is, you know, maybe fox is thinking the judge is better, the jurisdiction is better i don t think it is. you still have unlimited punitive damages, i believe, in new york state maybe they draw a better judge, but the facts are still so damning. they ll still lose in the end, the defamation suit. you ve got all the internal