prosecutor, paul, people are waiting for a final verdict on this case, but again, you can settle up until the verdict is read what do you think of this? >> so, there's a huge amount of m money at stake and fox doesn't have an obvious defense. the judge is already upset with fox for not turning over information it should have to the other side the judge also in an earlier ruling, said there are no factual issues about whether the statements that fox put out were true he said, as a matter of fact, those were lies. the only thing the jury has to decide is whether fox knew they were lies when they broadcast them lots of evidence that they did so it makes sense that fox would settle, because, otherwise, it's going to get taken to the cleaners >> breaking news, the parties have resolved the case the fox news versus the dominion case our apologies to heather boushey and the white house for abruptly

stopping that interview. "deadline: white house" which has a lot more about this starts right now. ♪ hi there, everyone, we come on the air with a whopper of a breaking news story for you. a settlement has been reached in that massive $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit brought by dominion voting systems against fox news it was that kind of day. everyone waiting for a vatican-like puff of smoke a lot of delays. a lot of pontificating and a lot of wondering what might be happening and now, we know nick confessori, the judge in this case, at 3:57 as we sat waiting to come on the air, quote, the parties have resolved the case do you have anything to say about that >> look, this is a very big deal it surprised many people, today was going to be the opening day of arguments

there was a two-hour delay after lunch. no one came back with the arguments. we saw the two parties in the courtroom, waiting in the courtroom, exchanging some paper. and before air time, we get the announcement from the judge that the settlement has been reached and the case is over before it even starts. >> and andrea, this has been a story of legal bombshells and reputational barrages against fox news for knowingly broadcasting lies about dominion voting systems to have accepted a settlement, what must this include >> well, the number is going to be the thing that everyone is sort of looking for, no matter what fox wants to spin this as, whether it's 1.6 or more is going to be really telling because, you know, here for dominion, what they get out of it is immediate cash, because, you know, there won't be appeals. there won't be all of these legal issues that fox would clearly do, the trump tactic, sort of delaying things.

and the real issue, a deterrent. when i think about this case, yes, liability is incredibly important. what you have really here is you have an alvin bragg type case which is the undermining of press. in bragg's case you have the national enquirer in cahoots with the one and only donald trump. here, you have the same thing, total hijacking by donald trump and symbiotic relationship whether there's a settlement or not, that's what happened. and the isreal issue is, is the bub anything enough to deter fox news or any other wannabe fox, from doing the same thing again. >> i mean, the thing that is curious to me, sort of a flashing yellow, is what sort of admonition of guilt will this settlement include because in talking with gldominn

folks, and folks close to their case, they were, of course, engaged in a legal undertaking but the moral trespass of fox misleading, millions and millions of viewers knowingly to distrust and to hate and threaten this company seemed essential. >> yes, many questions, are they going to have that in a statement where they actually admit that and what was the calculus, was the calculus better to admit it once, which is death by a thousand cuts. and more, because we've been hearing about dribbles and drabs that still have not been produced we do have a judge appointed today, a special master, by the way, that could continue >> what would that have done could that in and of itself been a final sort of poker in fox's you know what to settle? >> well, absolutely. worst case scenario, we don't know if this is the case, the worst case scenario, the special

master has free rein to take depositions. >> anew? >> anew. and on fox's dime. and this was not inadvertent that somebody said we're not producing this, or see if we're going to produce this late in the tape i think there are ethical lawyers involved when they would hear about that i'm pretty sure they would say, i'm not losing my bar ticket over this but that doesn't mean there aren't people at fox who are deliberately keeping stuff away from dominion if that's the case, just to be clear, that's a crime. to obstruct -- >> will we ever know i mean, the turning point may end up being, when the history is written, the abby grossberg suit against fox news saying that her deposition was coerced? >> yeah, i think, you know, i think it may not be so much her testimony, as opposed to her having the receipt >> and you turn over this rock, here are all of the recordings i had, why don't you look at more

rocks? >> right and she has said, for instance, when there's been a contra tone, he said/she said, she said, i told them that i'd been making these recordings i told them what device i was using. and fox said, no, no, she didn't tell us. that strikes me as implausible that she would not have said that she said she explains exactly how she did it and what was used it sounds like what any employee would say about that so what could still come out from a special master, which still can happen, is that kind of discovery of who actually know, and if anyone was doing this deliberately >> so, nick, you just said something interesting that lawyers were today, talking in the courtroom. and some left the courtroom. are we, as we start connecting some of these dotteds to presume that perhaps settlement negotiations were under way all day? >> you know, could certainly

explain the delay in the case for two hours after lunch. i'm curious, nicolle, to me, the pauley that they've said at once is the sticking point. fox can make more money if they can pay a billion dollars. the problem is they can't afford to lose more and what tucker carlson saying, some version of we lied to you does the audience go to the theater ordered by a judge or do they revoke again? so it's unclear if they manage to get some agreement or apology. >> what role do you think the judge played in maybe bringing the two sides to this dramatic development, we learned about it less than ten minutes ago that fox news has settled its $1.6 billion defamation case brought by dominion, smartmatic with a looming $2.6 million defamation

case in the wings. be it then that fox and others hinted or outright said that we will go all the way to the supreme court, it turns out that might have been bluster? >> well, i think that's right. and jumps typically don't play any role in settlement negotiations they can't force settlement negotiations that's up to the parties but what they can do, they can create space for the parties to settle sometimes, you have to get this close to trial sometimes, you have to see what your jury looks like to be really motivated, to settle a case now, this happens right after the final decisions about who would sit on the jury were finally made so the judge gives them a little bit of a delay early this week there's a delay today after lunch that result information the settlement i think nick is right to say the big issue here, yes, the money will matter, right and the $1.6 billion is compensatory damages for business losses. but dominion also had claims for punitive damages

that's pure punishment that the jury chooses to impose on fox so that number will be interested i'm more interested to see what the apology looks like in a classic old school legal remedy in a defamation case is the apology made in the same venue so if it's published in the newspaper, it's a retraction in the paper. here, that could look really bad for fox. and it may have been that they played to negotiate for a much less onerous form of apology >> katie fang, my friend and colleague has been inside the courtroom all day. we've been wiring her up she ran out to this location as this dramatic news broke less than ten minutes ago katie, take us inside this dramatic development, that the judge announced that the settlement has been reached. >> reporter: the announcement, nicolle, not as dramatic agency

the last one and a half hour, waiting in the court for recess. a couple of major developments wince is he recessed for lunch one, you had a sworn-in jury what does that mean? both sides were going to be stuck with this particular jury for the duration of the trial. so, you had the final composition of what that jury was going to be. that in and of itself had to move the needle for both sides to decide whether or not they wanted to settle or proceed to trial. the last thing, entered by judge davis, pretty much telling fox news, you screwed up and we're actually putting that special master in place to determine the extent of discovery violations in this case in my opinion, and having tried a lot of cases, jury trials, when you look at those two critical factors, i think that's what pushed this case over the finish line to get it settled. >> katie phang, i guess the first one would have gone either way. clearly would have inspired fox

to settle, not dominion, seeking something less than they were seeking to receive during trial. what is the range in your head if you had to analyze what we should be looking for and what would represent a victory in dominion's view? >> reporter: well, we know that dominion basically said going into this trial, it's not really $1.6 billion it's closer to $1.1 billion but let's be frank, right, $1 billion is still a hefty sum my understanding is there's a possibility that the punitive damages by dominion might have been holding up the case they're definitely going in with an advantage over fox considering the recent rules by judge davis. i think the ball was in fox's court when they got to come to the table to what dominion needed to say enough is enough a jury trial is enough at the end of the day, calculus for both sides it to get it

