A New York appeals court on Thursday restored silence in Donald Trump’s industrial fraud trial, ending two weeks of vitriol that reached levels even for the former president.
Trump wasted no time in attacking Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron, who is presiding over the fraud trial, as well as Engoron’s lawyer, after an appeal ruled on the suspension of the gag order while Trump’s legal team appealed the decision. The trials, however, put an end to Thursday’s verbal abuse.
Engoron said in court that the ruling also reinstated a separate gag order he had imposed on Trump’s lawyers. “I intend to enforce the gag orders rigorously and vigorously, and I need to make sure that lawyers inform their clients that the rest has been canceled. “he said.
Trump’s lawyer, Chris Kise, said he was aware of the ruling and complained, “This is a tragic day for the rule of law. “
The task of this specific litigation is to determine damages; Engoron decided in September that Trump had committed fraud. The New York attorney general accused Trump, his sons Don Jr. and Eric, the Trump Organization and other business executives of fraudulently inflating the price of various real estate assets to obtain more favorable bank loan terms.
Engoron ordered that all of Trump’s business certificates in New York be rescinded, leaving him on the verge of doing business in the state, a move that could well mean the demise of the Trump Organization.
From the earliest days of the trial, Trump has directed abundant anger at Engoron and his attorney, Allison Greenfield. Trump’s lawyers even requested a mistrial, arguing that Greenfield had been assigned an irrelevant lead role in the trial, even though she is a lawyer by training. Interns also do most of the studies for a trial and draft court orders, which are then signed by the judge.
Engoron imposed gag orders on Trump and his lawyers following repeated attacks by the former president. He fined Trump a total of $15,000 for violating the gag order twice.
After appeals ruled on lifting the gag order on Nov. 16, it took Trump just hours to start rambling on about Engoron and Greenfield on social media. He wrote in TruthSocial that Greenfield is a “politically biased and out-of-control” company. a worker who hates Trump” and a “disgrace” that “sinks” Engoron and his court “to new levels of lows. “
From there, Trump only got worse. Also on Wednesday, he claimed that several posts on X (formerly Twitter) about his chances of serving a criminal sentence had been posted through Engoron’s wife. The messages were first discovered through Laura Loomer, a far-right activist and Trump fan.
“Judge Engoron’s Trump-hating wife, along with her very disturbed and angry lawyer, have taken over the New York State witch-hunt trial that targets me, my family, and the Republican Party,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.
It’s unclear who posted those posts, however, Dawn Engoron has stated in the past that she doesn’t have an X account.
He may only have 24 hours left in Congress, and Rep. George Santos believes he now needs to be in on the deportation entertainment as well.
Congress is expected to vote Friday to expel the serial fabulist. Santos, who took it all incredibly badly, announced Thursday that he would respond by introducing a movement to oust fellow New York Democratic Rep. Jamaal Bowman, because why not?
Santos told reporters he would later present a solution Thursday to oust Bowman for setting off a fire alarm at a House building before a key vote. The solution will be preferred, meaning the House will have to act on it within two legislative sessions. days.
“I think it’s about consistency,” Santos said. Let’s hold ourselves accountable, but let’s make sure we do it within House precedent. “»
The attempted eviction of Bowman Santos is “meaningless. “
“No one in Congress, or anywhere else in the United States, is taking future former Congressman George Santos seriously. This is simply a nonsensical trick in their long history of scams, mischief and outright fraud,” he said in a statement.
Bowman argued that he mistakenly sounded the alarm as he rushed into the House chamber on a key vote. However, he took responsibility for his actions, pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor and agreed to pay a $1,000 fine, in addition to writing a formal apology. to the Capitol Police.
Santos, by comparison, fabricated most of his personal and professional story and accused the federal government of financial fraud and identity theft. A House Ethics Committee report released two weeks ago found that Santos had used his campaign to solicit donations. only to use the cash for non-public expenses. These expenses include designer products, makeup, cosmetic procedures, and “small purchases on Onlyfans. “
Santos downplayed the issue Thursday, calling it “slanderous,” “unprecedented” and “riddled with hyperbole. “
The embattled new congressman recently panicked at his imaginable deportation. On Friday, Santos hosted a three-hour X-Ray (formerly Twitter) slot, during which he denounced his colleagues and said Congress was full of “criminals galore. “
In a curious move for someone who has taken such a hard line against hyperbole, he also referred to himself as the “Mary Magdalene” of Congress, explaining that his fellow lawmakers have “going to stone this f—- -f—– because it’s just politically expedient.
