They're pushing the narrative hard - but having read the full court document (not the selected excerpts they're posting in the news articles) - seems like they're spinning a portion of the legal argument without providing the context in the document both before and after those excerpts.
Decide for yourself.
https://assets.documentcloud.org/doc...s-dominion.pdf
It's a slog, but an interesting read. Media would have you think it's one thing - when it's actually a supporting portion to historical legal precedent against a specific complaint in the Plaintiffs legal filing, which is only a portion of the overall lawsuit.
One interesting part later: "Id. at 731 (emphasis added). The Complaint comes nowhere close to meeting this daunting standard. It alleges no facts which, if proven by clear and convincing evidence, would show that Sidney Powell knew her statements were false (assuming that they were indeed false, which Defendants dispute). Nor have Plaintiffs alleged any facts showing that Powell “in fact entertained serious doubts as to the truth of h[er] publication.” In fact, she believed the allegations then and she believes them now."
IMO - media is cherry-picking a portion of a complete legal brief that covers numerous legal avenues required to protect their client, against specific legal arguments filed by the Plaintiff. Of course the media knows that nuance will be lost on the majority, hence... the spin.