all eyes have been on the delaware courtroom where fox news trial was slated to begin today, this very monday. the jury had been chosen the judge had set today for this actual trial to begin. but if you can see where i m going with this, the trial did not begin today. in a last-minute development that has been noticed everywhere from washington, d.c., where so many politicians have a symbiotic relation with fox to fox headquarters in midtown manhattan, they re noticing the big news i have for you right now in the biggest case about the lies that led us into the insurrection the judge has delayed this for at least a day and that may sound like a small scheduling matter until you hear why. this day, this pause right now tonight that we re living through is one last legal chance for fox to fold, to settle what could be a very costly case, to try to quietly lose rather than potentially loudly lose before the trial actually begins. and when a trial like this begins, as you may kno
now. welcome to the beat, our top story is new developments right now in what s shaping up to be the case of the decade for trying to hold liars accountable with real swift justice. fox news on defense, facing over a billion dollars for punishment and lies, it served up and fed the insurrection. as you see here, top fox hosts have clearly been on team trump in public for a long time. we know that. we know sean hannity broke all journalistic rules of pretense by endorsing and publicly campaigning for trump. there s no court punishment for breaking that kind of rule. there just isn t. but there can be penalties for malicious lying, for defamation if you can prove the defendant acting knowingly, maliciously, intentionally. that s hard to prove and that difficult standard is deliberate, which is why this case has to turn on hard evidence, not asking whether hannity is biassed for trump, he is. but asking whether hannity knowingly and maliciously pushed lies that caused immeas
trump s is longer than usual because he was creditly accused and facing evidence of threatening the court system and the judge. to be clear, murdoch hasn t been accused of threatening violence against the judge. but going on the stand would take a lot longer than arraignment. if fox doesn t settle, murdoch and others may be on the stand facing new legal jeopardy if they lie it s a forum where fox does not control the mic and the audio or the message and the visuals. the bubble would be very seriously breached it s also an unpredictable process where if fox were to lose, and they could win but if they were to lose, a jury would then be the one deciding in the end how much fox pays right now if they settle, they have some say on thatify f they can reach a deal i showed you the deal. in public, the judge is not saying exactly why the trial was delayed. and the voting machine company that is suing fox says it stands by the demand for damages of
yet she continued to oversee weeks of coverage, main lining the false perception that there was wider debate or question or a stolen election, which she and her host as you see here clearly knew was false. now, there s two sides to every case. the judge is going to hear it all out, if it continues, if fox doesn t settle. fox s lawyers say the coverage is of news worthy claims. there has to be a lot of room for claims, debates, contested ideas, opinions, all of that, and they are entitled to their defense. it will be heard in court. i want you to know what it is. we re also repeating their defense. this is not ms. romo s show. we re going to give you context and facts about it. this new evidence shows if that s going to be the key defense, if this was news worthy, credible, legitimate, the problem is fox s own people said at the time these were news worthy claims. a person claiming time travel is