In following the defamation trial against CNN by veteran Zachary Young, we have previously (here,here, andhere) marveled at how bad things were going for the network.
It appears that they are getting even worse.
This has been a brutal week as CNN figures, including host Jake Tapper, took the stand.
If this is CNN, the judge (and possibly the jury) are not liking what they are seeing.The report at the heart of the case aired on CNNs The Lead with Jake Tapper on Nov. 11, 2021, and was shared on social media and (a different version on) CNNs website.
In the segment,Tapper told his audience ominously how CNN correspondent Alex Marquardt discovered that Afghans trying to get out of the country face a black market full of promises, demands of exorbitant fees, and no guarantee of safety or success.
Marquardt piled on in the segment, claiming that desperate Afghans are being exploited and need to pay exorbitant, often impossible amounts to flee the country. He then named Young and his company as an example of that startling claim. The evidence includedmessages from Marquardt that he wanted to nail this Zachary Young mf**ker and thought the story would be Youngs funeral.
After promising to nail Young, CNN editor Matthew Philips responded: gonna hold you to that cowboy!
Likewise,CNN senior editor Fuzz Hogan described Young as a shit.
As is often done by media, CNN allegedly gave Young only two hours to respond before the story ran. It is a typical ploy of the press to claim that they waited for a response while giving the target the smallest possible window.
In this case, Young was able to respond in the short time and Marquardt messaged a colleague, f**king Young just texted.
In the last week, Tapper was seen on video by the jury and was mocked for claiming under oath that he doesnt pay attention to ratings, a claim that would make him unique as a network host. Critics hammered Tapper by showing repeated clips where he discussed ratings.
However, the most damaging testimony may have come from top producers who told the jurors that theyopposed the modest apologygiven to Young on air.Since Young seemed to do well before the jury, the testimony of senior editor Fuzz Hogan, CNN correspondent Alex Marquardt, CNN producer Michael Conte, CNNs executive vice president of editorial Virginia Moseley, and CNN supervising producer Michael Callahan undermined any effort to portray the network as seeking to amend a wrong or reduce damage to Young.
Arguably, the worst moment came with an argument by CNNs lead attorney, David Axelrod.
Axelrod introduced a document that he claimed was a smoking gun and showed that Young was a liar.Pointing dramatically at Young and waiving the document in the air, Axelrod declared that he had the proof:
Plaintiffs entire case, sitting right there, is that after the publications, he couldnt get any workMr. Young knew, when he filed this lawsuit that he had entered into a new consulting agreement with a government contractor one month after CNNs publication. This entire lawsuit was a fraud on this court. It was a fraud on CNN. This man knew it. I dont know what they know. But when his came up in discovery, CNNs counsel asked Mr. Young about the Helios connection, and he completely lied in his deposition. Over and over again, he made up some incredible ruse that Helios just had his security clearance because it was a company that held security clearances. It makes no sense. He knew at that time that he had a consulting agreement with Helios Global and he didnt disclose it. It was an outright lie.
However, it turned out that the document merely was Youngs application to maintain his security clearance.
Youngs attorney, Vel Freedman, later laid waste to CNN. He told the court that Young had lost his security clearance back in 2022 and that he hadnt been aware of that until he double-checked after his testimony in the case. Freedman asked for the right to present a witness who would testify on the issue and Axelrod objected. Judge Henry had had enough andblew up at CNN.
He read back Axelrods comments and saidYou called him a liar multiple times there.
After telling CNN that this isnt Kindergarten, he added Right now, your credibility with me, Mr. Axelrod, is about none.
That is never a good thing to hear from a judge.
Axelrod apologized but the damage is clearly considerable.
The most chilling aspect from a litigation perspective? Axelrod replaced the earlier lead counsel who also imploded in court overill-considered arguments.
None of this bodes well for the network.Alienating the judge is obviously never good, but it also could have a material impact if there is an award that CNN wants reduced by a order of remittitur. In addition, having top producers expressing a lack of regret and even opposition to the on-air apology could push such damages higher for a jury.Both sides are arguing that this is CNN, but these moments are building a more negative view of what that is.
ANP EMERGENCY!!-With the passing of Stefan Stanford, ANP's financial situation has become dire.Without significant contributions, the future of All News PipeLine, and our ability to stay online, is in danger. Anything at allANP readers can do to help usishugely appreciated.)
Checks or money orders made payable to Susan Duclos can be sent to:
10510 South Ave
Poland, OH. 44514
Anything at all at Amazon purchased after clickingthis ANP link will allow ANP to make a bit of revenue, all of which will be used to keep ANP online and to keep a roof over our heads.
.jpg)