done dominion is claiming a certain amount of punitive damages depending on the amount it makes them whole and then some but it makes you wonder was there a policy opponent, but we don't know what the question mark is right now. >> katie phang, if i understand the judge's decision to appoint a special master in previous rulings he was going to permit new depositions and a new discovery process at fox how much would staving that off have motivated fox today >> reporter: well, it's the person who was going to be doing the depositions. it was the special master who was appointed a number of months ago to handle some of the discovery disputes between the parties. but if you look at this order, it basically said as many dem p depos, as many requests for, and questions that the special master wants to ask, whenever, whomever, and at fox's expense and that might have made fox

say, we don't want somebody looking behind closed doors even more so than occurred during the litigation and that might have made fox ready to settle the case >> i have fox corp.'s statement on the settlement. quote, we are pleased to have reached a settlement of our dispute with dominion voting systems. we acknowledge the court's rulings finding certain claims by dominion to be false. this settlement reflects fox's commitment to the highest journalistic standards we're hopeful that the result of solving this acrimoacrimoniousl. and nick, the key here, which i'm sure people had a pencil on, quote, we acknowledge the court's rulings finding certain claims by dominion to be false

it's not saying we acknowledge and intentionally broadcast in a couple instances rebroadcast all claims about dominion. but saying we acknowledge the court's rulings very weak. >> interesting, earlier in the case, as you know, the judge had made a preliminary ruling saying fox's statements were definitely untrue no question. crystal clear. >> it wasn't going to be litigated? >> right i've seen a lot of statements from companies this statement is saying, i've seen your statement. it's not saying you're right or we agree it's simply saying we acknowledge that the judge's finding exists that's about as backhanded way of saying we were wrong. >> and drew, if all that fox is going to cop to, quote, we acknowledge certain rules claimed by dominion to be false, what are you acknowledging now

>> well, that's not an admission. to be clear, we all acknowledge that the court made those rulings. that's like saying i acknowledge that that's a cup. >> right >> well, it's something. >> i mean, weak tea is like an overstatement. it's so little and then the idea that we're looking forward to the country moving on. i mean, i'm sure they are, and the real issue, i think as nick pointed out which is are they going to say something that makes it difficult nor their vifo their vurpiewership to move on this is just their initial statement spinning it doesn't mean that they're going to be required as part of the settlement to say something more i would be surprised if that is the only thing they're required to say is that i acknowledge that the court ruled against us. >> that's saying i acknowledge there was a judge. >> right or that there's air. >> so, we are -- again, this is all happening as we came on the

air, we whiled the teleprompter and we're living it with all of you. what we understand about to happen is that dominion's lawyers or someone from that legal team or they had a very large public relations team, supporting legal team, somebody from the dominion side will be making a statement. we've talked a lot about the fox side katie, what bar, do you think, dominion, as part of their m month-long, years-long now, extension extensive public relations effort, what will they need to acknowledge today? >> reporter: if i understand your question correctly, nicolle, in terms what fox has to acknowledge >> just, what are they going to say, in terms of the things that they were able to receive from fox in this settlement that were better for the company and better for the country i mean, i think there was definitely a parallel conversation that dominion started about the damage to

their company in the climate of grave damage being done to the country. >> reporter: yeah, so, dominion was seeking the ability to get money to make itself whole, based upon the harm and damage that was caused by fox in terms of the perpetration and the dissemination of the lies about the company specifically so interestingly, it's a big question mark in terms of the actual amount that would have, quote, made dominion whole but in terms of this, you know, statement that came out from fox corporation in terms of a healing of the country, what's particularly problematic is whether or not they're going to be able to actually back that up dominion's position obviously is going to be, the damage made to the company, but to america as a whole, americans were damaged because of the fact there was his continued dissemination of lies so, i think we're going to have to wait and see what dominion is going to put out to the public the actual terms of the settlement, i want to emphasize this, the actual terms of the settlement are unknown at this

time the only thing addressed to the court -- he didn't address the peanut gallery, he didn't speak to us. he spoke stto the jury, he spok to they m specifically, he saide thanked them and said this case would not have settled if it were not for them. he said they and their service basically got this done today. so that's all we know. we know there's a settlement we know as we stand here today, we don't have another six weeks of this trial. i'm curious what america goes to >> katie, there is a press conference going on outside the courthouse we're going to listen in >> -- the truth matters, lies have consequences. over two years ago, a torrent of lies dominion and election

officials crossed into an alternative universe of conspiracy theories, causing harm to dominion and the country. today's settlement, $787,500,000 represents vindication and accountability lies have consequences but truth -- people across the political spectrum can and should disagree on issues. even of the most profound importance for our democracy to endure for another 250 years and hopefully, much longer, we must share a commitment to facts.

misinformation will not go away. it may only get worse. this litigation cannot solve all problems all of us remain ever vigilant to find common factual ground. today represents a ringing endorsement for truth and for democracy. and with that, i'd like to introduce the ceo of dominion voting systems, john pollis. >> good afternoon. thank you. fox and dominion have reached an historic settlement, fox has admitted to telling lies about dominion that caused enormous damage to my company, our employees and the customers that we serve

nothing can ever make up for that throughout this process, we have sought accountability and believe the evidence brought to light through this case underscores the consequences of spreading lies truthful reporting in the media is essential to our democracy. dominion, our employees, our people, our partners, are grateful for the court for allowing us to process for the truth to come out. i cannot thank the election officials that we serve enough without them there is no democracy. and the work they tirelessly do to that end, and they deserve much better. we're grateful for all of the support we've received grateful to our legal team and want to acknowledge staple street capitol who have been unconditional in their support of dominion and their customers. i want to introduce the principal and founder of staple street capitol >> can we just apologize to --

>> hi. i'm the co-founder of staple street capitol which is an investment firm that owns dominion voting systems in partnership with john poulos and the rest of the management team. it's not every day that an investment fund finds itself at the center of this type of dispute. for us, this case, has always been about exposing the truth and holding those who knowingly spread lies accountable. we're proud to have played whatever part we could, in helping dominion achieve these important goals. i would also like to thank all of the dominion employees who have been through so much, and st

stuck with the company through all of this. we're all very proud of them i also want to thank our attorneys. and gotfried and claire locke for their hard work. the truth exposed over the course of the last several months may have never seen the light of day thank you. i'll hand it over to steven shackelford. >> hi, steven shackelford with gotfried, it's a bittersweet day for the company. as i was preparing to give the opening that we never got to give, i was reminded the hell that the dominion employees went through, and continue to go through, to this day money is accountability. and we got that today from fox but we're not done yet we've got some other people who have some accountability coming

towards them and i'm very proud of them that has workedly for this case and move to the next one. thank you. >> is there anything else in the settlement besides money >> devita breck, sussmann gotfried one last thank you which is really to all of you for being with us on this journey. we appreciate what you've done to help us and to help expose what we were able to discover over the course of this process. and so, thank you. and we'll see you at the next one. >> they may be lawyers and notad that was the legal team, the ceo and the individual who, i think,

runs the investment fund that has most likely funded this legal process which was not cheap, as well as a primary funder of dominion itself. let me share some of the highlights there we learned for the first time the money, the dollar figure was $787.5 million that dominion voting systems will receive from fox news in its defamation lawsuit they were seeking $1.6 billion they settled for $787.5 million. john poulos, the ceo said something interesting, he said, quote, fox has admitted telling lies about dominion. i don't think we know yet where it did that. we have not as a public seen that yet, katie phang, if you're still with us, did that happen in court that fox news, quote, admitted to telling lies about dominion >> reporter: no, it did not

occur in court we actually didn't have anything close to opening statements in this case. and that is definitely something that i was taking notes on i'm curious to hear whether or not there is going to be a separate written apology from fox. maybe actually one that is broadcast on the news, in the different programs we didn't hear an answer to that i know you were listening. and that was one of the questions asked for the team for dominion collectcollectively, ar was no answer. hearing that fox admitted to telling lies to dominion didn't happen outside the courthouse. we don't know where that's going to be done >> it did not happen in the statement where they, simply, quote, acknowledged certain claims to be false >> that's right i'm sitting here wondering if that statement by fox coupled with the judge's ruling earlier in the case is what we're talking about is what poulos was referencing there people at the press conference dodged questions from the