In order to keep theological knowledge clear, here are a few points: Mary Magdalene was a faithful follower of Jesus Christ and was not the most vulnerable user that a Jew (as Santos says) could cite as a means of comparison. It should also be noted that Mary Magdalene was not stoned to death.
In addition to abusing the campaign budget and lying about the history of his painting, Santos falsely claimed that his grandparents were Holocaust survivors, that his mother died in the 9/11 attacks, and that four of his painters were killed in the shooting in the Pulse nightclub.
Santos lied about starting an animal rescue charity and his role in the production of the disastrous Broadway musical Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark. (She also recently photographed with too many small children in her arms for this author’s liking, if the Ethics Committee says she “cannot be trusted” to govern, but it is highly unlikely that she can be trusted to care for her baby. )
Santos has been charged federally with 23 counts of various types of monetary fraud. He pleaded not guilty in the first thirteen court cases in May and denied the remaining 10 court cases filed in October in a superseding indictment. Earlier this year, he also agreed to a deal with the Brazilian government to investigate him for currency fraud to avoid being prosecuted. These are just some more facts that possibly all of us, despite everything, would be exempt from having to know in a few days.
Elon Musk seems to be running out of other people to blame for what has been a cataclysmic collapse of X (formerly known as Twitter) during his tenure overseeing that platform. But in a public appearance on Wednesday, he laid out his dubious strategy for avoiding responsibility for the site’s demise: Unsurprisingly, it was about blaming everyone but himself and blaming corporations for the site’s destruction through an ongoing advertising boycott of the platform. .
Musk let all this pass with a profanity-laden tantrum, in which he told an organization of the company’s biggest advertisers that he was no longer looking for his money to help the platform, which, in his own words, has lost 90% of its price since then. He bought it a little over a year ago.
“If you need to blackmail me with advertising, blackmail me with money? Fuck you,” he told Andrew Ross Sorkin at the New York Times DealBook conference.
“I hope that’s clear,” he added, before calling Disney CEO Bob Iger by name.
“Fuck you. Fuck you. ” Elon Musk to advertisers who threaten to boycott. Later. ” G-F-Y. ” pic. twitter. com/klJ8YJOZLz
When Sorkin asked him about the economics of a move toward X’s dependence on advertisers, Musk responded, “G-F-Y. “
Advertisers have long rebelled against Musk’s designs for the site, which have consistently made the platform less attractive to brands. But in recent days, advertisers have discovered a new explanation for leaving the site, following an explosive Media Matters report published earlier this month. discovered that X placed anti-Semitic and pro-Nazi content next to classified ads from reputable companies. The consequences have been the hemorrhaging of some of the largest and most risk-averse advertisers, in addition to Apple, IBM, Disney, Lionsgate and Paramount.
But in the billionaire’s world, his own moves — add undermining X’s content moderation capabilities, his private account for propagating Nazi conspiracies, and allowing 105% more anti-Semitic hate speech to be spread on the platform — are never to blame. Amid his obscene panic, Musk all but admitted that the site was in a death spiral and that he was moving toward a new plan to absolve himself of any responsibility for its downfall — a plan he said was motivated by a conspiracy among the site’s members. major advertisers to deprive X of revenue.
“What the advertising boycott is going to do is kill the company,” Musk said, adding that “Earth” — through which he appeared to refer to the planet’s population — will ultimately deliver a verdict on who killed one of the biggest tech giants. corporations of all time. ” And everybody’s going to know that those advertisers killed the company, and we’re going to document it in wonderful detail. “
It is far from transparent that “Earth” reacts to X’s disappearance with anything other than indifference. As TNR noted elsewhere, Musk consistently overestimates his platform’s user base: “A Pew Research study found that less than a quarter of U. S. adults use Twitter. Among this segment of the population, an even smaller cohort is to blame for the vast majority of tweets: “The most sensible 25% of users in terms of tweet volume produce 97% of all tweets, while the poorest 75% of users produce only 3%. As it stands, the only other people likely to support Musk’s cause will be the small group of Musk hardliners who are stuck on his moribund platform.
