In reaching her decision, Vyskocil borrowed in part from an argument “persuasively” made by Fox News in Carlson’s defense, saying that the “general tenor” of Carlson’s program suggests to viewers that Carlson is “engaging in ‘exaggeration’ and ‘nonliteral commentary.’”
That is an interesting admission by Fox News. Will they now change their slogan from the laughable
“Fair and Balanced” to the far more accurate “Exaggerative and Nonliteral”?
Other phrases that could have been substituted for Tooker’s steaming heap of bandini:
Trump appointed judge and Federalist Society member.
Remember kids, defamation wins are only for rich white dudes.
Expect more idiotic rulings like this nationwide.
Or tell everyone at the start of Carlson’s show (and Hannity’s, etc.) that they are
“engaging in ‘exaggeration’ and ‘nonliteral commentary.’”
Frankly, it would be ok to have something similar before MSNBC shows also. Harrumph! I get tired of all the harrumphiing on all sides.
This is all you need to know. Judges could be independent but where chosen because they had drunk the Trump cool-aid.
This is the judicial equivalent of “Gee, can’t you take a joke?” And should at least require a public disclaimer/retraction with the same amount of play as the original statement.
Expect next Supreme Court Justice declare that since Trump routinely spews BS, he doesn’t need to present evidence and therefore all his claims that there was a massive voter fraud against him are legitimate.
I heard Tucker said Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil was a $2 whore, but that’s just rhetorical hyperbole.
While the judge may think Tucker (is that the correct spelling?) Carlson is full of shit but Fux nation believes that shit.
“Given Carlson’s reputation, any reasonable viewer ‘arrive[s] with an appropriate amount of skepticism’” about the Fox News host’s claims, the judge added.
Let me drop a fact bomb on ya… there’s no such thing as a reasonable Tucker Carlson ‘viewer’. They’re all fucking angry nutters in a sack of Q conspiracies.
So…he’s a liar and a performance artist and anyone appearing on his show or attacked/belittled/besmirched should just ignore him and consider the source. Cool. So should Facebook etal put up their little ‘disclaimers’ that everything out of his mouth is ‘unproven’?
Trump judge, but this is the correct outcome. Statements of opinion are not actionable as defamation, and it is well within the scope of opinion (as opposed to objective fact) that seeking money in order to obtain silence can be fairly characterized as extortion.
Folks isn’t is soothing and comforting to know that at this moment Fox News is programming the next Scott Roeder, Caesar Sayoc and Kyle Rittenhouse to kill for the Republican Party and they’re getting away with it by hiding behind the 1st Amendment and Federalist Society judges?
I went to school with a bunch of rich snot-noses like Tooker.* So I’ve been dismissing people like him all my life.
*Crooked Media joke after he repeatedly mispronounced the name “Kamala.”
So if I go on TV and say that Judge Vyskocil is a stupid twat who only graduated law school because she was pleasuring her professors then that’s just rhetorical hyperbole. Well, ok then.
Tucker Carlson regularly engages in “rhetorical hyperbole” and “opinion commentary”
I know we can never throw Carlson off tv, but we can pass a law that requires those 4 words to be placed on top of his image when he is on tv. At very least it might get conservative idiots to look up what rhetorical and hyperbole mean.
This sucks. They DO win because the MAGAts will pay no attention to this nor the implications, even if we remind them every day. Getting away with something is the same as being “right” in their cultist peabrains.
I see it somewhat differently. What it tells me is that no “reasonable person” would believe anything Tucker Carlson says. If you extend that to “anything Fox News says”, that pretty much covers it.
Is it possible for the plaintiff to appeal this decision and if so, can’t Carlson’s influence on Executive branch policy be used to establish his association with facts, albeit distorted though he renders them?
So it’s established in Federal Court that Carlson is an opinionated blow-hard who lies to suit his purpose.
And the sun sets in the West.