reporters about the apology. we just don't know yet it seems to me, you cyou can squint -- >> we don't squint around here we have invited a member from dominion's legal team. we know sometimes they catch network and the show, if you are in the office, let your legal team, we'd be happy to take them by phone to answer some of these questions. obviously, a huge legal victory. plenty to talk about a massive amount of money from a company that you know, to your point, this is a cup this is an obvious thing not always at fox news >> this is three quarters of a billion dollars. >> with a "b." it's so much money it's hard to -- >> when parties sit down, you can be sure that fox news said, and we're going to do this now and because, just remember, dominion won, it's not like it gets a check at the end, you've won and here's the money it appeals and time, and

everyone is thinking what's the present value of money, when you're thinking over three quarters of a billion dollars, that's three quarters of a billion dollars now that they actually get to use and put into a company that's been grievously damaged. as opposed to waiting three, four years for endless appeals and at that point, it's in fox's interest to sort of delay things as i used to say, any day you're not paying is a good day so, three quarters of a billion dollars now is not just a big number but it's a big number because of when it's being paid >> i mean, joyce, there is something that they will now have to disaggregate because they disaggregated it. what dominion aggregated, the broad lies about the 2020 election the settlement deals with the first part, lies that fox news

broadcast about their company dominion i think if people sort of got that feeling like they just got off the treadmill going too fast or awkwardly, it's sort of waiting for that second piece of it to be addressed i feel like what you're all saying, and you, too, katie, it may not be another part of this, it may be that $787.5 million. >> i think you're right. this case was never about vindicating the case to the american people. it was always about dominion's damage i think it's important we talk about having those expectations. look, i'm listening to the statement. and i see the statement from fox. i think it looks to me because i think that statement would have been very carefully vetted past the lawyers on both sides. there would have been an agreement that was what fox was going to say i bengan to wonder, if dominion fittering away the opportunity

about the lies and only in one place, do we hear that, dominion's president is at the podium at one point, he quickly says something about knowingly telling lies >> he says fox has admitted to telling lies about dominion. >> and he says something about, you know, that they knew they were lies at the time. as nick says, the judge until summary judgment already says, we know there were lies. the issue at trial would have been actually did fox knowingly lie or were they reckless in the truth. that's always the case in a defamation case. i'm curious, i wonder what fox is running right now is part of that agreement that fox will speak that to its viewers. it doesn't look like to this that they're going to acknowledge anything more than lies were told on their air. >> a key quote from that press conference is money is accountability that's a bat signal. this is done >> this is it.

>> look, i see this outcome, if there's no apology on the air as a draw for fox think about it, on any given night or week on fox, they are telling a different version of the same story that donald trump should be president. that the january 6th conspirators are innocent victims of government overreach. that they had a right to be angry. that something was, you know a miss that's the story that still animates the viewership on fox that's the story they tell every night. >> not to interject, they're platforming trump 2.0. xi, putin and kim jong-un, don't forget him, the most murderous of all can't be cast in hollywood because they're top of the line, top of the game. you can argue the lies they're broadcasting now, not to say anything of the zombie apocalyptic crime stories they tell day after day, which we don't know, but they may be on

in some of the living rooms of people stockpiling weapons to be ready if a teenager rings their door >> and the money, far more costly to fox news in the long term is a ruling or accommodation that prevents them from telling that story every night to their viewers because that's what makes them powerful and profitable. >> so, i think one of the things, though, is to remember the fortuity that brought us here they brought the big lie but fortuitously, the deep pockets to do something about it >> right >> what you're saying about this, fox 2.0, the lesson from this to avoid judgment going forward, just don't do that. tell your same big lie, but keep it away from private companies you don't need to attack dominion voting. say it was foreign actors or liberals who got into this but keep it away from a

particular company that can sue us, because then they're judgment proof >> yeah. with one of the corporate officers, they're smart officers, i'm sure that's one of the lessons. katie, what do you think they were trying to sustain the national and then the press's attention toward, by saying, on to the next one. the next one, i'm assuming is smartmatic's $2.6 billion or $2.7 billion defamation suit >> reporter: yeah, we talked about the fact this is not the end of fox's battle inside the courtroom, smartmatic lawsuit seeking $2.6 billion in damages is actually in its infancy it just survived a pilot appeal on who can be sued against particulars like rudy giuliani, for example. and critically in this case for smartmatic, fox corporation. that was part of the battle that

dominion was seeking seeking for fox news as a subsidiary, but fox corporation agency the pa agency the parent company, abby grossberg, she has lawsuits coming and several down the pipeline so this is not the end of the fox in terms of its continuing battle i would just add one small note to joyce's point, dominion brought this lawsuit to seek vindication and recovery of money to make itself whole although it traveled on the backs of the idea this is affront to democracy as a whole, this amount of money is a very important consideration. they ended up getting $1.1 billion as they started the trial yesterday. $787.5 million is just a tiny haircut, nicolle, off that $1 billion. so when it comes to dominion itself, it obviously was satisfied with what it settled to and actually answers the question that we started a few minutes ago. there's no punitive damages that

was considered as a part of that settlement again, let's see if we're actually going to see something verbally put out by fox in terms of hosts on the shows. and something in writing in one of the major publications tomorrow morning right now, what we've heard that dominion itself quote-unquote lied about dominion. >> and, joyce, the question is money is accountability, i think it might be that they await the grand recounting of lies proliferated as we've been discussing that continue to this day about the election outcome i want to ask you about the way the decisions have been going. i mean, everything around rupert murdock have not gone fox's way. he was going to have to testify. they failed in an effort to sort of hide the fact that he was in the chain of demand at fox news. not just sitting fat and happy over at fox corp

i mean, none of it had gone their way. do you think dominion exerted the maximum pressure on fox by settles, or would you vise them to go to trial >> it's important to note the conversation we've been having dominion's interest is making them whole and not making a grand standing public announcement from their point of view, yes, it's a good deal because what we skipped over is the fact although we assess the evidence of being strong they would still had to go to trial and convince a jury to rule in their favor and assess damages. and that's not a process that's without risk andrea is correct to note that money is worth a lot more than the risk that one juror might decide they didn't want to go along with the evidence. but the real issue here when you're thinking about risk assessment is on fox's side. because fox is looking at this prospect of losing its base of viewers if it has to go too far

towards acknowledging what it did. from the early statements, look, we don't know, i suspect we will end up knowing because fox is a public company so, i don't think, will be a nondisclosure agreement on this settlement the question is did they both sides leave each other free to talk about what the settlement means, without some sort of agreement where fox is going to have to acknowledge they knew what they were doing and about your point about permitting them to continue with the 2.0 lies, as long as they don't defame anyone -- >> with a legal team like that -- >> right, they can't defame the public or viewers. so this is very unsatisfying if you're an american citizen, hoping that this case would give us some closure. >> we should tell our viewers, over on fox news, the 4:00 p.m. slot belongs to neil caputo. i believe he's anchoring his show

they have hal kurtz on their care they have read the statement i have on the air. one of the few times we have simulcast something. they did not take this dominion press conference, and they have not revealed the $787.5 million that it cost fox news to settle with dominion. let me bring into our coverage, jeremy peters, "the new york times" political liter was also inside the wilmington courtroom. you mentioned yesterday that you planned to be there for weeks. you're coming home tell me about today. >> reporter: it was really an extraordinary and unexpected development, nicolle you could hear gasps in the courtroom when the judge said the parties have resolved this case and sent the jury home. my understanding is, you know, this $787 million settlement is one of the more, if not the largest, that fox has ever had to pay and it's settled an awful lot of