Musk’s comments came steps away from Linda Yaccarino, the impassive CEO of the continuation of Musk’s rants.
As usual, Yaccarino responded to this recent controversy with cloying, detached messages that made her, in the eyes of Defector’s David Roth, “the last remaining funny piece of Twitter. “”X allows for an informational independence that is uncomfortable for other people. We are a platform that allows other people to make their own decisions,” Yaccarino posted a few hours after the event. “And here’s my take on advertising: X sits at an exclusive and surprising intersection between laid-back speech and superiority. street, and the X network is tough and it’s here to welcome you. “
Okay with all of this.
Here, in the final days of its latest session, the Supreme Court is turning its attention to a few key abortion cases that still remain on its docket.
On Dec. 8, the court is expected to rule on whether to hear a case challenging the availability of a common abortion pill, mifepristone, a ruling that could have some of the most dire consequences for abortion since the court’s vast conservative majority overturned Roe. opposed to Wade in June 2022.
Mifepristone first evolved in the 1980s and, along with misoprostol, is part of a two-pill prescription commonly referred to as “the abortion pill. “Together, they account for more than a portion of all abortions in the U. S. According to a 2022 report by the Guttmacher Institute.
In April, a Trump-appointed court ruled on suspending access to the drug. Four months later, the U. S. Fifth Court of Appeals sided with the plaintiffs, the right-wing Christian organization Alliance Defending Freedom, and determined that although the tablet was for the market, the Food and Drug Administration had overstepped its role by taking several steps that would allow women to access the drug 10 weeks after the start of pregnancy instead of seven. Reduce the popular dose and allow access to the prescription through telemedicine. However, none of those adjustments were felt thanks to the Supreme Court’s suspension of the case. But all of that could be replaced if the nation’s highest court decides to hear appeals. .
“If the quantities of this order confirmed through the Fifth Circuit could go into effect right now, they would alter the regulatory regime for mifepristone, with negative consequences for women performing legal abortions and for a physical care formula that depends on the availability of the drug under the current conditions of use,” the Justice Department wrote in court documents.
If given the opportunity, the plaintiffs would like to see more than just limited access to mifepristone. In court papers, the Christian legal organization made clear that it expected the court to review the drug’s initial approval in 2000.
“The FDA’s moves related to mifepristone, from approval in 2000 to the recent removal of safeguards, have consistently elevated policy above the law, science, and safety,” they wrote.
But other demanding situations similar to reproductive fitness care may arise even earlier. One case, centered on Idaho’s emergency request to fully enforce its own national abortion law, could see a resolution as soon as this week. Then, on Friday, the justices will decide whether to file an appeal that would challenge state-imposed bans that ultimately prevent anti-abortion activists from harassing others who come to abortion clinics.
House Speaker Mike Johnson will speak at a Christian nationalist event next week, making it abundantly clear that the extreme wing of the Republican Party is now in full control.
The National Association of Christian Legislators revealed last week that Johnson would be the keynote speaker at the organization’s annual gala, but the announcement didn’t receive much attention until Rolling Stone reported on Wednesday.
The NACL is a Christian nationalist organization that says its purpose is to codify a “biblical worldview” into law. On its website, NACL states that its project is to “bring federal, state, and local policymakers to transparent biblical principles. ” Who wants the separation of Church and State?
The organization is quite right-wing in terms of its worldview: anti-abortion and, unsurprisingly, also anti-LGBTQ rights. The NACL played a key role in passing several anti-abortion laws, adding the horrific abortion surveillance law in Texas, which assigned citizens the task of acting as de facto bounty hunters, with monetary rewards for those who were willing to eliminate other people. Help patients seeking an abortion.
NACL founder Jason Rapert, a former Arkansas state legislator, also worked to block abortion access. During his tenure, he wrote a law prohibiting abortion at 12 weeks. He also drafted the abortion ban that went into effect after Roe v. Wade.
Rapert flies the Christian nationalist flag of the “Call to Heaven. “He managed to fly this flag over the Arkansas State Capitol in 2015. Johnson flies the same flag in front of his office.
No wonder Johnson was welcomed at the NACL gala. He has a well-documented history of opposing abortion access, LGBTQ rights, and environmental policy on the grounds that they are not Christian. His new people leader, who was once his director of operations, is equally extreme.
