Could be the single greatest roundup of government overreach in U.S. history .
Donald Trump Announces 2016 White House Bid
- Thread starter B00Mer
- Start date
Trump lawyer seeks monthlong delay in trial over rape claim
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Published Apr 12, 2023 • 1 minute read
NEW YORK — An attorney for Donald Trump is seeking a one-month delay in the trial regarding a columnist’s claims that Trump raped her in a department store dressing room in the 1990s, contending that his client’s right to a fair trial depends on a “cooling off” period following the former president’s indictment and arraignment.
The trial was set for April 25. In a letter Tuesday to Judge Lewis A. Kaplan, attorney Joseph Tacopina cited “the recent deluge of prejudicial media coverage” surrounding Trump’s arrest and court appearance in arguing for a delay. The former president was charged March 30 with 34 felony counts related to allegations that he paid hush money to an adult film star, Stormy Daniels.
The civil case before Kaplan was brought against Trump in November by E. Jean Carroll, a columnist who says the wealthy real estate developer raped her in early 1996 after a chance meeting at the Bergdorf Goodman department store.
Trump has repeatedly and emphatically denied the allegation. A jury will be asked to decide whether the rape occurred and if Trump defamed Carroll with his comments.
A temporary state law that took effect last year allows adult rape victims to sue their abusers, even if attacks happened decades ago.
Tacopina’s letter seeking a delay in the trial for Carroll’s civil suit followed Kaplan’s order on Monday directing parties in the case to notify him by April 20 whether they will be present throughout the trial in Manhattan federal court. Carroll’s attorney has said she will attend; Trump’s attorney has not responded to requests for comment on Kaplan’s order.
Carroll’s lawyer, Roberta Kaplan, said a response to the request for a delay will be filed in a letter to the judge. The lawyer and the judge are not related.
torontosun.com
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Published Apr 12, 2023 • 1 minute read
NEW YORK — An attorney for Donald Trump is seeking a one-month delay in the trial regarding a columnist’s claims that Trump raped her in a department store dressing room in the 1990s, contending that his client’s right to a fair trial depends on a “cooling off” period following the former president’s indictment and arraignment.
The trial was set for April 25. In a letter Tuesday to Judge Lewis A. Kaplan, attorney Joseph Tacopina cited “the recent deluge of prejudicial media coverage” surrounding Trump’s arrest and court appearance in arguing for a delay. The former president was charged March 30 with 34 felony counts related to allegations that he paid hush money to an adult film star, Stormy Daniels.
The civil case before Kaplan was brought against Trump in November by E. Jean Carroll, a columnist who says the wealthy real estate developer raped her in early 1996 after a chance meeting at the Bergdorf Goodman department store.
Trump has repeatedly and emphatically denied the allegation. A jury will be asked to decide whether the rape occurred and if Trump defamed Carroll with his comments.
A temporary state law that took effect last year allows adult rape victims to sue their abusers, even if attacks happened decades ago.
Tacopina’s letter seeking a delay in the trial for Carroll’s civil suit followed Kaplan’s order on Monday directing parties in the case to notify him by April 20 whether they will be present throughout the trial in Manhattan federal court. Carroll’s attorney has said she will attend; Trump’s attorney has not responded to requests for comment on Kaplan’s order.
Carroll’s lawyer, Roberta Kaplan, said a response to the request for a delay will be filed in a letter to the judge. The lawyer and the judge are not related.
Trump lawyer seeks monthlong delay in trial over rape claim
An attorney for Donald Trump is seeking a one-month delay in the trial regarding a columnist's claims that Trump raped her in a department store dressing room in the 1990s
Trump answers questions for 7 hours in New York fraud lawsuit
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Michael R. Sisak
Published Apr 13, 2023 • Last updated 1 day ago • 3 minute read
NEW YORK — Former President Donald Trump answered questions for nearly seven hours Thursday during his second deposition in a legal battle with New York’s attorney general over his company’s business practices, reversing an earlier decision to invoke his Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination and remain silent.
The Republican met all day with lawyers for Attorney General Letitia James, who sued Trump last year. Her lawsuit claims Trump and his family misled banks and business associates by giving them false information about his net worth and the value of assets such as hotels and golf courses.
Shortly after Trump entered the Manhattan skyscraper that houses James’ offices, his attorney, Alina Habba, said he was “not only willing but also eager to testify.”
After the deposition was finished, a lawyer for Trump’s businesses, Christopher Kise, said the former president had spent nearly seven hours “describing in detail his extraordinary business success.”
“The transactions at the centre of this case were wildly profitable for the banks and for the Trump entities,” Kise said. “When the facts of this success, and not politically engineered soundbites, are out in the open, everyone will scoff at the notion any fraud took place.”
The lawsuit is unrelated to the felony criminal charges filed against Trump by the Manhattan district attorney, which led last week to his historic arraignment, the first for a former president.
James declined to answer a question about the deposition at a news conference on an unrelated matter Wednesday.
Trump previously met with James’ lawyers Aug. 10, but refused to answer all but a few procedural questions, invoking his Fifth Amendment rights more than 400 times. At the time, James had not yet brought her lawsuit and it was unclear whether questions about the way Trump valued his company would become the basis of a criminal case.
“Anyone in my position not taking the Fifth Amendment would be a fool, an absolute fool,” he said in that deposition, which was recorded on video and later released publicly. Trump predicted a “renegade” prosecutor would try to make a criminal case out of his answers, if he gave them.
“One statement or answer that is ever so slightly off, just ever so slightly, by accident, by mistake, such as it was a sunny, beautiful day, when actually it was slightly overcast, would be met by law enforcement at a level seldom seen in this country, because I’ve experienced it,” he said.