lawsuits over the years. one of the things that was really kind of striking coming out of the courtroom was the forcefulness of dominion's tone, and their statement, that the lawyers came out and justin nelson, the lead attorney, or one of the lead attorneys for dmin cominion, sao is going to have to answer for the torrent of lies that it told about dominion and this represents, the $787 million settlement represents vindication and accountability dominion hasn't at all softened its tone here. and i think looking at it from fox's perspective, their statement in this is interesting because it only kind of glancingly acknowledges the falsehoods that it allowed on its air about dominion machines. it says that it realizes that some statements, and i'm paraphrasing here -- >> i've got it, jeremy

let me read it we'll talk about it together this is the sentence and we've pontificated earlier that probably took 47 lawyers to write the sentence quote, we acknowledge the court's rulings, finding certain claims about dominion to be false. that's it. that's it about the lies to dominion the court's ruling in black and white. really up for debate >> reporter: it doesn't, from what i understand, have any type of on-air component either so, you know, fox, i think, if they approach this the way they have approached covering the rest of this case, i expect to hear very little about it on fox news >> andrew, you just entered a pretty fascinating tease from smartmatic -- >> smartmatic, if you want to see sort of picking up the baton. >> right >> you really get the sense, this is victim one, victim two that's on deck, to katie phang's

point, a spokesperson said, quote, dominion's litigation exposed some of the misconduct and did damage caused by fox's disinformation campaign. sparkmatic will explosion the rest that's a statement going forward and more to unearth. that's why it's interesting to see if the special master process goes forward because that can be part of something that gets unearthed in this case because, you know, a jump dge is not bound by a settlement agreement. the judge has his own interest if he thinks he was lied to in the discovery process. so this is definitely a to-be continued both on what the judge may do and continued litigation. >> yeah, i mean, jeremy, how does fox deal with defamation of smartmatic when they basically have a road map proceeding in this case? >> reporter: i imagine this puts

an awful lot of pressure to settle that case, you know, if it settled the dominion case, which many people expected it would never do, settling smartmatic, i think, is a perfect reasonable thing for fox to want to do. i don't know, on smartmatic's end, how willing they will be to settle this. but certainly, fox doesn't want the specter of another messy, embarrassing trial, like they were facing here let's just think about it for a second, what we are not going to see now, because this case is going away you're not going have rupert murdoch on the witness stand you're not going to have suzanne scott, the ceo on the witness stand. we're not really going to hear some of the explosive developments that we expected that dominion was saving for trial. this was going to be six weeks of bad headline after bad headline for fox news. and it just didn't want to do that, and i don't see it wanting to go through it again with

smartmatic. >> i wonder, nick, as we sort of listen to the difference of being made whole, the unanswered questions for democracy sideswiped along with the company being defamed and the specter of another trial, if you think that they were more rattled? i mean, fox news, a public posture, and you and jeremy pierced it with your great reporting but the public posture all along is i'll huff and i'll puff and i'll take it all the way to the supreme court and they have huge, huge audiences that people like what they're broadcasting we should acknowledge that but was there a sense inside that this was not great for business, and great for relations with some of the members on the board who weren't super down with the coup >> absolutely, folks, paul ryan and others voicing concerns trying to push the company to pivot away from trump, away from denialism, and they got

overruled. and what we've seen in the last year or two, fox doubling down on the same one that the viewers want in some way i see the settlement as fox putting out the strike price for smartmatic, like this is what it takes think about it, this amount of money, three quarters of a billion dollars is ten times what staple street paid or valued this company at when it was purchased. that's a great return of investment for dominion and its owners so, this case has taken on broader overturns. >> sure. >> democracy and the press but for them, it's really business that's a useful lever for them and smartmatic, but those are businesses >> claire mccaskill is with us and has been with the coverage claire, your reaction to the coverage today >> i think nick just laid it out clearly. keep in mind, i think many of us are looking at this lawsuit as a surrogate for our frustration with what's happened with our

democracy and what's happened with fox news and other places around the big lie and it was really kind of out there, we thought, for s at the end of the day, these lawyers had an obligation to their client and when you look at present value of money, as andrew mentioned earlier, and if you look at the plea going into the trial which is right around $1 billion, they got everything financially they were asking for. and i'm sure their clients were going, we want the money and they have to respect their client's wishes. they weren't there to make us all feel better. they were there to represent the financial interest of dominion and that's what this settlement really represents. now, it's too bad that it appears at this moment, we are speculating somewhat, but it appears at this moment that fox until going to have to say i'm sorry. isn't going to let us all have that moment of vindication that they finally are going to admit how bad they really were, but

this is quite an amazing settlement and keep in mind, as joyce talked about, you have a risk, when you go to trial and when a jury's been sworn and you settle, it is acknowledgement of both sides of the risk they were made whole financially. and they always had to worry about jury nullification, which is a fancy way of saying they could have had somebody on the jury that was going to be a loyalist to the big lie. or maybe more than one, that wasn't completely truthful in the process of selecting the jury so, i think, speakingfor the lawyers that represented dominion, i understand exactly why they did today speaking as claire mccaskill who wanted fox hung out to dry, this is a clear distinction >> this is not and if a dispute

can be worked out in a settlement that dominion felt fair to employees and reputation, that's a decision for dominion to make you're right, we were sort of stragglers, right? kind of hanging on to the case because it did what no one else has ever done, not even superb journalists like jeremy and nick and trump believes rupert murdoch is demonic and pupert murdock wanted laura ingraham, tucker carlson and sean hannity together to telethon the insurrection season style recant the lies about the election. that they thought sidney powell was deranged and crazy that maria bartiromo was almost too crazy for fox. i mean, we know so much, that was being along for the ride brought into public view >> that's exactly right. and, you know, it's not over, there will be more litigation. and i do think that abby

grossman's lawsuit is going to be particularly defining for fox news but it, unfortunate, i think we would all have liked them to have to apologize on air maybe that's still coming, my sense is, it isn't my sense is that is a parsed statement. i think your statement was accurate, nicolle, when you said 47 lawyer has a pencil on it i would have thought it was more than 47 and pr people at the same time. >> it's so interesting to see the rocks turned over, money makes all of the mud go away i think you're getting to something where we always end up, whether we have tim thehafyr the other or two and talk about the select committee and it all comes back, though, i think what you're talking about, clare, the unsatisfied desire for accountability do you today, as we sit here at

4:48 in the east feel optimistic that this is part of a wave of accountability for trump and his allies and the media and otherwise? >> i actually think the only accountability is going to happen when there's another election i think that is going to be the final chapter. now, that hasn't been written yet. but, you know, i think fox news, i know we're going to talk about this maybe or maybe not, depending on how much time we have, but fox news is also contributing to this that there is a crime around every corner and everyone has to be armed and shoot everyone and we've seen incredible heartbreak over the weekend with people that dollar bet you a dime, they watch fox news. and they're getting this constant feed of crime everywhere which is not reflected in really the statistics so, fox wants to make the viewers angry or they want to make them afraid

and that is their coin of the realm. and they did that with the big lie. and i think this lawsuit is going to stop them from continuing to do that. >> jeremy peters, we thought we would be talking to you live from wilmington, you and katie phang every day for six weeks. we are happy that hopefully, you'll both be around this table more often but i'll give you a final word >> reporter: well, i think, really, what -- to wrap this all into your previous conversation with senator mccaskill, the people who were so outraged over donald trump's conduct after the 2020 election and his just, you know, shredding of any types of norms, were looking at this trial, because it was because it was a moment of accountability or could have been a jury injured against fox would have been seen as one of the only ways that president trump

