Dan Bongino Ordered To Pay Daily Beast $30,000 For Frivolous Lawsuit


Often, anti-defamation lawsuits are threatened and even brought to court frivolously in order to silence an outlet or person as a way to intimidate them into silence, tying up the court system and costing the outlet or person piles of money. The practice is so common, in fact, that laws, known as anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) legislation, allows a court to demand attorney’s fees be paid to the party sued in order to curb the number of lawsuits brought for that reason. Fox News’ Dan Bongino, today, knows a lot about anti-SLAPP legislation.

Bongino took The Daily Beast to court over an article written by Lachlan Markay which said that NRA TV had “dropped” Bongino in an attempt to downsize as the NRA struggles to stay afloat. The Fox News contributor sued, saying that the article implied that he had been fired for cause. A judge found that it didn’t, that Markay had repeatedly tried to reach Bongino for a statement in an effort to understand the truth, and that nowhere in the article did Markay “imply” that Bongino had been fired “for cause.”

According to Law & Crime:

‘Judge Martinez concluded that Plaintiff’s suit is ‘without merit’ because Plaintiff failed to state a claim for defamation, and it arises of out of ‘free speech in connection with a public issue’ because it involves a news report on a public figure,” she wrote. “It is of no moment that Judge Martinez granted Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss without prejudice, because when a district court dismisses an action against a defendant, even if that dismissal is without prejudice, the defendant is the prevailing party.’

Since the case was without merit, Bongino was ordered to pay The Daily Beast $30,000 in attorney’s fees, which is part of the remedy for frivolous lawsuits under anti-SLAPP legislation. In an earlier story about Bongino’s loss in court, Law & Crime wrote that:

‘The judge, in a thorough takedown of Bongino’s claims, ruled as follows. First, Bongino “failed to comply” with a Florida statute which requires notice to be given when a media defendant is sued. Second, the judge ruled, the article is simply not defamatory. (As a matter of law, the judge noted, “an employer’s ability to terminate an employee is ‘inherent in the employment relationship’ and the exercise of that right does not necessarily impute wrongdoing to the employee.’”).’

The irony of anyone on Fox News, the “news” network that allowed for stories about President Obama being a terrorist who was born in Kenya, suing anyone for defamation is stunning. It appears they might want to think twice before complaining again that anyone had “defamed” them. In fact, Bongino is involved in his own charge of “defamation” by Dominion Voting Systems, who he has repeatedly trashed as having changed votes in the 2020 presidential election.

The judge in his case against The Daily Beast did not hold back in his decision.

‘Here, even a cursory review reveals that nowhere in the article does it state that Plaintiff was fired—much less that he was fired for cause. The article merely states that NRATV “dropped” Plaintiff from its lineup of conservative commentators. And as Plaintiff concedes, this is in fact true. Indeed, the article’s subheading explains that NRATV was “downsizing” and Plaintiff’s show was “a casualty of those plans.” The article even reflects that NRATV made “every effort to retain [Bongino].” Such reporting is a far cry from stating that Plaintiff was fired for anything other than corporate downsizing.’