Circumstances since then have changed. The criminal charges brought by the Manhattan district attorney focused on how the company accounted internally for payments to a lawyer, Michael Cohen, for his work paying off people not to go public with stories about extramarital sexual encounters Trump said never happened.
James’ lawsuit focused on allegations that Trump lied repeatedly about his own wealth and exaggerated the value of his assets on financial statements.
In a social media post Thursday morning, Trump called the suit “ridiculous, just like all of the other Election Interference cases being brought against me.”
He raised a fist as he left his apartment at Trump Tower in the morning, arriving by motorcade at the attorney general’s office around 9:40. The two sides took a break for lunch. Trump departed in the motorcade just before 6:15 p.m. and did not stop to speak to reporters.
The lawsuit James brought is scheduled to go to trial in October. Video recordings of Trump’s depositions could potentially be played at the trial, if the lawsuit is not settled.
Thursday’s deposition was conducted in private.
torontosun.com
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Michael R. Sisak
Published Apr 13, 2023 • Last updated 1 day ago • 3 minute read
NEW YORK — Former President Donald Trump answered questions for nearly seven hours Thursday during his second deposition in a legal battle with New York’s attorney general over his company’s business practices, reversing an earlier decision to invoke his Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination and remain silent.
The Republican met all day with lawyers for Attorney General Letitia James, who sued Trump last year. Her lawsuit claims Trump and his family misled banks and business associates by giving them false information about his net worth and the value of assets such as hotels and golf courses.
Shortly after Trump entered the Manhattan skyscraper that houses James’ offices, his attorney, Alina Habba, said he was “not only willing but also eager to testify.”
After the deposition was finished, a lawyer for Trump’s businesses, Christopher Kise, said the former president had spent nearly seven hours “describing in detail his extraordinary business success.”
“The transactions at the centre of this case were wildly profitable for the banks and for the Trump entities,” Kise said. “When the facts of this success, and not politically engineered soundbites, are out in the open, everyone will scoff at the notion any fraud took place.”
The lawsuit is unrelated to the felony criminal charges filed against Trump by the Manhattan district attorney, which led last week to his historic arraignment, the first for a former president.
James declined to answer a question about the deposition at a news conference on an unrelated matter Wednesday.
Trump previously met with James’ lawyers Aug. 10, but refused to answer all but a few procedural questions, invoking his Fifth Amendment rights more than 400 times. At the time, James had not yet brought her lawsuit and it was unclear whether questions about the way Trump valued his company would become the basis of a criminal case.
“Anyone in my position not taking the Fifth Amendment would be a fool, an absolute fool,” he said in that deposition, which was recorded on video and later released publicly. Trump predicted a “renegade” prosecutor would try to make a criminal case out of his answers, if he gave them.
“One statement or answer that is ever so slightly off, just ever so slightly, by accident, by mistake, such as it was a sunny, beautiful day, when actually it was slightly overcast, would be met by law enforcement at a level seldom seen in this country, because I’ve experienced it,” he said.
Circumstances since then have changed. The criminal charges brought by the Manhattan district attorney focused on how the company accounted internally for payments to a lawyer, Michael Cohen, for his work paying off people not to go public with stories about extramarital sexual encounters Trump said never happened.
James’ lawsuit focused on allegations that Trump lied repeatedly about his own wealth and exaggerated the value of his assets on financial statements.
In a social media post Thursday morning, Trump called the suit “ridiculous, just like all of the other Election Interference cases being brought against me.”
He raised a fist as he left his apartment at Trump Tower in the morning, arriving by motorcade at the attorney general’s office around 9:40. The two sides took a break for lunch. Trump departed in the motorcade just before 6:15 p.m. and did not stop to speak to reporters.
The lawsuit James brought is scheduled to go to trial in October. Video recordings of Trump’s depositions could potentially be played at the trial, if the lawsuit is not settled.
Thursday’s deposition was conducted in private.
Trump answers questions for 7 hours in New York fraud lawsuit
Donald Trump answered questions for nearly seven hours Thursday during his second deposition in legal battle with New York attorney general.
Stormy Daniels to receive lifetime achievement award from porn site
She is being recognized 'for her many contributions, which have helped shape the face of the adult industry as well as American history'
Author of the article:Bang Showbiz
Bang Showbiz
Published Apr 14, 2023 • 1 minute read
Stormy Daniels is set to receive PornHub’s lifetime achievement award.
The former porn star, 44, who is at the centre of Donald Trump’s historic indictment, will receive the online porn giant’s trophy at a ceremony in Los Angeles on April 20, where Diplo is set to perform according to Page Six.
It reported PornHub said Daniels is being recognized “for her many contributions, which have helped shape the face of the adult industry as well as American history.”
Stormy told Page Six about her pride in the porn world.
“I’m very much involved in advocating for the adult industry, and for sex worker rights and sex positivity.”
She added she’s also worked as a lobbyist for adult entertainment companies, “working to change laws that were discriminatory to performers and sex workers.”
She added: “I have worked to promote and protect those of us in the industry.”
Trump, 76, is expected back in court in December in Manhattan after pleading not guilty to 34 counts of falsifying business record charges, thought to be linked to an alleged $130,000 hush money payment to porn star Daniels in the run-up to his 2016 presidential campaign after she claimed they had a fling – which the former Apprentice judge denies.
Daniels claims the money was paid by Michael Cohen, Trump’s former lawyer, and it emerged on Tuesday the former U.S. president is suing Cohen for more than $500 million, according to a filing in a Florida court.
If he wins the Republican presidential nomination for the 2024 race to become the U.S.’ next leader, Trump is likely to face President Joe Biden, who said on Monday he planned to seek re-election, but no formal announcement has been made.
