During the 2020 U.S. presidential election, which, despite some views to the contrary, was won by Joe Biden, issues tied to Dominion Voting Systems arose and became newsworthy — at least to news organizations challenging the defeat of President Donald Trump some three years ago.
Among those critical of Dominion is a host heard during the weekend on a Class B AM in Denver owned by Salem Media Group. Comments made by the host led to a defamation lawsuit from a now-former Dominion executive. Last week, both Salem and the air personality, Randy Corporon, argued in a Colorado state appeals court the case has no merit.
The individual bringing the lawsuit against Corporon, heard on Salem’s KNUS-AM in Denver, and Salem is one Eric Coomer.
Coomer earlier this year emerged as the central figure in a widely disputed “Antifa conference call” who some claim said, prior to Election Day 2020, that he made “f-ing sure” Trump would not be reelected as President. This narrative was amplified by Joseph Oltmann, a podcast host based in Colorado.
There is no evidence of such a statement from Coomer, who has denied it via a sworn declaration. Yet, One America News aired a report from correspondent Chanel Rion aired a report noting this occurrence as fact. It led to a lawsuit from Coomer, settled out of court in September 2023. Coomer had also sued for defamation against podcast host Clay Clark, host of “Thrivetime Show,” for promoting the “Antifa conference call” tall tale.
How Coomer became the “perfect villain” for voting conspiracists even resulted in an August 2021 exposé in The New York Times Magazine.
Now, he’s seeking to punish both Corporon and Salem for their activity in spreading the “Antifa conference call” story. Only, they’re not about to settle and say the case should be dismissed. Why? Corporon shared with the Colorado appeals court last week that the lawsuit is impermissible due to the state’s anti-SLAPP law, which is designed to block a lawsuit deemed frivolous tied to a subject of public importance.
Salem Media Group filed its own brief in the case. In it, the owner of conservative Talk radio stations stated that a lower court was incorrect in concluding Coomer could definitively prove Salem knew the statements were fictitious or acted with reckless disregard for whether they were true under the heightened actual malice standard, Law360 reports.
Furthermore, Salem seeks to shield itself from liability on the grounds that Corporon is an independent contractor and is not a company employee. “Salem cannot be vicariously liable for defamation by its independent contractors or employees merely because it has a right to control them,” the company said.
Whether the appeals court decides in favor of Salem and Corporon is unclear, as the trial court declined to do so. Meanwhile, Corporon is arguing that the “fair report privilege” protects both him and Salem.
“The standard for actual malice is not whether a defendant ‘should have known’ that a statement may have been false, as the District Court improperly found,” Corporon said. “Rather, to find actual malice, Corporon must be shown to have actually ‘entertained serious doubts as to the truth of his publication.'”
Given the timing of the broadcasts — November and December 2020 — Salem also believes discussion of the U.S. presidential election results was timely and part of the news narrative.
“Serious doubts over whether election fraud had occurred remained,” Salem said. “Nothing approaching a definitive finding on the security of the election had been released when most of the statements were made.”
Coomer has also filed a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress. However, should “reckless disregard” be established as non-present, this claim will likely be dismissed.
Eric Coomer v. Salem Media Of Colorado Inc. et al.
-
Coomer is represented by Charles J. Cain, Bradley A. Kloewer, Zachary H. Bowman and David E. Jennings of Cain & Skarnulis PLLC.
-
Corporon is represented by John S. Zakhem of Jackson Kelly PLLC.
-
Salem is represented by John R. Mann, Thomas B. Quinn and Melissa A. Wiese of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani LLP.
The case is in the Colorado Court of Appeals.
