sk on so they didn't know who I was. Maybe just a crazy woman." It could be. It could be that they didn't recognize her. This 20-something beautiful young couple, it could be they didn't recognize Cher because she had her mask on. That's one of the possibilities. The other possibility is that they're a young couple who have never heard of Cher. How many people in their 20s even would recognize Cher, right? Am I right?

And you know, I feel I can speak to this phenomenon because there aren't too many people in high school who could name Dilbert as a comic strip either. But I like her little blind spot that the reason they didn't recognize her is because she had a mask on. I'm going to start using that. "You've never heard of the Dilbert comic strip, youngster? Is it because I'm wearing a mask?" I think it'll work well.

CNN is all atwitter — all atwitter, not on Twitter, but they're all atwitter. Their hearts are fluttering because there's some news that is, oh, it's just like candy for their hearts. And it is that the lawsuit brought by Dominion, the voting election voting company — they're bringing a lawsuit alleging that Fox News personalities, including Tucker Carlson, Jeanine Pirro, Sean Hannity, and their on-air guests spread lies about fraud in the 2020 election that hurt Dominion's business. It's one of several lawsuits that they're doing against right-wing or right-leaning entities, I guess.

Now there are two essential claims. One is that the opinion people brought experts on and talked in a way that suggested there was a problem and hurt their business. The other is that the news people, or at least producers or people in the decision-making chain, were probably aware of information they did not report that would have been more complementary to Dominion. So two claims: one is that the opinion people said things that they feel are untrue, and number two, that there may have been extra information that Fox News collectively or individually was aware of that would have been important to give you context to the story that was left out.

So does anybody want to make a prediction how this lawsuit goes? I'm feeling pretty confident about this prediction. I mean, the total amount I know about the law could be put in a thimble within a thimble, but I feel like I could get this one. No, I don't know that it'll be dismissed or thrown out, but we have seen that the Rachel Maddow defense — that it's just an opinion — and it worked, right? The defense that opinion people giving opinions can't be wrong in a libelous way has already passed muster. Beyond that, Facebook's lawsuit — they're claiming that even their fact checkers are opinions. So not only are opinions opinions, but fact checkers are just opinions. So in that world where those two things seem to be somewhat established-ish, is there any way that opinion people are gonna somehow be found guilty?

Now I don't know what the standard is for this. This is a civil suit, right? So that means they don't need a full majority, do they? They just need — or the standard is lower than a criminal case. Let's just put it that way. So I suppose anything can happen. But I would say the precedent has largely been set that opinions are opinions and facts are opinions. Now what if it's true? Suppose they can come up with an email or set of emails, just hypothetically, that would suggest that Fox News was aware of more information than they reported and that information could have been good for Dominion's side of things. Do you think that the courts will set a standard as a precedent that if you leave out some relevant facts to your reporting you can be sued? Just think about it. That's all of the news. The entire news landscape is the left leaving out stuff that would be good for the right and the right leaving out stuff that would be good for the left. There's nothing but that. If you create that standard it will destroy the entire news industry. There wouldn't be anything left.

Yeah, how would the fine people hoax play? Do you think that if Trump sued CNN for the fine people hoax you wouldn't find any internal communication saying that they knew that they'd clipped off part of the video to turn it into a hoax? You don't think anybody knew that? Yeah, they did. Yeah, you might even find a digital communication from me to somebody at CNN telling them that very thing. So I don't think they can win on that, right? I mean, I don't know how precedent works exactly in this domain, but I don't see how you could possibly have a standard that if you left something out you're guilty, you know, just for that, even if you knew it, even if you totally knew you were doing it and why you did it. It would destroy the entire news industry. There would be nothing left, which would be funny.

All right, now here's the other scary thing about it. Apparently there is some point in this process in which Dominion would get access to Fox News's communications, like private communications, which I assume would include from outside people, aside from people who are communicating with Fox News hosts, which includes me. My