Biden, 80, told NBC News: “I plan on running, but we’re not prepared to announce it yet.”
pagesix.com
torontosun.com
She is being recognized 'for her many contributions, which have helped shape the face of the adult industry as well as American history'
Author of the article:Bang Showbiz
Bang Showbiz
Published Apr 14, 2023 • 1 minute read
Stormy Daniels is set to receive PornHub’s lifetime achievement award.
The former porn star, 44, who is at the centre of Donald Trump’s historic indictment, will receive the online porn giant’s trophy at a ceremony in Los Angeles on April 20, where Diplo is set to perform according to Page Six.
It reported PornHub said Daniels is being recognized “for her many contributions, which have helped shape the face of the adult industry as well as American history.”
Stormy told Page Six about her pride in the porn world.
“I’m very much involved in advocating for the adult industry, and for sex worker rights and sex positivity.”
She added she’s also worked as a lobbyist for adult entertainment companies, “working to change laws that were discriminatory to performers and sex workers.”
She added: “I have worked to promote and protect those of us in the industry.”
Trump, 76, is expected back in court in December in Manhattan after pleading not guilty to 34 counts of falsifying business record charges, thought to be linked to an alleged $130,000 hush money payment to porn star Daniels in the run-up to his 2016 presidential campaign after she claimed they had a fling – which the former Apprentice judge denies.
Daniels claims the money was paid by Michael Cohen, Trump’s former lawyer, and it emerged on Tuesday the former U.S. president is suing Cohen for more than $500 million, according to a filing in a Florida court.
If he wins the Republican presidential nomination for the 2024 race to become the U.S.’ next leader, Trump is likely to face President Joe Biden, who said on Monday he planned to seek re-election, but no formal announcement has been made.
Biden, 80, told NBC News: “I plan on running, but we’re not prepared to announce it yet.”
Exclusive | Stormy Daniels fears her scandal could make things ‘worse’ for America
The porn star tells Page Six she worries that the fallout from her sex scandal involving Donald Trump could lead to a “worse” president being elected instead.
pagesix.com
Stormy Daniels to receive lifetime achievement award from porn site
Stormy Daniels is set to receive PornHub's lifetime achievement award.
Capitol rioter who crushed officer with shield gets 7 years
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Michael Kunzelman
Published Apr 14, 2023 • Last updated 1 day ago • 4 minute read
WASHINGTON — A man who used a stolen riot shield to crush a police officer in a doorframe during the U.S. Capitol insurrection was sentenced on Friday to more than seven years in prison for his role in one of the most violent episodes of the Jan. 6 attack.
Federal prosecutors had recommended a prison sentence of 15 years and eight months for Patrick McCaughey III, which would have been the longest sentence for a Capitol riot case by more than five years.
U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden sentenced McCaughey to seven years and six months in prison followed by two years of supervised release. The judge described McCaughey, 25, as a “poster child of all that was dangerous and appalling about” the Jan. 6, 2021, riot.
“Your actions are some of the most egregious crimes that were committed on that dark day,” the judge told McCaughey.
McCaughey, of Ridgefield, Connecticut, expressed shame for joining the mob of then-President Donald Trump’s supporters who “violated” the Capitol.
“I’m sorry that I conducted myself less like a citizen and more like an animal that day,” he said.
McCaughey’s 90-month sentence matches the second longest prison sentence so far for a Capitol riot defendant. It’s the same length as the sentence that another judge handed down to Albuquerque Cosper Head, a Tennessee man who dragged Metropolitan Police Department Officer Michael Fanone into a crowd of rioters.
Also on Friday, a Finksburg, Maryland, man pleaded guilty to assaulting an Associated Press photographer and police officers in separate attacks outside the Capitol on Jan. 6. Rodney Milstreed is scheduled to be sentenced on July 20. Chief Judge James Boasberg told Milstreed, 56, that the estimated sentencing guidelines for his case recommend a term of imprisonment ranging from five years and three months to six years and six months.
The judge in McCaughey’s case convicted him of nine counts, including felony assault charges, after hearing trial testimony without a jury in September.
Nine people, including McCaughey, were charged together with joining one of the most brutal clashes at the Capitol on Jan. 6. Police and rioters were fighting for control of a tunnel entrance on the Lower West Terrace when MPD Officer Daniel Hodges came face to face with McCaughey, who used a stolen riot shield to pin Hodges to a metal doorframe.
“Go home!” McCaughey shouted at the officer.
Hodges, who testified at McCaughey’s trial and spoke at his sentencing hearing, said he thinks about the horrors of Jan. 6 every day.
“I do not foresee that changing anytime soon,” he told the judge, describing McCaughey as a “foot soldier” who was at “the vanguard of the assault.”
Hodges screamed out for help when another rioter grabbed the officer’s baton and struck him in the face with it.
“It was only then, over two minutes after the assault began, that McCaughey relented and pulled Officer Hodges’s face shield down over his eyes,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Kimberly Paschall wrote in a court filing.
Hodges managed to retreat inside the Capitol building and was taken to a hospital. McCaughey struck a second officer with the shield before another officer sprayed him with a chemical irritant, backing him away.
“It is not an exaggeration to state the actions of these officers in thwarting the mob at the Lower West Terrace entrance potentially saved the lives of others, including members of Congress,” Paschall wrote.
The judge convicted McCaughey of obstructing an official proceeding, the Jan. 6 joint session of Congress for certifying Joe Biden’s presidential election victory over Trump.
Earlier this year, the judge sentenced four of McCaughey’s co-defendants to terms of imprisonment ranging from 14 months to five years. Paschall argued that McCaughey’s conduct was more “egregious and protracted” than the others’.
A probation officer’s calculation of the sentencing guidelines for McCaughey recommend a prison term ranging from nine years to 11 years and three months.