and his supporters who spread the big lie were made to answer for that yes, fox is writing an awfully big check, $787 million is a lot of money they also have $4 billion cash on hand, so, you know, it may -- it's not a -- it's not going to be extremely financially painful for them to write this check because they are not having to apologize, which i know is what dominion wanted them to do there isn't that level of accountability that i think a lot of people were hoping to see here >> katie, your last thoughts >> i kind of want to echo the idea this may have been a business decision for dominion but this truly was a david versus goliath thing consider the following dominion had to take on fox news and fox corporation which we think is

this huge monolithic giant media titan, and in doing so dominion was able to expose the hypocrisy, expose the fact decisions were being made in violation of basic journalistic integrity concept to be able to get a bottom line profit done on behalf of a company. i am not as optimistic -- and i don't want to throw water on everything here. smartmatics lawsuit may be seeking more money than dominion, but it's a shorter window of time in terms of exposure for defamation. to everybody's point dominion created a road map it created an opportunity to set forth a road map for future people seeking basically the opportunity to go to court because of defamation by a huge giant, an industry titan like fox, it gave these people a road map to go and get squlus s s, so i'm applauding and my codokudoso dominion being able to get it

done i think people are dissatisfied but this is just the beginning of a very long road for fox. >> the other piece of it i think we can thank dominion for is understand a war with them just someone who's worked inside campaigns and network election nights that fox built the preeminent decision desk, and then laura engram, tucker carlson, and sean hannity want to tear it down is a revelation, that their fact checkers had reporting on social media and on the air that could have spared fox this whole thing and this whole $787.5 million settlement today and they wanted to have them fired tucker said why can't she be nired. the revelations how they operate is very structured i think for everything we understand about that place >> that is 24 big message for all of this. yes, i think all of us wanted to have it repeated and having to

feel the pain of having them to say it from their own mouths >> just admitting a mistake and acknowledging wrongdoing >> it's like a child and you want to hear them say i'm sorry. >> i acted with actual malice. >> and to katie's point, though, and yours this is sort of a remarkable what was uncovered here and just how devastating it is in terms of journalism and this day in and age, which was in bed with one and only one candidate violating all journalistic ethics. that is really the key to this but, you know, that's something that dominion as a privity company, that wasn't their mission, their ultimate mission as a private company but they turn this all -- this is the gift that they have given us >> one of the things i remember hearing about and some of the people involved in the dominion

fight was the power of the paper trail, that there was always a black and white copy of every correction, the time that something was broadcast incorrectly, and sometimes between the live broadcast and being re-aired, more communications from dominion to fox. i mean the pile of evidence that fox was told over and over and over again from people with immense credibility inside the political media arenas seemed like a powerful part of their success. >> lordy, there were tapes, right? the evidence here and i spent a portion of my career in private practice working on defamation cases. the evidence here was extraordinary. you never in a defamation situation are talking about proving actual knowledge of falsity. you're always hoping to hope you can prove reckless disregard for the truth. here that would not have been the case dominion would have shown that

fox absolutely knew. and then it goes unfulfilled in this case i think whoever suggested it may have been claire that ultimate accountability comes from the voters in 2024, this case really was ultimately about donald trump and about the fact that he was in bed with a network that americans relied upon for news, and that what they were told instead of news was lies andthere is a mountain of evidence that establishes that, but there won't be a moment where rupert murdoch testifies or where the general counsel testifies, and they acknowledged they contacted without actual malice >> i wanted to fill everyone in on what is happening we're going to continue with our breaking news coverage on this big story. we're going to get more reporting from folks inside the courtroom. we're still extending an open invitation from anyone in that dominion team and call in and tell us what was behind anything we didn't see today.

>> yeah, you know, i think we're all waiting to see how this came together and i'm not sure anyone gets answers because part of the settlement could be not talking about the settlement back to the topic of accountability for a second, i mean as somebody who's reported on fox where you're always trying to trying to get behind, man, we have a lot of facts. we have thousands of pages of internal documentation about how fox worked as a business and everything you thought might be true, you know, is pretty much true. we know that words cannot be disputed we know how they operate we know how their prime time shows come together. we know they don't care that much about the facts we know they're willing to peddle lies if their audience

wants them that can't be changed. that is said and done. >> the toothpaste can't go back in the tube. everyone is going to stick around a bit longer. much more news ahead don't go anywhere. you're doing business in an app driven, multi-cloud world. that's why you choose vmware. with flexible multi-cloud services that enable digital innovation and enterprise control, vmware helps you keep your cloud options open. want your clothes to smell freshly washed all day without heavy perfumes? try downy light in-wash freshness boosters.

it has long-lasting light scent, no heavy perfumes, and no dyes. finally, a light scent that lasts all day. downy light! >> woman: why did we choose safelite? we were loading our fisuv when... crack!nt that lasts all day. safelite came right to us, and we could see exactly when they'd arrive with a replacement we could trust. that's service the way we want it. >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪ that's some bad luck brian. and i think i'm late on my car insurance. good thing the general gives you a break when you need it. yeah, with flexible payment options to keep you covered. so today is your lucky...day [crash] so today is your lucky...day for a great low rate, go with the general. they need their lawn back fast and you need scotts turf builder rapid grass. it grows grass 2 times faster than just seed alone. giving you a stronger lawn. smell that freedom, eh? get scotts turf builder rapid grass today, it's guaranteed. feed your lawn. feed it. (vo) businesses nationwide are switching to verizon business internet. (woman) it's a perfect fit for my small business.

(vo) verizon has business internet solutions nationwide. (man) for our not-so-small business too. (vo) get internet that keeps your business ready for anything. from verizon. give your small business one tech solution that checks all the boxes. it's all here with the comcast business complete connectivity solution. peace of mind with cyberthreat security. the power of the largest, fastest reliable network. plus, save up to 75% a year with comcast business mobile. the complete connectivity solution. from the company powered by the next generation 10g network. get started for just $49 a month. and ask about an $800 prepaid card. comcast business. powering possibilities™. everything's changing so quickly. before the xfinity 10g network, we didn't have internet that let us play all at once. every device? in every room? why are you up here? when i was your age, we couldn't stream a movie when the power went out. you're only a year older than me. you have no idea how good you've got it.

huh? what a time to be alive. introducing the next generation 10g network. only from xfinity. the future starts now. reached a historic settlement. fox has admitted to telling lies about dominion that caused enormous damage to my company, our employees, and the customers that we serve. nothing can ever make up for that throughout this process we have sought accountability and

believed the evidence brought to light through this case underscores the consequences of spreading lies truthful reporting in the media is essential to our democracy. >> hi again, everybody wow, welcome back to our breaking news coverage it's now 5:00 in new york. it was over before it started. today a massive and historic settlement was reached in this unprecedented defamation case brought by dominion voting systems against fox news the company's agreeing to a $787.5 million settlement. dominion had originally sought $1.6 billion in damages. today's dramatic development ends a months long battle over how the network, fox news, had spread lies about voter fraud in the 2020 election specifically pertaining to these dominion voting machines. dominion said that fox had defamed them when it broadcast knowingly baseless claims that

it was tied to the late venezuelan president hugo chavez, that it gave kick backs to politicians and its machines flipped millions of votes that were intended for donald trump to joe biden all of them flagrant, knowing lies broadcast in some instances rebroadcast. this settlement comes after months of pretrial filings and hearings, which gave the public a stunning behind the scenes look at the inner workings if you can call them workers, at fox news making public thousands of pages of internal conversations conducted via e-mail and text message and other communications that made clear fox news anchors and fox news executives knew the claims about the election were false even as the network continued to broadcast them on their airways. in its statement on the

