In just a few weeks, lawsuits and legal threats from a pair of obscure election technology companies have achieved what years of advertising boycotts, public pressure campaigns and liberal outrage could not: curbing the flow of misinformation in right-wing media.This refers to the lawsuit that starts:
Fox Business canceled its highest rated show, “Lou Dobbs Tonight,” on Friday after its host was sued as part of a $2.7 billion defamation lawsuit.
The Earth is round. Two plus two equals four. Joe Biden and Kamala Harris won the 2020 election for President and Vice President of the United States. The election was not stolen, rigged, or fixed. These are facts. They are demonstrable and irrefutable.The NY Times motto is "All the news fit to print", but it is relying on a stupid lawsuit for demonstrable and irrefutable facts? This makes no sense. The NY Times would publish a demonstrable refutation of the pro-Trump claims, if it could.
Defendants have always known these facts. They knew Joe Biden and Kamala Harris won the 2020 U.S. election. They knew the election was not stolen. They knew the election was not rigged or fixed. They knew these truths just as they knew the Earth is round and two plus two equals four.
Time mag explains: "They were not rigging the election; they were fortifying it." That is a fine distinction. Apparently the NY Times believes that the libel was saying "rigged" instead of "fortified".
I don't believe these voting machine and software companies will be able to prove much in court. They have always had crappy security, and not good ways of showing that they are operating correctly. Just recently, federal election regulators have relaxed standards, so that the machines can have hardwire to wirelessly connect to the internet while election day voting takes place. There is no necessity for this, and it only creates suspicion that someone is remotely rigging the count.
Reason mag reports:
The New York Times on Friday forced out its lead pandemic reporter, 47-year newsroom veteran Donald McNeil Jr., because the Grey Lady's management, under public pressure from more than 150 employees, decided that when it comes to speaking certain radioactive words, not only does intent not matter, any utterance is potentially a one-strike offense.Do not let anyone tell you that the NY Times believes in tolerance. This is as intolerant as anyone ever gets.
"We do not tolerate racist language regardless of intent," Times Executive Editor Dean Baquet and Managing Editor Joe Kahn explained bluntly in a memo Friday.
This week, the newsroom revolted via a remarkable group letter in which more than 150 staffers at one of the country's leading newspapers argued that word-choice intentions are "irrelevant," because "what matters is how an act makes the victims feel." Signees, declaring themselves "outraged and in pain" and "disrespected," demanded a reinvestigation of the 2019 incident, an apology to the newsroom, and an organizational study into how racial biases affect editorial decisions.No, no one was outraged and in pain. There are no victims. Blacks are not bothered by the N-word. Many of them use the word themselves, and listen to rap music with the word.
No sane person is ever bothered by a single word anyway. The NY Times seems to be saying that Black people have the mental stability of three-year-old children.
The NY Times also has an article on Tipping Is a Legacy of Slavery. Apparently Blacks are the worst tippers on Earth. Waiters hate getting Black customers because they don't tip. Even Black waiters hate Black customers. Apparently tipping is just one of those artifacts of a civilized White society that doesn't work with other ethnic groups.
Update: Here is a summary of the reporter firing. The reporter was in S. America responding to a question about offensive words, and only used the N-word as an example. The investigation produced an allegation that he “did not believe in the concept of white privilege”! See also the absurd apology that he was forced to recite.