McCaughey’s attorneys requested a sentence of one year behind bars. They said McCaughey’s “reprehensible” actions were motivated by his “misunderstanding” about the 2020 presidential election. Trump, the Republican incumbent, falsely claimed that Democrats stole the election from him.
“There remain many grifters out there who remain free to continue propagating the ‘great lie’ that Trump won the election, Donald Trump being among the most prominent. Mr. McCaughey is not one of these individuals; he knows he was wrong,” his lawyers wrote.
McCaughey, a carpenter employed by his father’s construction company, drove about 300 miles (480 kilometres) from his Connecticut home to Washington, D.C., to attend Trump’s “Stop the Steal” rally on Jan. 6. After listening to speeches, McCaughey went to the Capitol and joined other rioters in confronting police officers guarding the West Plaza.
When the rioters broke through the police line, McCaughey climbed up the steps inside construction scaffolding and took a selfie atop the structure. Minutes later, he joined the mob in a coordinated “heave-ho” push against officers guarding the Lower West Terrace tunnel entrance.
More than 1,000 people have been charged with federal crimes related to the deadly Jan. 6 riot. Over 600 of them have pleaded guilty or been convicted after trials decided by a jury or a judge. Over 450 of them have been sentenced, with more than half getting terms of imprisonment ranging from seven days to 10 years.
The 10-year prison sentence was for retired New York City police officer Thomas Webster, who was convicted by a jury of assaulting a Metropolitan Police Department officer with a metal flagpole.
Asked for his reaction to McCaughey’s sentence, Officer Hodges said it depends on what happens when his assailant is released from prison.
“We’ll see if he’s a changed man,” Hodges said outside the courtroom.
torontosun.com
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Michael Kunzelman
Published Apr 14, 2023 • Last updated 1 day ago • 4 minute read
WASHINGTON — A man who used a stolen riot shield to crush a police officer in a doorframe during the U.S. Capitol insurrection was sentenced on Friday to more than seven years in prison for his role in one of the most violent episodes of the Jan. 6 attack.
Federal prosecutors had recommended a prison sentence of 15 years and eight months for Patrick McCaughey III, which would have been the longest sentence for a Capitol riot case by more than five years.
U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden sentenced McCaughey to seven years and six months in prison followed by two years of supervised release. The judge described McCaughey, 25, as a “poster child of all that was dangerous and appalling about” the Jan. 6, 2021, riot.
“Your actions are some of the most egregious crimes that were committed on that dark day,” the judge told McCaughey.
McCaughey, of Ridgefield, Connecticut, expressed shame for joining the mob of then-President Donald Trump’s supporters who “violated” the Capitol.
“I’m sorry that I conducted myself less like a citizen and more like an animal that day,” he said.
McCaughey’s 90-month sentence matches the second longest prison sentence so far for a Capitol riot defendant. It’s the same length as the sentence that another judge handed down to Albuquerque Cosper Head, a Tennessee man who dragged Metropolitan Police Department Officer Michael Fanone into a crowd of rioters.
Also on Friday, a Finksburg, Maryland, man pleaded guilty to assaulting an Associated Press photographer and police officers in separate attacks outside the Capitol on Jan. 6. Rodney Milstreed is scheduled to be sentenced on July 20. Chief Judge James Boasberg told Milstreed, 56, that the estimated sentencing guidelines for his case recommend a term of imprisonment ranging from five years and three months to six years and six months.
The judge in McCaughey’s case convicted him of nine counts, including felony assault charges, after hearing trial testimony without a jury in September.
Nine people, including McCaughey, were charged together with joining one of the most brutal clashes at the Capitol on Jan. 6. Police and rioters were fighting for control of a tunnel entrance on the Lower West Terrace when MPD Officer Daniel Hodges came face to face with McCaughey, who used a stolen riot shield to pin Hodges to a metal doorframe.
“Go home!” McCaughey shouted at the officer.
Hodges, who testified at McCaughey’s trial and spoke at his sentencing hearing, said he thinks about the horrors of Jan. 6 every day.
“I do not foresee that changing anytime soon,” he told the judge, describing McCaughey as a “foot soldier” who was at “the vanguard of the assault.”
Hodges screamed out for help when another rioter grabbed the officer’s baton and struck him in the face with it.
“It was only then, over two minutes after the assault began, that McCaughey relented and pulled Officer Hodges’s face shield down over his eyes,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Kimberly Paschall wrote in a court filing.
Hodges managed to retreat inside the Capitol building and was taken to a hospital. McCaughey struck a second officer with the shield before another officer sprayed him with a chemical irritant, backing him away.
“It is not an exaggeration to state the actions of these officers in thwarting the mob at the Lower West Terrace entrance potentially saved the lives of others, including members of Congress,” Paschall wrote.
The judge convicted McCaughey of obstructing an official proceeding, the Jan. 6 joint session of Congress for certifying Joe Biden’s presidential election victory over Trump.
Earlier this year, the judge sentenced four of McCaughey’s co-defendants to terms of imprisonment ranging from 14 months to five years. Paschall argued that McCaughey’s conduct was more “egregious and protracted” than the others’.
A probation officer’s calculation of the sentencing guidelines for McCaughey recommend a prison term ranging from nine years to 11 years and three months.
McCaughey’s attorneys requested a sentence of one year behind bars. They said McCaughey’s “reprehensible” actions were motivated by his “misunderstanding” about the 2020 presidential election. Trump, the Republican incumbent, falsely claimed that Democrats stole the election from him.
“There remain many grifters out there who remain free to continue propagating the ‘great lie’ that Trump won the election, Donald Trump being among the most prominent. Mr. McCaughey is not one of these individuals; he knows he was wrong,” his lawyers wrote.
