about the 2020 election. i just was unthinkable to me tha fox would admit that there i some kind of wrongdoing there. that they, that is at the hear of this case let s talk about rupert murdoch. he has become a interesting figure in this particular case. obviously h is a very central figure to th existence of fox. there s no doubt about that. but how he has played a pivotal role in this, some are calling his possible court appearance date with destiny. how much of an embarrassment is this for him? and what do you think i going through his mind right now, having overseen thi empire and now watching this day in court unfold? look, i am not a mind reader. i m certainly not mind reader. for a guy lik rupert murdoch. what i can say is that fox put forth completely ridiculou proposition that he had no involvement in fox news, tha he was just a member of th parent company, that he didn t really care about what was going on with their quote on
back foot, going into this they are. the judge has repeatedly reprimanded fox. an its attorneys. for objecting t certain arguments that the shouldn t have objected to they have been repeatedl sanctioned by the judge and think, if i were fox, i woul want to settle. this but i als don t know that that is wher this case is. because fox is going to have to offer dominio an apology and much, muc money. i don t think fox can afford to offer them a apology. imagine. saying, yo were wrong. for everything you said about the january 6th attacks. everything you said
katie, dominion will need to, as i mentioned there, convince the jury that fox acted with quote, actual malice. talk t us a little through what thi means, how difficult it will b to prove so, this is why everybody keeps on saying, you are never seeing a case for defamation really go to trial, and yo certainly don t see one that i allegedly this strong on behal of dominion. actual malice, it is kind of one of these things that you can reel off the lega definition and ayman, you did great job in your set up t this block in terms of what th definition is. but having jury really understand it is going to be the nuanced tric for dominion. it is the idea as you said, that fox put fort fruits of you are s to consume information that they knew was false, which frankly, with judge davis s ruling on thos motions, dominion s going in it already checked off, or, fox basically said, i m goin
might be in the works? yeah. so, you can settl even on the courthouse steps on the eve of trial, you can settle right before a jury verdict is rendered in the case, frankly, you could settle afte the verdict annual if you are going to appeal. everybody has wondered aloud why hasn this case settled already. i seems to be the case tha dominion is barreling toward the finish line, towar success. and why has fox not pointed up the money? number one, we do know dominion i claiming billions of dollars i damages. let s be clear. compensatory damages in this case. the economic damages i this case, they are claiming a 1. 6 billion, plus the - punitive damage of this that they are asking the jury t award, which could ve also troubled that, right? so there is a lot of money that is at play. i personally think tha if we settle, you are not goin to know the amount. one and two,
to have total reckless disregard, i m just going to completely ignore whether or not there is truth going o with what we are putting forth and our viewers, we are goin to put it out there. can i ask you particularl about that point sure. can the dominion lawyers us the fact that the judge ha already said that they clearly were saying false information, or will that not be allowed in court? so, let me be clear. it i not like the dominion lawyer are going to get up in front o the jury and say, with thi judge. he has already said tha everything that fox did in thi case was false. they are not going to do that. but fox is hamstrung legally in being abl to liberate certain defenses so even though you may hea certain key word throughout th course of the trial that fox will try to convince the jur to think is a defensive, i think at the end of the day, i it is not an available legal defense, then it is not like the jury is going to be able t come back and render a verdict that is in c