settlement fox said this, quote, we we acknowledge the court's rulings, filings, certain claims about dominion to be false, end quote. here's fox news' media analyst howard curts right after reading that statement on the air. >> i do think the statement acknowledging certain claims overall, and this had to do with the idea dominion voting machines and former president trump and his allies made this case on fox and elsewhere were somehow stealing votes from donald trump and flipping them to joe biden that's obviously false those were conspiracy theories, but the case would have revolved around whether fox had done its due diligence, whether it was reckless >> good for howard curts, he goes further than his company does in that carefully worded statement. as we heard from dominion's lawyer, justin nelson, the stakes for dominion were high as well >> the truth matters lies have consequences

over two years ago a torrent of lies swept dominion and election officials across america into an alternative universe of conspiracy theories causing grievous harm to dominion and the country. today settlement of $787.5 million represents vindication and accountability lies have consequences >> and a price we will have a chance to speak with one of dominion's lawyers in a minute. we're very excited about that, but we start our coverage this hour with our some of our favorite reporters and friends legal analyst katie phang is with us. she's been inside and now outside the courtroom for a good part of the day in wilmington. also joining us, a law professor

at the university of utah, a first amendment scholar who we all have turned to in covering this, claire mccaskill is with us let me start with you, your reaction >> well, i mean this is something that is a surprising development to all of us but only in its timing we've said before on this program that suits of this sort routinely settle in fact, settling is the norm and moving ahead to the jury trial is not the norm. this whole case sort of felt like one wild season of succession, and this seems like we've gotten the episode where we're surprised at the thing that happened not because it happened but where it happened the last minute truly 11th hour aspect of this was truly surprising to folks. the fact that it happened suggests that fox was feeling

boxed into a corner and both parties were i think rightly nervous about moving before a jury juries are unpredictable beasts and maybe especially so in cases that involve libel and particularly libel cases as socially and politically divisive as this one was at some point the number is high enough that a company like dominion doesn't have any choice really but to say yes. this goes to the wider point we've been making sort of all along here, that defamation is one tool but never the perfect tool for tackling the wider societal problem of dismfrgz, having private parties suing other private parties can only get so far and today we saw the end of the line for this one. >> your analysis is so interesting that it was fox that it was boxed in. i wonder what role you think the judge's most recent sort of

bucket of rulings which today included the appointment of a special master giving free rein to continue and redo >> it definitely was the case that fox experienced a bruising set of developments at the tail end of last week in pretrial hearings including those sanctions that you describe and now the appointment of the special master it also lost in pretrial hearings the opportunity to put forward a couple of major privileges it was hoping to be able to lean into as its defense here all of those things combined together put it into a position it may have been much more motivated to increase the numbers we talked about. even as we now see as the jury was being impanelled >> stay with us. we're now joined by phone by dominion lawyer stephen

shackleford. he was prepared to deliver dominion's opening statement ipcourt today. thanks for joining us. >> hi, nicolle >> what were you going to say? >> the same thing we said all along. fox knew the truth and fox broadcast those lies over and over again anyway. that was the theme and that's the truth. >> were you prepared for a settlement today >> i was not my job was to get ready to give the opening and it kept getting pushed back and i kept hoping i'd get to give it, honestly >> what is your reaction to both the news of the settlement and the size of the settlement, $787.5 million >> it's a great day for dominion those people have been through so much. obviously getting ready for trial we've bip spending a lot of time with over a dozen different dominion employees and elected officials and so forth and they've been through some real trauma, nicolle and to have a day like today where there's real accountability where fox is accountable for what they put

them through is a great day for them and great day for dominion. >> yeah, i mean the trauma that the ceo was able to lay bare i think first at "60 minutes" and subsequent interviews became part of the fabric of story you and the dominion team told part of the story that was told was also about the damage done to our democracy on that front is there a forthcoming apology or acknowledgement that the lies about dominion were broadcast knowingly and they were just that, lies >> well, nicolle, an apology is about accountability, and we held them accountable today. that was our -- we had two goals. we had accountability and we had justice for our client, for dominion, and we achieved both of them. i think the accountability is part of it and i think that's what we achieved >> so the money is accountability it's a massive amount of money >> i actually think it's more than the money we had that summary judgment

decision where the judge acknowledged it was crystal clear they brought false claims. and i think you heard in the last few weeks the judge was even having second thoughts about summary judgment on the actually malice, on whether fox knowingly published. they have acinformationed -- fox has acknowledged they published false claims the fox behind the closed doors in private so different than what they're broadcasting to all of us and their viewers. that was very important accountability we've achieved over the last few months >> and we've talked a lot about how but for this case you brought on behalf of your client, dominion, we would never know tucker carlson thinks trump is, a, quote, demonic force or they fought to fire fox's own fact checker or that they believed their decision desk

which called the accurately and first, which in a normal world is something you're proud of it, is something they'd like to see dismantled what do you believe just as someone who is very astute in the political arena as well as the legal one, what do you think the contribution of this case is to our understanding of the role fox plays in undermining our faith in democracy >> well, you know, a lot of great reporters i think we had have an opportunity thanks to our court system and excellent judge and special master who gave us the discovery to expose the reality at fox in a way that had never been done before i think that was important i think it helps hold fox accountable. i think it led to today. we're very proud of dominion for bringing this lawsuit and for standing up for itself to fox and hearing all the way through the end, all the way through discovery and all the way through today. >> how much of the legal team will remain intact to take on

smartmatics case >> we're not involved in the smartmatics cay. we do have left number of defendants who have sued after we take a short break i think we'll all get back to work >> let me just ask you because of your client when john said this, fox has admitted to telling lies about dominion he's acknowledging fox acknowledging the court's rulings because what fox says is obviously because it's fox and we goesed it here between 40 and 70 lawyers had a pencil on this they actually said today, quote, we acknowledge the court's rulings. do you think that's as much as a mea culpa as we'll see publicly from fox >> it's an admission it's a level of accountability it's an admission of what the did, and what the court did was important. yes, i think it's part of the accountability really we had to do a lot of the

accountability ourselves getting those documents and the summary judgment record, nicolle >> i want to ask you a question about the legal strategy it seems fox had some crushing legal blows in the last couple of weeks one was abbey grossberg suing fox and becoming one of your witnesses. one was a couple of rulings -- most of their legal turns were defeats from them. how much did adding the special mast door what fox is going to have to take on in terms of legal water, how much do you think that impacted their motivation structure to settle for such a figure of $787 million? >> i'm not sure the answer of that i do want to say that reminds me a lot of what this case was was that fox hired a lot of smart lawyers who were in my view tried to do libel to the first

amendment. the judge came out the right way that the actual malice standard is the right standard. that's what we were going to hold fox to at the trial and there's not some privilege to publish whatever you want just because it's newsworthy. that's part of what the judge did in this case >> and due violence to the first amet that's the first time i've heard it put that way. say more >> the theories advanced in a lot of the briefings, nicolle, if you read through our briefing the theory fox was advancing would basically give a free pass to knowingly publish lies even if you know they're lies as long as you think they're newsworthy. judge davis read all the briefings and he came out the right way. he said, no, there's no free pass just because something is newsworthy if you know it's a lie, you can't publish it or you face liability. >> it's an extraordinary thing to sort of sit in for a minute

i mean fox news smears journalists from this organization, from "the new york times," from "the washington post," but importantly in terms of that being advanced their own news organization, i think some of the biggest bombshells, it things we came on the air and said, oh, my god were revelations about their own hatred for their journalists what do you think the lasting impact is of this picture you were able to depict again for your legal pursuit for dominion, but you were able to illustrate fox is at war with itself, with the titans, the on-air personalities like tucker carlson and sean hannity smearing in internal communications their fact checkers, their decision desk, their washington bureau chief, their journalists and people who don't go along with promoting the lies about the election result >> i think the evidence speaks for itself at least parts of fox knowingly spreading lies

