The End of the EV Mandate is at Hand

Yes. Tesla’s penetration into the Chinese market and domestic tax credits which are more beneficial to Tesla’s domestic competitors are interesting confounders.

 

Sorry, not a lawyer.

When I said libel, I meant they were liable for lying and had to admit and pay for said lies.

...xxx
liable /lī′ə-bəl/
adjective

1. Legally obligated or responsible: synonym: responsible.
   "liable to pay for damages; liable for negligence."
   Similar: responsible
2. Subject to undergoing or suffering something, especially something unpleasant. Used with to.
   "We did not use glass containers because they are liable to breakage."
3. Likely. Often used with reference to an unfavorable outcome.
   "People who are sleep deprived are liable to make mistakes."

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition • More at Wordnik

 

NO NO NOT NOPE. For me.


Yes, it sure seems that way. Of course. For you.

 

libel /lī′bəl/
noun

1. The legally indefensible publication or broadcast of words or images that are degrading to a person or injurious to his or her reputation.
2. An incidence of such publication or broadcast.
3. The written claims initiating a suit in an admiralty court.

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition • More at Wordnik


...
Seems I don't need to be a lawyer. I used the word correctly.

 

Having an opinion is not lying.

 

Having an opinion is not lying. Jones stated an opinion/speculation on Sandy Hook. He is granted the right by the Constitution. Contrary opinions (sometimes referred to as being ghe devil’s advocate) actually strengthen the correct depiction of what happened.

 

It is lying if the opinion is false. An intentional untruth.

As indicated by Fox admitting to lying and paying a fine for said lies.

Did you not claim to be a lawyer?

 

Hope that won't trigger you.

 

He promoted an intentional untruth. That is a lie.
That is why he has to pay for profiting off of lying.

And I am not a claimed lawyer. Are you?

 

No opinions are false. Fox settled the civil suit. They admitted nothing.

 

Opinions are not false. Angering someone does not result in financial damages. The jury punished Jones for voicing an opinion which he either believed due to evidence or because he was playing devil’s advocate.

Should weather forecasters be sued?

 

Actually not so. Knowledge and intention mark the difference between a lie and a mere falsehood.

 

It seems your opinion is false.

...
Rupert Murdoch says Fox stars 'endorsed' lies about 2020. He chose not to stop them

https://www.npr.org/2023/02/28/1159...ion-voting-rupert-murdoch-2020-election-fraud

...
WILMINGTON, Del. (AP) — Fox News agreed Tuesday to pay Dominion Voting Systems nearly $800 million to avert a trial in the voting machine company’s lawsuit that would have exposed how the network promoted lies about the 2020 presidential election.

...
“The truth matters. Lies have consequences,” Dominion lawyer Justin Nelson told reporters outside a Delaware courthouse after Superior Court Judge Eric Davis announced the deal.
https://apnews.com/article/fox-news...l-trump-2020-0ac71f75acfacc52ea80b3e747fb0afe

 

Correct, a lie is an intentional untruth.

In the cases of Fox and Jones, a jury decided they knowingly promoted lies and therefore, they lost their libel cases and have to pay money as damages for the lies they promoted.

IN Fox's case, they settled out of court. In admission to promoting false information. Intentionally.

 

Again having an opinion based on evidence is not a lie. Whether the 2020 election results were affected by fraudulent and/or illegal voting will never be known because forensic audits were not done.

 

Fox admitted nothing. It was disappointing that they settled as Prof Dershowitz has detailed.

 

Fair enough. In Fox's case I believe the settlement precluded a determination as to lying. But the settlement itself is highly suggestive.

 

"We are pleased to have reached a settlement of our dispute with Dominion Voting Systems," the statement said. "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."
https://www.tbsnews.net/worldbiz/us...uit-7875-million-over-us-election-lies-619058

 

Nope. They admitted to claims they made to being false. False means not true and not an opinion. IOW, a lie.

 

No, again. One can make a false claim without lying. A lie requires an intent to deceive.

 

The acknowledgment of the court’s ruling does mean that Fox admits anything.

 

Of which Fox owner admitted to.

One doesn't pay the largest libel payout in US history based on making a wrong claim with bad information.

One pay's that amount of money to avoid a trial and admit to false claims, because they knew they were going to lose in court.
IOW, they knew they intentionally made false(lies) claims.
As their owner admitted to.

 

Actually, he did not admit to lying. That was the point of the settlement.
And parties often prefer a settlement to a trial for many reasons.

 

Dominion CEO was satisfied with the choice of words they use to admit their wrong doing. Making false claims about their voting machines. IE, lying about them and the company.

...xxx

The jury had been selected earlier in the day and the trial poised for opening statements in Wilmington, Delaware. 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.
"Truthful reporting in the media is essential to our democracy," Poulos said.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/domin...inst-fox-poised-trial-after-delay-2023-04-18/