Unfortunately, these MAGA blowhards donât really care what happens to their unsubstantiated claims of âproofâ down the line.
They just like to say things like âLOOK AT THAT PROOFâ or âWHAT POSSIBLE EXPLANATION IS THERE BESIDES FRAUD?â Sounds like GSC, no?
And then, when it comes time to pay the piper, theyâve already moved on to the next thing.
Or itâll be some conspiracy theory rationale, explaining why the Obama judge ruled against OAN.
You guys are hilarious.
Of course this is their position in a lawsuit. Otherwise theyâd have to prove it and they arenât the substantiators of the claim, just reporters of it.
Silly that youâd think this proves anything.
All it proves is that OAN believes they canât prove fraud occurredâŚ. And why would they ever be able to in the first place.
You mean the real fake news admits to fake news and canât substantiate their fake claims, yet you still make excuses even though you get bitch slapped by them?
No you dummy. They listened to their lawyer. Itâs not their claim to make. They allowed their OPINION anchor to run with it.
Why would the company subject itself to liability when it doesnât need to? Would be a stupid move.
You are the dummy who, AGAIN, refuses to take responsibility or be held accountable for fake ass lies. My lawyer said it, duuuurrrrrrrr
Why would I have to take responsibility for something OAN said or did or didnât do? Dumbest shit Iâve ever read.
And this is why you have no integrity. Weâve had Rudy, Powell, FOX and OAN all admit they donât have shit while in court. But, you donât care. âOf course, they HAVE to say thatâŚâ.
What drivel. Zero, absolutely, ZERO integrity. This guy defines slimy salesman
It proves that they donât have proof.
That they reported something that was not founded on evidence.
I thought we couldnât prove a negative? 
HmmmmâŚ. It doesnât prove they didnât have evidence to believe it or report it.
I donât know all the elements of the case but Iâm assuming that they would need all the elements to substantiate the claim and they donât have that (and why would we think they do).
Remember, these are opinion shows. MSNBC does this just as much as OAN.
I just think this is a company protecting themselves and doing it in the easiest way possible. No need to defend or prove something your not a party to.
Just say, âitâs opinionâ and move on.
I mean, itâs a company that crossed the line, got sued, settled the lawsuit, and had to broadcast a retraction to that effect. But potayto potahto.
100% agree.
I donât follow OAN. They donât speak for me or millions of others who feel there was fraud. They fucked up. That doesnât prove there wasnât fraud.
Well hold onto your hat because GWP is also involved in the same lawsuitâŚ
Of course not. Like I said, it proves they were talking out of their ass. It proves they printed statements that were unfounded.
Thatâs the whole problem with this fraud narrative. Nobodyâs been able to prove it yet. Keep in mind Trump âknew it was gonna happenâ and âset a trapâ two years in advance and somehow still came up empty.
Too bad we canât sue you and those millions of others to embarrass you as well. Just cause you think there was fraud (lol), doesnât prove it exists. In fact, the onus is on you to provide us with evidence of your outlandish claim. OTHERWISE IT IS HORSE SHIT
Hmmmm. You CAN sue. I donât know if you have jurisdiction or can prove damages, but go ahead and try.
I also think this little thing called the first amendment would get in the way. It allows me and you to form opinions, accurately or erroneously, as we wish, so long as we donât pose an immediate and credible harm to a person or property.
So have at it. Let us know how it goes.