It's their right to defend their reputation. If there is any proof against them let those come to light and if the machines are indeed not good let the company go belly up. But what if the allegations are lies? Shouldn't the originators of those lies take responsibility?
Of course they should be able to sue if the can show actual damages, but then that’s not chilling speech.
I took GP meaning that they want corporations to shut down anything they don’t like. That’s typically what’s meant by chilling speech.
They have a good shot at being able to successfully show actual damages here, so it sounds like you're onboard with these lawsuits.
Laws against defamation chill defamation.
Pretty easy to show damages. Their employees are getting death threats. People are calling for dominion equipment to be disallowed from future elections.