i think the rest of that is internal and i'm not able to speak to >> i want to ask if andrew wiseman, my friend and colleague can lob a question at you. >> of course >> congratulations in terms of the result but also the documents you were able to turn over i had sort of two related questions. one is were there documents that we would have seen you're able to talk about or does this settlement preclude you from talking about what we might have learned -- not thought what we learned was chop liver but is it more than that we would have learned at the trial >> i can't think of a document for instance going to be in the opening or high on my list that hadn't seen the light of day i think we accomplished what we wanted through the discovery judgment process >> and is there some reason that

fox didn't try to settle -- or maybe they did try to settle -- to avoid all of those documents coming to light? that was certainly something when all of our jaws were dropping learning what you knew and now made public why fox didn't try to settle before that happened when presumably you had enormous leverage at that point. is there anything you can tell us about that discussion internally >> all i'll say is dominion wanted accountability, and we had to get all the way to today to get that. >> was there anything about the jury that gave dominion pause, or was fox the driver of settlement talks >> i was just going to give the opening. i wasn't involved. >> all along the way domennian was very forthcoming with the press, lots of great professionals understanding our

interest in this case and its import in the political conversation i just want to give you a last word, again, in the vein of an opening statement that you now don't get to make in terms of how this case may have or if you hope it has changed the conversation around accountability in the media and political arena. >> the truth matters, and $787.5 million hopefully will make a difference the next time a major news network decides to put profit over the truth. >> stephen shackleford whose opening sfamt we will never hear, yet to be written books about fox news, thank you very much on a day like today for taking the time to talk to us. we're really grateful. >> thank you take care. >> any reaction there to what you just heard >> yeah, i mean, i think it's -- i empathize with a lawyer who prepared for probably months on

endch. >> i know like an anchor prepares -- >> and never sees the light of day. i think the core question here is an interesting one about why fox wouldn't have gotten to a place where it would have made settlements happen before the revelations of this massive body of evidence came into the public eye. we're talking about evidence about what it said about trump, what it said about its own audience, what it said about its sources. the fact all of that made its way into the public eye and became discourse i think was surely problematic to fox and that it took until the end stage for the parties to reach a deal on this is pretty telling. it suggests something we've seen all along and that i think the tern attorney just confirmed for us, which is that there was an undercurrent of motivation here for dominion that wasn't just about remedying dominion's own

harm but also about making this case of broader referendum on election denialism and on the wider social problem of disinformation, and i think that they've managed to achieve that. >> yeah, i mean, katie, i wonder your thoughts on, again, the sort of -- the view from inside the dominion legal team as well as another thing they punctured, which was this notion i mean fox as a brand is fascinatingch to their viewers they are all mighty, but as this lawsuit reveals they live in terror of their viewers. i don't think it was two days of ratings before they were shaking in their boots it is not a picture of strong men and women inside fox news. >> no, and it really was the exposure of what is the true motivator at fox news to be able to continue to put specific type of editorial content out for its viewers to consume you know, we talk about the bigger picture implications of this

of course we have to look at it through the narrow lens of the fact this was just one case in a courthouse here in wilmington, delaware, may have end up being a large number in terms of a settlement but fox -- there was one thing i wanted to ask stephen shackleford, the lawyer for dominion it's the redactions because we talk a lot about evidence and what was discovered during the course of discovery. the fact the special master got appointed to conduct itown investigation in term of what type of violations occur there were so many redactions that fox didn't want the american public to see and we talked about how particularly damning was the evidence we had already seen and if we'd actually gun to trial in this courthouse today those redactions would have been open for all us to consume inside that courthouse and for those of us in america listening in on that open audio line, they would have been able to listen as well.

so i think fear is always a great motivator whether you're in trial or not. i think in this instance fox got scared fox had a huge game of chicken it was playing with domippian. fox blinked first. i am disappointed as an american who believes ipdemocracy that there wasn't this bigger referendum as it's been referenced to. but it didn't create new law we didn't get new law out of judge davis, but i think we achieved some measure of clarity in terms of just how egregious things need to be for a judge to say you do not get constitutional protections that you otherwise would have been entitled to if you were in the media industry and i think that's a very big take away because a lot of people are going to be looking at these rulings two fold. they're going to be looking at the exceptionally well reasoned arguments set forth by dominion as well as the rulings from judge davis. and they're going to say we need to avoid that. that's what we shouldn't be doing, so we don't want to be on

the hook like fox was. >> so elegant and high-minded, and i'm going to go the other direction and be petty and catty for a second i think the other thing we've learned is one of the those sources had information from the wind we learned that others thought trump was demonic and spent a lot of time communicating on company devices about how hideous and odious he is at least one of those hosts showcased him in an interview this week. i mean the window into fox news, the behind the curtain, i mean the emperor doesn't have on any clothes. and it ain't pretty. >> no, it's really ugly. and there was some crazy stuff in the name of profit that fox was engaging in, and really -- i know people are disappointed, and i get that, but let's not underestimate what just occurred

here and what these lawyers did. they fought kicking and screaming for years and spent millions of dollars pulling all this ugliness out into the light. and the other thing i think is important to remember, nicolle, is that this happened in america. and this never would have happened in russia or china or any of the other places that donald trump longs to be like. but this is our rule of law working, our civil court system working in a way that it is designed to work dominion got really what they asked for. you know, they were going to go with a billion dollars, present value of a billion dollars is about $800 million, so by the time they would have received it if they'd gone to trial and gotten that much so i really think it's important to remember this was ugly, but it was very american and i'm very proud of our legal system, our civil justice system and i think this is an example

of where the plaintiff's lawyers did many times what governments can't do they go in and they find wrongdoing and they pull it out for everyone to see, and they make things better and i i do think this lawsuit will make things better for people that consume news in america. >> it's so interesting stephen talked about fox's legal strategy was about violence being done in the first amendment. no credible legal analyst inside a news organization sees itself as a news organization i think you could argue fox doesn't see itself -- it sort of doesn't operate. it doesn't see itself as bound by the news organization's content. they called it the -- >> they will tell you they feel

overshadowed and pressured by the prime time opinion hosts the prime time is where the money is a few years ago fox got rid of fair imbalance as their slogan and went to most trusted which goes to the question of their audience i think they've been backing away from journalism for a few years now. they've been backing away from the journalism that roger ales tried to create to counter balance the opinion side you can see in those e-mails and texts, there was no search for the truth. there was no what's true here and how to get it to our viewers. it was what can we say without ticking off the people who watch? that was always front of mind. >> and when it doesn't include calling the election that's when they know they're in trouble >> yeah, and to have built this firsten class election machinery to call the election accurately and then to throw it under the bus or seek to, to have prime time hosts calling for the firing of the white house

correspondents to get them in trouble for speaking the truth, interest doing reporting and fact checking, that to me as a reporter just speaks volumes about what was going on here if i had to say on the question of effect of our guest earlier he said fox had made an aadmission, which i think is an interesting bit of myth making we're going to see there was no admission in that fox statement. and we can see the contours now of the deal. and you can imagine being a lawyer in that room -- i'm just guessing here, but they all say we'll point to the judge's ruling and we'll say that's our vindication. you guys will point to it and say, hey, that exists without actually saying the judge was right. and we can all walk away and say we got what we wanted on the question of the apology. that's what happened there >> i have sort of a i think we may be in a situation where the war is lost but the battle is won.