McCaughey, a carpenter employed by his father’s construction company, drove about 300 miles (480 kilometres) from his Connecticut home to Washington, D.C., to attend Trump’s “Stop the Steal” rally on Jan. 6. After listening to speeches, McCaughey went to the Capitol and joined other rioters in confronting police officers guarding the West Plaza.
When the rioters broke through the police line, McCaughey climbed up the steps inside construction scaffolding and took a selfie atop the structure. Minutes later, he joined the mob in a coordinated “heave-ho” push against officers guarding the Lower West Terrace tunnel entrance.
More than 1,000 people have been charged with federal crimes related to the deadly Jan. 6 riot. Over 600 of them have pleaded guilty or been convicted after trials decided by a jury or a judge. Over 450 of them have been sentenced, with more than half getting terms of imprisonment ranging from seven days to 10 years.
The 10-year prison sentence was for retired New York City police officer Thomas Webster, who was convicted by a jury of assaulting a Metropolitan Police Department officer with a metal flagpole.
Asked for his reaction to McCaughey’s sentence, Officer Hodges said it depends on what happens when his assailant is released from prison.
“We’ll see if he’s a changed man,” Hodges said outside the courtroom.
Capitol rioter who crushed officer with shield gets 7 years
A man who used stolen riot shield to crush police officer during U.S. Capitol insurrection was sentenced to more than seven years in prison.
Judge delays Fox News-Dominion Voting Systems defamation trial
Barring a settlement, opening statements are now scheduled for Tuesday.
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
David Bauder, Randall Chase And Geoff Mulvihill
Published Apr 17, 2023 • Last updated 1 day ago • 2 minute read
WILMINGTON, Del. — The Delaware judge overseeing a voting machine company’s $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit against Fox News delayed the opening of the trial Monday, raising the prospect that the two sides might settle before the eagerly watched case goes before a jury.
Superior Court Judge Eric Davis suggested the sides try to mediate their dispute, according to a person close to Fox who was not authorized to speak publicly about the status of the lawsuit. Attorneys for both sides who appeared in court Monday declined to answer reporters’ questions about the delay, as did representatives for both companies.
Davis gave no explanation for delaying the trial’s start until Tuesday, although he did note that delays are common and built into the schedule. Jury selection and opening statements were planned for the first day in a trial that, if it happens, is expected to last six weeks.
“This is not a press conference,” Davis said during Monday’s brief hearing. “I don’t do that.”
A trial would force Fox to answer for its actions in the weeks after the 2020 presidential election and litigate denial about the outcome of the race in general. The case centres on whether Fox defamed Denver-based Dominion Voting Systems by spreading false claims that the company rigged the election against then-President Donald Trump.
A settlement is certainly a possibility in a trial that carries risks for both sides. Fox already has been embarrassed by revelations that some of its executives and on-air personalities did not believe fraud claims that the network spread on the air, and it doesn’t want to see 92-year-old founder Rupert Murdoch testify. Dominion could miss a big payday if a jury rules against it.
Not everyone wants the case to go away quietly, however.
“PLEASE Dominion — Do not settle with Fox! You’re about to prove something very big,” tweeted Gretchen Carlson, the former Fox anchor whose accusations of sexual misconduct by former Fox chief Roger Ailes led to his downfall in 2016.
Fox, meanwhile, paid for a full-page advertisement in The New York Times on Monday headlined “Trusted Now. More Than Ever.”
Dozens of journalists gathered at the courthouse in downtown Wilmington, some before dawn, for a hearing that lasted about five minutes. The courtyard in front of the court building was full of TV crews ready to do live shots.
Besides its implications for Fox, the case is being watched carefully by journalists for what it could mean for libel law. Defamation is generally hard to prove, since it requires a finding that journalists published information they knew to be false, or with a reckless disregard for the truth.
Some First Amendment lawyers say Dominion’s lawsuit presents a powerful case, given the doubt expressed within Fox about the fraud allegations. Fox says Dominion can’t prove that the people with such doubts were in position to affect what was said on the air about the company.
Even before a jury hears the case, Davis has made some rulings in Dominion’s favour, including stating that the allegations of election fraud made against the company were clearly false. That means the issue will not have to be litigated in the trial.
— Associated Press writer Eric Tucker in Washington contributed to this report.
torontosun.com
Barring a settlement, opening statements are now scheduled for Tuesday.
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
David Bauder, Randall Chase And Geoff Mulvihill
Published Apr 17, 2023 • Last updated 1 day ago • 2 minute read
WILMINGTON, Del. — The Delaware judge overseeing a voting machine company’s $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit against Fox News delayed the opening of the trial Monday, raising the prospect that the two sides might settle before the eagerly watched case goes before a jury.
Superior Court Judge Eric Davis suggested the sides try to mediate their dispute, according to a person close to Fox who was not authorized to speak publicly about the status of the lawsuit. Attorneys for both sides who appeared in court Monday declined to answer reporters’ questions about the delay, as did representatives for both companies.
Davis gave no explanation for delaying the trial’s start until Tuesday, although he did note that delays are common and built into the schedule. Jury selection and opening statements were planned for the first day in a trial that, if it happens, is expected to last six weeks.
“This is not a press conference,” Davis said during Monday’s brief hearing. “I don’t do that.”
A trial would force Fox to answer for its actions in the weeks after the 2020 presidential election and litigate denial about the outcome of the race in general. The case centres on whether Fox defamed Denver-based Dominion Voting Systems by spreading false claims that the company rigged the election against then-President Donald Trump.
A settlement is certainly a possibility in a trial that carries risks for both sides. Fox already has been embarrassed by revelations that some of its executives and on-air personalities did not believe fraud claims that the network spread on the air, and it doesn’t want to see 92-year-old founder Rupert Murdoch testify. Dominion could miss a big payday if a jury rules against it.