Johnson has been a pillar of right-wing parties, even if his appearances went unnoticed in the years before his rise from the GOP backbench to the top of the caucus. In 2019, he gave the keynote speech at a convention of the National Policy Council, an elite right-wing event. He did not report his vacation on his monetary reporting forms, and it is still unclear who paid for it to happen or how much the vacation cost.
The Louisiana Republican was also scheduled to deliver the International Freedom Initiative’s keynote address in early November. Johnson’s spokesman, Raj Shah, confided to TNR that Johnson did not do so at any point over the weekend, but declined to explicitly confirm whether Johnson had spoken. or why the speaker was so present on WFI’s social media channels and in the event’s publicity if he wasn’t speaking.
Johnson’s willingness to participate in those parties, especially now that he holds the toughest job in the House, lays bare his ideological leanings and suggests that the issues he supports and plans to prioritize in law will increasingly be sidelined.
If Democrats continue to work with Johnson, as they did to pass a transition bill on government spending, then he will continue to exert that kind of force on social issues, and perhaps even in politics. democracy.
“Stop laughing at his accountability software setup and self-confessed biblical worldview,” Matthew Taylor, a devout scholar who specializes in Christian nationalism, tweeted Tuesday night. “Mike Johnson is associating with some very harmful Christian leaders, who played a central role in instigating #6janvier. “
The unwavering loyalty Donald Trump has managed to generate among his supporters reached a new milestone on Tuesday, when one of Trump’s billionaire donors said he would continue to fund the GOP front-runner’s presidential campaign even if the former president is convicted.
Bernie Marcus, the 94-year-old retired Home Depot co-founder, has thrown his hat at Trump’s latest bid for the White House, for the third time, after aligning Trump’s efforts in 2016 and 2020.
In an interview with Reuters, Marcus made it clear that his support for Trump would be unwavering regardless of the final results of his multiple criminal trials, telling the outlet: “I think it’s all made up. An intentional play on words?
Still, Marcus, who became one of the real estate mogul’s biggest supporters in 2016 by signing checks for the sum of $7 million, made it clear that there are some limits to his generosity and that he has no plans to break monetary records this time around. around.
“Of course I’m going to go to him to some extent, but I’m not one of his big donors, that’s for sure,” Marcus told Reuters, adding that Trump was “very happy” with his endorsement.
Trump is hardly in a position to reject a benefactor. He lately faces 91 charges in 4 criminal cases. He has denied any wrongdoing and has pleaded not guilty in all of his trials. A possible conviction of Trump has raised valid questions about his White House eligibility, even if none of that turns out to matter to Trump’s most ardent supporters – or, apparently, his donors – who anticipate he will clinch the nomination. Republican Party shortly after the Iowa Caucus begins on January 15.
“I never know their legal fees or their legal problems,” Marcus said.
Despite Trump’s volatile foreign policy positions, Marcus thought he valued supporting Trump because of his positions on the Middle East. He also thought Trump was a “fixer” who could gain advantages for the U. S. economy, the outlet reported.
Other potential applicants in Marcus’ group include former Ambassador Nikki Haley and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis; he doesn’t think any of them have a fair chance of opposing Trump, who lately is getting more than forty-five percentage points above any of them. he skipped any and all GOP debates, according to a nationwide general vote conducted through FiveThirtyEight.
Mike Johnson revealed how weak the Republican impeachment inquiry against Joe Biden was, when he failed to make a substantial case for one of the main charges against the president.
Johnson held a news conference Tuesday with Reps. Jim Jordan and James Comer, who led the investigation into Biden, to discuss the ongoing impeachment inquiry. Although Republicans have made various accusations against Biden in recent months, making accusations of political corruption, they have yet to present concrete evidence to substantiate their allegations.
One theme that Republicans have continually harped on is their claim that Biden, when he was vice president, had said the U. S. would withhold monetary aid to Ukraine unless Kyiv fired Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin. Republicans say Shokin had investigated Burisma, the Ukrainian oil company for which Biden’s son Hunter is a board member. This claim has been continuously refuted by U. S. intelligence, the former Ukrainian president, and the owner of Burisma.
