The far right isn’t having much luck with lawsuits lately. The former, disgraced, one-term President Donald Trump’s many lawsuits making claims about election fraud were all shot down in court, many because of a lack of any substantiar evidence. As it turns out, one of Trump’s favorite news channels tried to take a case to court with the same results.
Two years ago, @maddow said on her show that One America News (OAN) was "literally Russian propaganda." OAN sued for libel, seeking $10 million.
OAN didn't just lose the case. A judge just ordered it to pay MSNBC $250,000 to reimburse legal fees. (A nice win for @BoutrousTed).
— Jan Wolfe (@JanNWolfe) February 6, 2021
Judge Allison H. Goddard of the U.S. District Court in the Southern District in California heard the case brought by One America News Network (OAN), who claimed that MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow made libelous claims about them when she said that they were “literally Russian propaganda. The judge determined that the case was frivolous and without merit, subjecting them to a ruling based on anti-SLAPP legislation. The law is meant to prevent people from using the court as a way to intimidate or threaten another’s First Amendment rights.
In the judge’s ruling, it says:
‘The anti-SLAPP statute is“intended to compensate a defendant for the expense of responding to aSLAPP suit. To this end, the provision is broadly construed so as to effectuate the legislative purpose of reimbursing the prevailing defendant for expenses incurred in extracting herself from a baseless lawsuit.’
Dominion is going after OAN too☺️
Judge Orders OAN to Pay Rachel Maddow and MSNBC $250,000 in Attorney Fees For Filing Frivolous Defamation Lawsuit https://t.co/nQPChOHY0E via @lawcrimenews
— Hope E Ransom (HopeERinFL) (@SoulFlyTry) February 7, 2021
Just as the lawsuits related to Trump’s claims of a stolen election, the judge ruled that no substantial evidence had been brought before the court. Instead, the “evidence” was based on a misguided view of what legal evidence entails, and the judge was not pleased.
‘Plaintiff’s objections are based on a range of evidentiary principles, such as hearsay, relevance,vagueness, lack of foundation, speculation, lack of authentication, improper legal conclusions, and unfair prejudice outweighing probative value.’
New: A San Diego judge has ruled that the right-wing TV network OAN must pay Rachel @maddow’s attorneys $247,667.50 for their work on a now-dismissed libel case.
OAN had sued Maddow for $10 million for saying the news outlet “literally is paid Russian propaganda." https://t.co/obiYRYkgmF
— Seth Hettena (@seth_hettena) February 6, 2021
In the end, OAN was forced to pay $247,667 to MSNBC and The Rachel Maddow Show instead of getting the $10 million they sued for. The network is currently also being sued by Dominion, the makers of vote tabulating machines that Trump said had been used to switch votes, a claim that OAN repeated and may now have to pay for, as well.
‘The Court awards Defendants fees in the amount of $247,667.50representing53.5hours billed by Mr. Boutrous at $1,150per hour,19.1hours billed by Mr. Edelman at $1,050per hour,130.6 hours billed by Mr. Bach at $720 per hour, 127.9hours billed by Ms. Moshell at $470 per hour,15.8hours billed by Mr. Rubin at $470 per hour, 14.9 hours billed by Ms. Gadberry at $280per hour, and 1.3 hours billed by Mr. Amponsah at $265 per hour, and costs in the amount of $10,724.36.’
One America News paying Rachel Maddow’s legal costs to the tune of nearly $250K. https://t.co/7U8C0MqgVO pic.twitter.com/xJVwbtg2qN
— Eriq Gardner (@eriqgardner) February 6, 2021
