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
the trial actually begins. and when a trial like this begins, as you may know if you followed it, people who normally aren t held to account many this type of forum, rupert murdoch, tucker carlson and others will be required to take the stand potentially. now if this sounds like an interpretation of a delay, just take a look at exactly where this settlement news is being reported, these settlement talks, where it s being confirmed. i ll show you. it s a newspaper owned by rupert murdoch. that s part of the same fox news company. and you can see the headline fox defamation trial delayed as the fox network pushes to settle looking for a possible way to settle the case. that s how murdoch s own paper in its own corporate structure is reporting this out today amidst the big news that the trial that was supposed to begin has been momentarily delayed if there is a settlement, that would imply that fox would end up paying out a very large amount knows the exact amount.
the settlement, right? is it like the seth rich case where fox made really outrageous and incendiary comments about the murder of seth rich, settled, and kept making a different version of those incendiary comments about seth rich the question is does the settlement make it impossible for fox and also for the smaller competitors like newsmax or oann to continue to peddle this election lie the election lie is the core of the attempt to subvert democracy in the united states and if this trial really shuts that down as a viable avenue of just information, then it s really done a huge service to all of us if it doesn t, whether there is a settlement or a trial, it s been a little bit of show business, but doesn t really affect the future as much as i would like. it s such an important point you are making it s the point of the exercise i want to double down on it with you, and then go to john on the law.
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
should mention, a fox critic, but very knowledgeable in this area, a emmy award winning long-time producer welcome to both you have i m sure john would like to go first because he snows so much about this, and he knows i love him. i love him as an expert. but i m going to start with michael. and the reason can we don t have new developments in the legalities of the case we have something broader. you might call it a corporate development, or murdoch according to the wall street journal really thinking about folding. so i m curious your views on that and anything else you want to share big picture i think that the macro question is not necessarily whether he folds or not or how much he pays because i think fox can actually survive a billion dollar plus settlement the question is what kind of straitjacket is fox and right wing media put in as a result of