Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Newsmax agrees to pay $67M in defamation case over bogus 2020 election claims

apnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 308 posts

Re: Newsmax agrees to pay $67M in defamation case over bogus 2020 election claims

#111

Post by mapt »

cj wrote: post #95
lesuorac wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lawyers would tell you that water isn't wet it's just slick if it'd help them win their case. I don't see any fix for the news cycle besides slowing it down. Even if enough happens to fill 24h in a day there isn't enough time to actually analyze it at all.

> Lawyers would tell you that water isn't wet Sure, but do you really think the Fox News anchors honestly believed what they were saying? I’d venture a guess: no. They said what they said because that’s what they had to do to get their paycheck at the end of the day. Yes, lawyers will say whatever to win a case. But I highly doubt those news anchors really thought the election was stolen. It’s all for ratings. Let’s…

To willingly lie about something you need to be able to differentiate truth from fiction. Defamation hinges on either this willing lie ("malice") or on negligence (and the expected due diligence for a self-professed news organization is high). There is a little performative middle ground here, but WHATEVER is argued in court does not moot the things argued at every commercial break about trusting their news institution to report the facts. Fox news is not, and never has been, intended as satire.

Re: Newsmax agrees to pay $67M in defamation case over bogus 2020 election claims

#113

Post by platevoltage »

jeltz wrote: post #31
alistairSH wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Paper ballots can be faked. Or lost. Or stuffed. Anyways, haven’t most/all districts gone to paper ballots, the electronic part is just auto tabulation. They can be counted manually if necessary.

What is the point then? Why introduce a machine where none is needed. In most countries all votes are counted twice by his d and the initial voubt finishes in a few hours.

We had half the country believe a conspiracy theory based upon the fact that they didn't get to know who won the Election day of. There is NO way Americans would accept universal hand counting.

Re: Newsmax agrees to pay $67M in defamation case over bogus 2020 election claims

#114

Post by jakelazaroff »

sugarpimpdorsey wrote: post #93
jeffbee wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are welcomed to fix this. There is not a single Democrat anywhere in America who will be mad if you fix this. Everyone will congratulate you. The problem is that Republican-controlled states have arranged to systematically make it harder for urban people to get ID cards, and have systematically structured the system such that even born citizens cannot get one due to having never had a birth certificate (because t…

> The problem is that Republican-controlled states have arranged to systematically make it harder for urban people to get ID cards Source? The fact is you need ID for SNAP and Medicaid benefits. So who are all these people with no ID, no money, no food, no identity, no anything but somehow all eligible voters?

Why do you assume the people targeted must have no money, or use SNAP or Medicaid?

Re: Newsmax agrees to pay $67M in defamation case over bogus 2020 election claims

#115

Post by platevoltage »

baggy_trough wrote: post #25
the_gastropod wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There were literally Russian-sourced bomb threats at several major democratic strongholds' polling locations in the last presidential election. https://www.npr.org/2024/11/06/nx-s1-5181834/election-day-vo... Voter ID and blocking mail-in / early voting are just a few examples of contemporary Republican voter suppression efforts. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_suppression_in_the_Unite...

Count me as one who strongly opposes mail-in and early voting because I believe it violates the sanctity of the voting booth.

Do you also oppose a federal election holiday? because pretty much everyone who opposes flexible voting options does so because they want less people voting.

Re: Newsmax agrees to pay $67M in defamation case over bogus 2020 election claims

#116

Post by atmavatar »

sugarpimpdorsey wrote: post #26
marstall wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The arguments pro and con are purely motivated by partisan concerns. its believed that more democratic voters are less likely to have an id, therefore voter id laws supposedly favors republicans. that supposed fact is at the heart of the entire debate and as far as i know there is nothing more to it.

> its believed that more democratic voters are less likely to have an id This notion that Democrats keep pushing - that a sizable portion of their voting base is too dumb to get an ID - when massive developing countries like India that are still struggling with basic things like sanitation have long ago solved this problem - is nothing short of embarrassing. There are people in rural India that live in straw huts tha…

Getting an ID is not as simple as you make it out to be.

