3 ms·
I understand perfectly. Defamation doesn't have to have damages to get an award, you only need to show that it occurred. Based on dominion's financials the don
by elmerfud 4y ago
I understand perfectly. Defamation doesn't have to have damages to get an award, you only need to show that it occurred. Based on dominion's financials the don't appear to be impacted financially nor in the eyes of the public either.
What you're failing to understand is that things like this are very muchn out of balance. I'm not saying fox should be less, I'm saying those knowingly in violation of national security export restrictions should be punished more.
There's a big difference between "you said lies about me" and "I sold equipment to our enemies". That you missed that point is sad.
- yamazakiwi 4y agoIt's difficult to convincingly argue which of the two occurrences is more damaging. It is easy, however, to reduce one of those occurrences you view as less damaging into "You said lies about me", to promote your narrative.
- COGlory 4y agoFox settled - it could have gone to court and Fox could have won. It's not like the government had much say in the amount which Fox settled for. Fox paying $750 million was their own decision.