Not everyone wants the case to go away quietly, however.
“PLEASE Dominion — Do not settle with Fox! You’re about to prove something very big,” tweeted Gretchen Carlson, the former Fox anchor whose accusations of sexual misconduct by former Fox chief Roger Ailes led to his downfall in 2016.
Fox, meanwhile, paid for a full-page advertisement in The New York Times on Monday headlined “Trusted Now. More Than Ever.”
Dozens of journalists gathered at the courthouse in downtown Wilmington, some before dawn, for a hearing that lasted about five minutes. The courtyard in front of the court building was full of TV crews ready to do live shots.
Besides its implications for Fox, the case is being watched carefully by journalists for what it could mean for libel law. Defamation is generally hard to prove, since it requires a finding that journalists published information they knew to be false, or with a reckless disregard for the truth.
Some First Amendment lawyers say Dominion’s lawsuit presents a powerful case, given the doubt expressed within Fox about the fraud allegations. Fox says Dominion can’t prove that the people with such doubts were in position to affect what was said on the air about the company.
Even before a jury hears the case, Davis has made some rulings in Dominion’s favour, including stating that the allegations of election fraud made against the company were clearly false. That means the issue will not have to be litigated in the trial.
— Associated Press writer Eric Tucker in Washington contributed to this report.
Judge delays Fox News-Dominion Voting Systems defamation trial
The judge overseeing a voting machine company’s $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit against Fox News delayed the opening of the trial Monday.
Judge rejects Trump's request to delay trial in rape accuser Carroll's lawsuit
Author of the article:Reuters
Reuters
Luc Cohen
Published Apr 17, 2023 • Last updated 1 day ago • 1 minute read
NEW YORK — A U.S. judge on Monday rejected former President Donald Trump’s request to delay a scheduled April 25 trial over whether he defamed former Elle magazine columnist E. Jean Carroll by denying he raped her.
Last week, Trump’s lawyers urged U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan in federal court in Manhattan to grant a four-week “cooling-off” period to at least May 23 to give Trump a fair trial, citing a recent “deluge of prejudicial media coverage” of criminal charges against him.
In a written order on Monday, Kaplan said Carroll’s case was “entirely unrelated” to the New York state-level prosecution, in which Trump pleaded not guilty to 34 counts of falsifying business records in connection with a hush money payment made to a porn star before the 2016 election.
Kaplan said there was no reason to assume it would be easier to seat a fair and impartial jury in May. He said some media coverage was based on Trump’s own public statements.
“It does not sit well for Mr. Trump to promote pretrial publicity and then to claim that coverage that he promoted was prejudicial to him,” Kaplan wrote.
Trump’s lawyer Joseph Tacopina declined to comment.
Carroll’s lawsuit stems from her alleged encounter with Trump in late 1995 or early 1996 in a Bergdorf Goodman department store in Manhattan. She has said Trump asked her for help in buying a gift for another woman, but later “manoeuvred” her into a dressing room, where he sexually assaulted her.
After Carroll described the incident in a June 2019 New York magazine excerpt from her memoir, Trump told a reporter that he did not know Carroll, that “she’s not my type,” and that she concocted the rape claim to sell her book. He largely repeated his denial in October 2022.
torontosun.com
Author of the article:Reuters
Reuters
Luc Cohen
Published Apr 17, 2023 • Last updated 1 day ago • 1 minute read
NEW YORK — A U.S. judge on Monday rejected former President Donald Trump’s request to delay a scheduled April 25 trial over whether he defamed former Elle magazine columnist E. Jean Carroll by denying he raped her.
Last week, Trump’s lawyers urged U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan in federal court in Manhattan to grant a four-week “cooling-off” period to at least May 23 to give Trump a fair trial, citing a recent “deluge of prejudicial media coverage” of criminal charges against him.
In a written order on Monday, Kaplan said Carroll’s case was “entirely unrelated” to the New York state-level prosecution, in which Trump pleaded not guilty to 34 counts of falsifying business records in connection with a hush money payment made to a porn star before the 2016 election.
Kaplan said there was no reason to assume it would be easier to seat a fair and impartial jury in May. He said some media coverage was based on Trump’s own public statements.
“It does not sit well for Mr. Trump to promote pretrial publicity and then to claim that coverage that he promoted was prejudicial to him,” Kaplan wrote.
Trump’s lawyer Joseph Tacopina declined to comment.
Carroll’s lawsuit stems from her alleged encounter with Trump in late 1995 or early 1996 in a Bergdorf Goodman department store in Manhattan. She has said Trump asked her for help in buying a gift for another woman, but later “manoeuvred” her into a dressing room, where he sexually assaulted her.
After Carroll described the incident in a June 2019 New York magazine excerpt from her memoir, Trump told a reporter that he did not know Carroll, that “she’s not my type,” and that she concocted the rape claim to sell her book. He largely repeated his denial in October 2022.
Judge rejects Trump's request to delay trial in rape accuser Carroll's lawsuit
A U.S. judge on Monday rejected Donald Trump's request to delay a scheduled April 25 trial over whether he defamed E. Jean Carroll.
Fox settles Dominion defamation lawsuit for $787.5 million, avoiding trial
Author of the article:Reuters
Reuters
Helen Coster and Jack Queen
Published Apr 18, 2023 • Last updated 9 hours ago • 4 minute read
WILMINGTON — Fox Corp and Fox News on Tuesday settled a defamation lawsuit by Dominion Voting Systems for $787.5 million, averting a high-profile trial putting one of the world’s top media companies in the crosshairs over its coverage of false vote-rigging claims in the 2020 U.S. election.
