Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch Allegedly Blessed Fox News Plan to Air 2020 Voting Fraud Claims, Court Hears.

In a key court hearing on Tuesday, a lawyer for the voting technology company Smartmatic contended that top executives at Fox News, including Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch, authorized a conscious strategy to adopt baseless assertions of voting fraud championed by Donald Trump.

“The conservative viewers, their bread and butter, abandoned them,” stated J Erik Connolly, the company's attorney. “So what do they do? They revert to what they know best: they return back to misinformation, political propaganda and fear-mongering. The election story and the fraud allegations was the perfect tool for them to get back onto their core messaging.”

A Multi-Billion Dollar Libel Case Hangs in the Balance

In courtroom presentations, both sides pleaded with Judge David B Cohen to decide on critical elements of Smartmatic's $2.7 billion legal action ahead of a possible trial next year. The company argues that Fox executives hatched a plan to “pivot” to the former president's allegations to win back angry viewers.

The Network's Strong Rebuttal

K Winn Allen, representing the network, vigorously denied these claims. “No campaign of misinformation was authorized,” he stated. “It is completely false. The evidence does not support it. It is hogwash. It is made up by opposing counsel.”

He further asserted that the Murdochs, who held ultimate control over the network, “issued no directives to cover Smartmatic or the fraud claims.”

The Core Challenge: Proving “Actual Malice”

For Smartmatic to prevail, the voting firm will have to demonstrate that key figures at Fox News were aware the fraud claims lacked truth but allowed them to be broadcast regardless. In its filings, Smartmatic cited private messages showing personalities like Jeanine Pirro and Maria Bartiromo voicing skepticism about the claims while also showing an interest to help Trump.

The network's attorney argued that Smartmatic has “grossly exaggerated” its worth and the projected damages from the coverage. Fox maintains its personalities were simply reporting on newsworthy claims from the president's allies, not endorsing them.

“This suit really isn't about Fox's coverage of the 2020 election,” said Allen. “It concerns Smartmatic's attempt to capitalize on comments made by the president's lawyers to salvage its financial livelihood.”

A Previous Case Looms Large

Smartmatic's case closely mirror the prior legal action brought by Dominion Voting Systems against Fox. In that case, a judge's pre-trial rulings proved critical, ruling that Fox's statements were untrue and inherently damaging.

That ruling was later cited as a key factor in Fox's decision to settle with Dominion for $787.5 million. A previous Fox legal officer noted that the court's initial decisions had “hamstrung” the company's legal defense at trial.

The Judge's Position

Judge Cohen offered no clear hints of his thinking but informed Smartmatic's lawyer that establishing “actual malice” for a summary judgment would be a “difficult task.” He stated he planned to review all pertinent broadcasts before issuing his rulings.

“I think I have more than enough information, data, legal briefs, charts, graphs and everything I need to make my ruling,” he told the parties in the case.