At Wednesday’s press conference, HuffPost reporter Arthur Delaney asked Johnson why the GOP keeps bringing up Shokin’s firing. Delaney noted that in Donald Trump’s first impeachment trial, “many State Department officials . . . they came and said, ‘That wasn’t Joe Biden’s policy, that was our policy. ‘”He didn’t do this for his son, he did it because we wanted him to do it.
U. S. foreign aid is granted on the condition that the recipient country takes official action that Washington deems important. In Ukraine, he eliminated corruption in the government.
“So did they all commit perjury or will they bring them back for additional interviews?” asked Delaney. Why do Republicans ignore all these testimonies?
“No one ignores testimony,” Johnson said abruptly, before moving on to the list of foreign bills won through the Bidens.
Surely this is a question from a reporter to President Johnson that exposes the baselessness of the impeachment campaign against House Republicans (note how Johnson ignores this and changes the subject pic. twitter. com/YYGnATGdo7
Johnson also told Delaney that he was “not going to answer any questions outdoors about this,” the testimony is obviously directly applicable to a central pillar of the ongoing impeachment inquiry.
Shokin was fired in 2016 for corruption. Three years later, Trump and Rudy Giuliani introduced a conspiracy theory that Biden’s family accepted a $10 million bribe to indict Shokin and avoid an investigation into Hunter Biden’s role in Burisma. This claim has been continually refuted by Burisma’s owner, Mykola. Zlochevsky, Giuliani’s business partner Lev Parnas, and former Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko.
President Mike Johnson faces his first primary challenge as leader of the Republican caucus in the House: In just a few weeks, he’ll want Congress to reach consensus on two contentious issues: border investment and foreign aid. This has been achieved over decades, in a position where compromise has proven to be the Waterloo of Republican speakers.
Although Johnson has done his best to reach a deal, it will be a “difficult road” for the new president, as one lawmaker told The Hill. Senate negotiators, who face their own demanding situations as their members debate their percentage of the existing deal. , they are unsure whether their good fortune, if it materializes, will be replicated through Johnson in the lower house.
The factor is a $105 billion national security plan proposed by the Biden administration, which includes more than $13 billion to address border factors, as well as $14. 3 billion in aid to Israel and more than $61 billion in aid to Ukraine. that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky promised. Advised can be the difference between winning or wasting the war.
The main impediment is a familiar misconception: Republican infighting, fueled by a very narrow conservative primary in the House. The Republican group, whose notorious inability to work together led to Johnson’s inauguration, has already begun to infiltrate discussions about this new deal, with some lawmakers adamantly refusing to negotiate.
The chaos within the caucus is compounded by external pressures. The conservative political organization Heritage Action on Tuesday suggested lawmakers cancel any spending cuts from the upper chamber, insisting that H. R. 2, an immigration bill restricting asylum proposed by Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart, was the “only solution to secure the border. “
“Worse, the proposal resulting from those ‘negotiations’ will likely be used as leverage to push President Biden’s call for $106 billion in fiscally irresponsible spending, adding another $60 billion more for Ukraine that fails to deliver. conservative criteria and $13. 6 billion in bogus spending. “border security” that would boost Biden’s open border operations,” Heritage Action President Kevin Roberts wrote in a statement.
“Conservatives in the House and Senate deserve to reject this proposal and commit to H. R. 2 to repair the safety and security of the American people. Anything less is unacceptable,” he added.
Even as conservatives stalled, Democrats have their own turmoil over a deal that many fear is willing to give too much to the GOP in laconic negotiations.
“We were willing to give a lot in those conversations. We’re out of [our] classic convenience zone for Democrats,” one of the negotiators, Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Mass. , told reporters. “At some point, Republicans are going to have to say ‘yes. ‘
In recent election cycles, young voters have consistently delivered primary victories to Democrats. Republicans said the most productive reaction was to try to disenfranchise young people.
This year alone, at least 15 Republican-controlled states have enacted or implemented laws to replace regulations for the use of student cards in voting booths, according to the Voting Rights Lab. And Rolling Stone reported Tuesday that there is broader pressure among Republican lawmakers to absolutely control the ability of some academics to vote on their school’s status.