The settlement was announced by the two sides and the judge in the case at the 11th hour, with a jury selected just hours earlier in Delaware and the trial poised to kick off with opening statements. Dominion had sought $1.6 billion in damages in the lawsuit filed in 2021.
Dominion CEO John Poulos called the settlement “historic.”
“Fox has admitted to telling lies about Dominion that caused enormous damage to my company, our employees and our customers,” Poulos said in a statement. “Nothing can ever make up for that. Throughout this process, we have sought accountability and believe the evidence brought to light through this case underscores the consequences of spreading and endorsing lies.”
At issue in the lawsuit was whether Fox was liable for airing the false claims that Denver-based Dominion’s ballot-counting machines were used to manipulate the 2020 U.S. election in favour of Democrat Joe Biden over Republican then-President Donald Trump. Dominion had argued that these on-air claims caused the company “enormous and irreparable economic harm.”
“We acknowledge the court’s rulings finding certain claims about Dominion to be false. This settlement reflects Fox’s continued commitment to the highest journalistic standards. We are hopeful that our decision to resolve this dispute with Dominion amicably, instead of the acrimony of a divisive trial, allows the country to move forward from these issues,” Fox said in a statement that was read on air on Fox News.
Shares of Fox Corp closed up slightly at $34 per share, but were down 1% in after-hours trading after the settlement amount was disclosed. Fox has plenty of cash on hand to pay for a settlement. It committed another $3 billion to buy back shares in the first quarter after revenues beat estimates. Fox Corp CEO Lachlan Murdoch told Wall Street analysts in February that the company had about $4 billion cash on hand.
Dominion lawyers declined to answer questions about whether Fox News would apologize publicly or make reforms.
Fox News is the most-watched U.S. cable news network, according to Nielsen.
“Truthful reporting in the media is essential to our democracy,” Dominion’s Poulos said.
Delaware Superior Court Judge Eric Davis, presiding over the case in Wilmington, had ordered a one-day trial postponement on Monday before another delay on Tuesday, as the two sides hammered out a deal in private.
The deal spared Fox the peril of having some of its best-known figures called to the witness stand and subjected to potentially withering questioning, including executives such as Rupert Murdoch, the 92-year-old media mogul who serves as Fox Corp chairman, and Fox CEO Suzanne Scott as well as on-air hosts including Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity and Jeanine Pirro.
The primary question for jurors was to be whether Fox knowingly spread false information or recklessly disregarded the truth, the standard of “actual malice” that Dominion must show to prevail in a defamation case.
In February court filings, Dominion cited a trove of internal communications in which Murdoch and other Fox figures privately acknowledged that the vote-rigging claims made about Dominion on-air were false.
Dominion said Fox amplified the untrue claims to boost its ratings and prevent its viewers from migrating to other media competitors on the right including One America News Network, which Dominion is suing separately.
ANOTHER LAWSUIT PENDING
Adding to the legal risks for Fox, another U.S. voting technology company, Smartmatic, is pursuing its own defamation lawsuit seeking $2.7 billion in damages in a New York state court. Fox Corp reported nearly $14 billion in annual revenue last year.
“Fox’s statement about the settlement makes clear that Fox acknowledges ‘the court’s ruling finding certain claims about Dominion were false,'” said Mary-Rose Papandrea, a constitutional law professor at the University of North Carolina School of Law. “For many plaintiffs, a court holding, and admission by the defendant about falsity, are even more important than any actual money damages.”
Fox had argued that claims by Trump and his lawyers about the election were inherently newsworthy and protected by the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment. Davis ruled in March that Fox could not use those arguments, finding its coverage was false, defamatory and not protected by the First Amendment.
Dominion in 2021 sued Fox Corp and Fox News, contending that its business was ruined by the false vote-rigging claims that were aired by the influential American cable news outlet known for its roster of conservative commentators.
The trial was to have been a test of whether Fox’s coverage crossed the line between ethical journalism and the pursuit of ratings, as Dominion alleges and Fox denies. Fox had portrayed itself in the pretrial skirmishing as a defender of press freedom.
The complaints referenced instances in which Trump allies including his former lawyers Rudolph Giuliani and Sidney Powell appeared on Fox News to advance the false allegations.
Dominion obtained internal communications and testimony from Murdoch and other Fox News executives and commentators. Murdoch internally described the election-rigging claims as “really crazy” and “damaging” but declined to wield his editorial power to stop them and conceded under oath that some Fox hosts nonetheless “endorsed” the baseless claims, Dominion told the court in a filing.
Under questioning from a Dominion lawyer, Murdoch testified that he thought everything about the election was on the “up-and-up” and doubted the rigging claims from the very beginning, according to Dominion’s filing.
Asked if he could have intervened to stop Giuliani from continuing to spread falsehoods on air, Murdoch responded, “I could have. But I didn’t,” the filing said.
torontosun.com
Author of the article:Reuters
Reuters
Helen Coster and Jack Queen
Published Apr 18, 2023 • Last updated 9 hours ago • 4 minute read
WILMINGTON — Fox Corp and Fox News on Tuesday settled a defamation lawsuit by Dominion Voting Systems for $787.5 million, averting a high-profile trial putting one of the world’s top media companies in the crosshairs over its coverage of false vote-rigging claims in the 2020 U.S. election.
The settlement was announced by the two sides and the judge in the case at the 11th hour, with a jury selected just hours earlier in Delaware and the trial poised to kick off with opening statements. Dominion had sought $1.6 billion in damages in the lawsuit filed in 2021.
Dominion CEO John Poulos called the settlement “historic.”
“Fox has admitted to telling lies about Dominion that caused enormous damage to my company, our employees and our customers,” Poulos said in a statement. “Nothing can ever make up for that. Throughout this process, we have sought accountability and believe the evidence brought to light through this case underscores the consequences of spreading and endorsing lies.”