For many people, getting an ID requires taking a day off work, which for many can mean their family is going to miss one or more meals, or even worse, that they miss a car or rent payment.

Consequently, this is also a strong reason why Republicans have repeatedly blocked attempts to make voting day a national holiday, while at the same time strategically closing down polling locations -- so working poor (predominantly registered Democrats) have a harder time voting.

But it gets even worse than that. During segregation era, it wasn't uncommon for black women to be turned away from hospitals and be forced to give birth via midwives, then be unable to obtain birth certificates for their children. Because they have no official birth certificates, states deny them IDs.

Example: https://atlantablackstar.com/2025/05/07/florida-woman-real-i...

Voter ID laws are explicitly designed to disenfranchise these people, because they're virtually always proposed by individuals representing the very states that denied black people birth certificates, and in many cases, those same individuals proposing the laws lived through the very era when those birth certificates were still actively being denied.

That said: I'm mostly in agreement - the solution is to get these people proper IDs (and by extension, birth certificates). However, I think you'll find the very people proposing these ID laws are going to be the same ones stonewalling any attempts to address the problems I laid out.

Re: Newsmax agrees to pay $67M in defamation case over bogus 2020 election claims

#117

Post by viewtransform »

eirikbakke wrote: post #78
virgildotcodes wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How on Earth are we able to have a global digital financial system that is able to keep track of trillions in transactions per year but running a seasonal election with < 100 million participants through a digital system seems too hard?

If electronics is involved in the act of voting, the voter has no assurance that the ballot remains secret (even if you're a software engineer!). With paper/envelope/box, by contrast, the voter can see and understand the full process.

This is a solved problem in India [0] - and the system is brilliant in its simplicity[1]: Fixed function non-reprogrammable battery operated electronic units, no connectivity, randomization of voting units and a paper trail for verification.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vlHJZrXrnyQ

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJReQ8ao0SU

Re: Newsmax agrees to pay $67M in defamation case over bogus 2020 election claims

#118

Post by baggy_trough »

bediger4000 wrote: post #42
FridayoLeary wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The counterargument is that mail in ballots help increase voter turnouts and that requiring id will turn people away. It's a weak argument because you shouldn't try to increase turnout by making voting less secure. Any other solution should be found instead.

What, exactly is insecure about voting by mail? Are drop off ballot boxes also insecure? In the same or different ways?

There's no way to know who actually filled it out, for example.

Re: Newsmax agrees to pay $67M in defamation case over bogus 2020 election claims

#119

Post by ceejayoz »

FridayoLeary wrote: post #85
siliconc0w wrote: post #5

It's pretty sad that is these sort of ticky-tacky lawsuits are really the only mechanism we seem have of holding these "news" networks responsible for brazen repeated lies that are hugely damaging to our society (like saying a election was stolen). And that wasn't even the problem, it's that their lies created damages for another corporation.

Wouldn't that damage the right to free speech? Regulating what the media is and isn't allowed to say is a very slippery slope and it is open to abuse. If the government was responsible for this task what would prevent Trump and the republicans from hijacking it? It might be frustrating but free speech is one of the cornerstones of democracy and we are much better off with it then without it. > And that wasn't even th…

> Wouldn't that damage the right to free speech?

We already ban defamation, fraud, the f-bomb and boobs on publicly available television channels, etc.

> Dominion was libelled by Newsmax, so they was able to claim damages from them in a court of law. The law didn't allow them to get away with it.

Long, long after the damage was done, and it'll take equally long the next time they do the same thing. As the saying goes, if there's just a fine, the fine is just the cost of doing business.

Re: Newsmax agrees to pay $67M in defamation case over bogus 2020 election claims

#120

Post by the_gastropod »

litoE wrote: post #82
FridayoLeary wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The counterargument is that mail in ballots help increase voter turnouts and that requiring id will turn people away. It's a weak argument because you shouldn't try to increase turnout by making voting less secure. Any other solution should be found instead.

I've never understood why elections are held on a Tuesday. Why aren't they held on a Sunday, which would eliminate the excuse of "I have to go to work"?

There are people who work on Sundays.
Post reply on HN