“Young people are the explanation for why Biden won in 2020 and Democrats won the 2022 and 2023 elections,” Abhi Rahman, national communications director for the Democratic legislative crusade committee, told Rolling Stone. on the cusp of the most progressive era in our country’s history. Republicans know this, too, and that’s why they’re doing everything they can to prevent other young people from voting. “
GOP efforts to suppress the student vote are underway in the state of Wisconsin, where the state Supreme Court last week heard arguments to overturn Badger State’s well-curated district maps. This court is leaning to the left for the first time in 15 years, following the election in April of Judge Janet Protasiewicz, which she won in large part thanks to the large turnout of young people in the election.
Immediately after the election, former Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker said that “the challenge is young voters. ” A few months later, the state Republican conference considered a solution to require out-of-state academics to vote by mail in their hometowns. The solution ultimately did not advance, but it is just one component of a much larger effort across the Wisconsin Republican Party to limit youth voting by any means available.
In recent years, Wisconsin Republicans have tried to make registration more difficult, taking steps to increase the number of ballot boxes and voting booths and shortening the early voting period, and also trying to impose more onerous residency requirements.
In New Hampshire, state Republicans introduced a bill in March that would ban any out-of-state student from voting in state and local elections. The bill was ultimately rejected.
A Texas Republican lawmaker also introduced a bill in March that would ban voting booths on school campuses (the bill has not yet been in committee). And Virginia Republicans have tried, unsuccessfully, to repeal a law that would allow other people over the age of 16 to vote. Register to vote if you are 18 in the upcoming primary election.
Despite appearances, this is not a piecemeal effort: All of these measures are part of a larger plan devised by Republican strategist Cleta Mitchell. Speaking at a Republican National Committee donor retreat in April, shortly after Protasiewicz’s victory, Mitchell called on the GOP to restrict voting on school campuses, same-day voter registration and automatic mailing of ballots to registered voters. Young voters and mail-in ballots tend to skew Democrats. Mitchell insisted that U. S. electoral systems will have to be replaced so that “any candidate who is not a left-wing candidate has a chance of WINING in 2024. “
Republicans see the evidence, but they are suppressing the message, and there has been little to no discussion among national Republicans about winning back the young electorate. Increasingly, it turns out that the Republican Party needs to simply eliminate the young electorate from the electorate entirely. In the 2022 midterm elections, young voters turned out in record numbers and voted overwhelmingly for Democrats. Republican luminaries responded by calling for the voting age to be raised.
Instead of implementing policies on issues that really matter to young people (like environmental protection, greater access to abortion, and LGBTQ rights), Republicans are taking positions that alienate huge swaths of the new generation of voters. And then they get angry when they are young. others do not, and the cycle of dispossession of the young electorate begins again.
Rupert Murdoch will be charged Tuesday and Wednesday as part of the $2. 7 billion defamation lawsuit between Smartmatic and Fox News. The questioning will take place in Los Angeles and has been publicly scheduled for the case, according to Reuters.
Smartmatic filed a lawsuit in 2021 after the conservative broadcast giant baselessly promoted Trumpian conspiracies that the voting device company had engaged in voter fraud. Fox then spent the better part of the last two years trying, unsuccessfully, to get the case out of court.
“They needed a villain,” the lawsuit says. They needed to blame. They needed them to be able to make others hate. A clever versus evil story, the kind that will provoke an angry crowd, only works if the narrator introduces the audience to the one who personifies evil.
“Without a true villain, the defendants invented one,” the lawsuit states. “The defendants made Smartmatic the villain of their story. “
The deposition will be the second time this year that Murdoch will have to answer questions similar to Fox’s election lies, after the company reached a landmark $787 million settlement with Dominion Voting Systems in April over allegations.
Along with Fox Corporation and Fox News, Smartmatic is receiving damages from five people: Trump’s lawyers, Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell, as well as Fox hosts Maria Bartiromo and Jeanine Pirro, and former host Lou Dobbs. To win the defamation lawsuit, Smartmatic will have to find that the defendants spread the lies with “true malice,” meaning they knowingly disseminated incorrect information or recklessly ignored the truth.
While Murdoch’s call is not on the list of defendants, it shows that he was personally involved in the decisions that shaped Fox’s media policy, while he, the company’s chairman, could help Smartmatic find out that Fox Corp is liable.
The 92-year-old stepped down in September as king of his media empire, which Fox, the Wall Street Journal, the New York Post and Dow Jones Newswire, among others, ceded leadership of the company to his son, Lachlan. Murdoch.