At issue in the lawsuit was whether Fox was liable for airing the false claims that Denver-based Dominion’s ballot-counting machines were used to manipulate the 2020 U.S. election in favour of Democrat Joe Biden over Republican then-President Donald Trump. Dominion had argued that these on-air claims caused the company “enormous and irreparable economic harm.”
“We acknowledge the court’s rulings finding certain claims about Dominion to be false. This settlement reflects Fox’s continued commitment to the highest journalistic standards. We are hopeful that our decision to resolve this dispute with Dominion amicably, instead of the acrimony of a divisive trial, allows the country to move forward from these issues,” Fox said in a statement that was read on air on Fox News.
Shares of Fox Corp closed up slightly at $34 per share, but were down 1% in after-hours trading after the settlement amount was disclosed. Fox has plenty of cash on hand to pay for a settlement. It committed another $3 billion to buy back shares in the first quarter after revenues beat estimates. Fox Corp CEO Lachlan Murdoch told Wall Street analysts in February that the company had about $4 billion cash on hand.
Dominion lawyers declined to answer questions about whether Fox News would apologize publicly or make reforms.
Fox News is the most-watched U.S. cable news network, according to Nielsen.
“Truthful reporting in the media is essential to our democracy,” Dominion’s Poulos said.
Delaware Superior Court Judge Eric Davis, presiding over the case in Wilmington, had ordered a one-day trial postponement on Monday before another delay on Tuesday, as the two sides hammered out a deal in private.
The deal spared Fox the peril of having some of its best-known figures called to the witness stand and subjected to potentially withering questioning, including executives such as Rupert Murdoch, the 92-year-old media mogul who serves as Fox Corp chairman, and Fox CEO Suzanne Scott as well as on-air hosts including Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity and Jeanine Pirro.
The primary question for jurors was to be whether Fox knowingly spread false information or recklessly disregarded the truth, the standard of “actual malice” that Dominion must show to prevail in a defamation case.
In February court filings, Dominion cited a trove of internal communications in which Murdoch and other Fox figures privately acknowledged that the vote-rigging claims made about Dominion on-air were false.
Dominion said Fox amplified the untrue claims to boost its ratings and prevent its viewers from migrating to other media competitors on the right including One America News Network, which Dominion is suing separately.
ANOTHER LAWSUIT PENDING
Adding to the legal risks for Fox, another U.S. voting technology company, Smartmatic, is pursuing its own defamation lawsuit seeking $2.7 billion in damages in a New York state court. Fox Corp reported nearly $14 billion in annual revenue last year.
“Fox’s statement about the settlement makes clear that Fox acknowledges ‘the court’s ruling finding certain claims about Dominion were false,'” said Mary-Rose Papandrea, a constitutional law professor at the University of North Carolina School of Law. “For many plaintiffs, a court holding, and admission by the defendant about falsity, are even more important than any actual money damages.”
Fox had argued that claims by Trump and his lawyers about the election were inherently newsworthy and protected by the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment. Davis ruled in March that Fox could not use those arguments, finding its coverage was false, defamatory and not protected by the First Amendment.
Dominion in 2021 sued Fox Corp and Fox News, contending that its business was ruined by the false vote-rigging claims that were aired by the influential American cable news outlet known for its roster of conservative commentators.
The trial was to have been a test of whether Fox’s coverage crossed the line between ethical journalism and the pursuit of ratings, as Dominion alleges and Fox denies. Fox had portrayed itself in the pretrial skirmishing as a defender of press freedom.
The complaints referenced instances in which Trump allies including his former lawyers Rudolph Giuliani and Sidney Powell appeared on Fox News to advance the false allegations.
Dominion obtained internal communications and testimony from Murdoch and other Fox News executives and commentators. Murdoch internally described the election-rigging claims as “really crazy” and “damaging” but declined to wield his editorial power to stop them and conceded under oath that some Fox hosts nonetheless “endorsed” the baseless claims, Dominion told the court in a filing.
Under questioning from a Dominion lawyer, Murdoch testified that he thought everything about the election was on the “up-and-up” and doubted the rigging claims from the very beginning, according to Dominion’s filing.
Asked if he could have intervened to stop Giuliani from continuing to spread falsehoods on air, Murdoch responded, “I could have. But I didn’t,” the filing said.
Fox settles Dominion defamation lawsuit for $787.5 million, avoiding trial
Fox Corp and Fox News on Tuesday settled a defamation lawsuit by Dominion Voting Systems for $787.5 million, averting a high-profile trial.
Mike Lindell’s firm told to pay $5 million in ‘Prove Mike Wrong’ election-fraud challenge
MyPillow founder and prominent election denier Mike Lindell made a bold offer ahead of a “cyber symposium” he held in August 2021 in South Dakota: He claimed he had data showing Chinese interference and said he would pay $5 million to anyone who could prove the material was not from the previous year’s U.S. election.
He called the challenge “Prove Mike Wrong.”
On Wednesday, a private arbitration panel ruled that someone did.
The panel said Robert Zeidman, a computer forensics expert and 63-year-old Trump voter from Nevada, was entitled to the $5 million payout.
Zeidman had examined Lindell’s data and concluded that not only did it not prove voter fraud, it also had no connection to the 2020 election. He was the only expert who submitted a claim, arbitration records show.
He turned to the arbitrators after Lindell Management, which created the contest, refused to pay him.
Story
That's a lot of pillows.
I wasn’t actually aware that anyone blamed Dominion until the court case. The most probable suspects were the democrats that bought and set up the machines.
I knew the vote counting machines were rigged. Just never really thought the manufacturer was responsible. And I don’t have time to follow US politics that closely.
So. . . the principle is if anybody but your guy wins, the election was rigged?