27 Oct 2020 7:16 pm
You mean nobody with a shred of integrity would write such bs as Tucker? Sure. But he makes money off dumb tv audiences like you.Termin8tor » 27 Oct 2020, 8:44 am » wrote: ↑ .
Thanks for proving yet again that you're a hopeless lying troll.
No one with a shred of integrity would write such ****.
Anyway I told you about their legal defense: it's parody not taken seriously. They won the case on that basis.
https://www.npr.org/2020/09/29/91774712 ... ox-s-lawye
Now comes the claim that you can't expect to literally believe the words that come out of Carlson's mouth. And that assertion is not coming from Carlson's critics. It's being made by a federal judge in the Southern District of New York and by Fox News's own lawyers in defending Carlson against accusations of slander. It worked, by the way.Just read U.S. District Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil's opinion, leaning heavily on the arguments of Fox's lawyers: The "'general tenor' of the show should then inform a viewer that [Carlson] is not 'stating actual facts' about the topics he discusses and is instead engaging in 'exaggeration' and 'non-literal commentary.' "
She wrote: "Fox persuasively argues, that given Mr. Carlson's reputation, any reasonable viewer 'arrives with an appropriate amount of skepticism' about the statement he makes."Vyskocil, an appointee of President Trump's, added, "Whether the Court frames Mr. Carlson's statements as 'exaggeration,' 'non-literal commentary,' or simply bloviating for his audience, the conclusion remains the same — the statements are not actionable."