in other words, to claire's point that this is a great day this is seeing, again, the justice system working here. it's the civil justice system and the clash with trump and trumpism in the court of law, and i think we're going to repeatedly see that. but i do think long-term there really is an open question about whether this a speed bump for fox and that they know that there's a way to do this and to still, you know, cater to their audience, not be a news organization at all. they can keep the label news, but they're not in fact going to be doing what you do and they just don't want to fall into this pit fall again of defaming a company, but in fact they'll toip doing exactly what their brand is >> with a lot less paper trails, probably would you expect -- you're describing what you anticipate to be a somewhat brazen posture from fox would you expect to see the likes of rudy giuliani and sydney powell and all these

people uninterrupted >> in other words, they can say we're not going to go with that because they're tarnished and we don't want the baggage they bring. >> an unbelievable day, what we were expecting to cover today. we're not letting anyone get up including katie phang. thank you all so much for spending so much time with us today. i am grateful. when we come back with today's settlement between dominion and fox news and investigations inching ever closer to the twice impeached and now indicted ex-president we are beginning to see some accountability for some of the people and places that spread the big lie. we'll be joined by a former member of the house january 6th select committee about the groundwork that committee laid and where things might go from here and in the face of the republican party's all out assault on the lgbtq community,

chasten buttigieg, the husband of transportation secretary pete buttigieg and author and friend of the show will be our guest right here at the table. "deadline white house" continues after a quick break. don't go anywhere. your to-do list can be... a lot. ♪♪ [ buttons clicking ] that's why progressive makes it easy to save with a commercial auto quote online, so you can take on all your other to-dos. already did. see if you could save at progressivecommercial.com.

you need to deliver new apps fast using the services you want in the clouds of your choice. with flexible multi-cloud services that enable digital innovation and enterprise control, vmware helps you innovate and grow. ever notice how stiff clothes can feel rough on your skin? for softer clothes that are gentle on your skin, try downy free & gentle

downy will soften your clothes without dyes or perfumes. the towel washed with downy is softer, and gentler on your skin. try downy free & gentle.

dominion's $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit which has now been settled for a little under $800 million represented one of the avenues that we've focused on in pursuing justice and accountability for lies told about the election result in this what we hope is a new era of big lie accountability. but remember before dominion the january 6th select committee in

its own very powerful way also sought to hold responsible those who spread election falsehoods and as we wait for fox's next round of litigation brought by smartmatic as well as action from doj, it is worth remembering just how plainly we could all see the 1/6 committee's hard work sewn into the fabric of all these cases. joining us now is a member of the house january 6th select committee. i wonder your reaction to seeing a totally different effort brought by a private company against a news network, really neither were deeply probed what is your feeling on this very different way to pursue accountability for lies? >> hi, nicolle i think that the reach of these lies and the impact and also

businesses like dominion who were harmed by these lies but truly the american people -- dominion has received some restitution through the settlement i would say one doesn't settle for $800 million if they can they can go into the courtroom and convince a jury of their innocence. the damage of peoples faith by these lies and by a network that perpetuated them knowing, knowing they were falsehoods but continued to push them out to their viewers in order to keep their ratings up, to make money, to be a better network and get more ratings, that damage i don't think we'll ever be able to put a real price tag on thus. but i think in the work of it committee we tried to lay out all the aspects by which these lies sort of penetrated our

political system, and this is one of those instances and i think there's been some accountability here today. >> but you make -- you make such a better and larger point, that accountability efforts are -- they amount essentially to w whack-a-mole, right? what you did -- what the committee did was extraordinary, but it just seemed to maybe hold back the forces and the lies for a bit, and it's tbd, you know, what doj and jack smith will do before the committee but the lies told on fox news they pervade everything. and they don't just lie about the election result or the evidence of fraud of which there was none or the absence of fraud. they lie about crime they cover crime as though it is a wave starting in our urban centers and spreading to town squares all across the country coast tocoast. and it is possible that some of that narrative is consumed by some of the people who stockpile

some of the guns and are now feeling threatened by teens at their door or women turned around in their driveways. what do we do about the democracy about that >> i think this is one court case and one instance of one particular company that was wronged by these lies. but as you said the entire american people were essentially hoodwinked by lies and many people who that was their sole source of news or chose to view have internalized those, and they truly believed them and as much as we tried to as a committee to clearly, consistently without a motion lay out the facts of what actually happened there are still many people who consumed fox news and the people who sat before a camera like we are right now knew the things they were saying were false there's got to be accountability

for that in many professions if you maliciously did something to deceive or harm the person you were providing a service to -- in this case it's news -- you should be held accountable and i think fox today clearly said to the american people we had to settle because we didn't want to go up there and have to lay out more of our dirty laundry, more of these e-mails, more of the things showing that people like tucker carlson knew they were lying to you all along. >> you and liz cheney and adam kinzinger in part paid for your public service and your refusal to simply tell voters what they want to hear, which is what it's clear tucker carlson and fox want to do from their own internal communications with each other, with your jobs, with your seats how do we change the reward structure so that actually doing your job and actually telling the voters or viewers the truth is what's rewarded, not lying to

them >> i tell you it's a tough climate today. don't want to dwell on it too much, but you have people like george santos who completely fabricated his professional career and campaign operation and nonetheless was elected. so i think we have a big challenge to establish faith in the institutions and faith in the sources of information that people receive so i don't have a single answer for that i would say i'm proud of the work i did on the committee. i thought it was very important. and i went into to knowing this could very well mean i don't get elected because it's much bigger we have to lay out the truth to the major people i have no regrets, and i'm actually very proud of the work we've done as a committee. >> one of the lasting legacies of the committee are for criminal referrals they were picked up by special counsel jack smith we see a little bit more it's still opaque by design to protect the rights of any wo

would-be defendants, but from the tea leaves you can read are you optimistic the four criminal referrals will be matched by criminal charges for donald trump? >> i can say i see the same information you do, reporting of who was going in to provide information about these circumstances, and it does seem -- it has seemed for a while the circle is getting closer and closer and right there to those who directly surrounded donald trump and have direct knowledge of his words, thoughts, intentions and my hope is and has been that will then be held accountable understand our justice system because as i said many times no one is above the law, and i have confidence this will lead to a process that those will be held accountable that undermine the election >> here's to hoping. i try to remain hopeful as well. everything you've seen and done we're really grateful to get to talk to you on a day like today.

thank you so much for spending time with us >> thank you shifting gears a little bit for us here at the table, the republican party is making no secret, in fact it is broadcasting from the rooftops about its plan, its strategy to target the lgbtq community with harmful hate-filled legislation and politics anti-trans bills have doubled in just the last year how do we fight back against the rise in hate perpetrated by the gop? chasten buttigieg is here. he'll be our guest at the table after a quick break. ... hum... what's the ocean like? ♪ are there animals living underwater? ♪ is the ocean warm? yeah, it can be very warm. ♪ you were made to remember some days forever. we were made to help you find the best way there.

♪ you're doing business in an app driven, multi-cloud world. that's why you choose vmware. with flexible multi-cloud services that enable digital innovation and enterprise control, vmware helps you keep your cloud options open. (vo) in two seconds, eric will realize (man) and ente[laughs]ontrol, (vo) they're gonna need more space... gotta sell the house. (vo) oh..open houses or, skip the hassles and sell with confidence to opendoor. wow. (vo) request a cash offer at opendoor dot com

okay everyone, our mission is complete balanced nutrition. together we provide nutrients to support immune, muscle, bone, and heart health. yaaay! woo hoo! ensure with 25 vitamins and minerals and ensure complete with 30 grams of protein. ♪ my a1c was up here; now, it's down with rybelsus®. his a1c?h 30 grams of protein. it's down with rybelsus®. my doctor told me rybelsus® lowered a1c better than a leading branded pill and that people taking rybelsus® lost more weight. i got to my a1c goal and lost some weight too. rybelsus® isn't for people with type 1 diabetes.

don't take rybelsus® if you or your family ever had medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if allergic to it. stop rybelsus® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, or an allergic reaction. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. gallbladder problems may occur. tell your provider about ro. taking rybelsus® with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases low blood sugar risk. side effects like nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea may lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. need to get your a1c down? you may pay as little as $10 per prescription. (vo) businesses nationwide are switching to verizon business internet. (woman) it's a perfect fit for my small business. (vo) verizon has business internet solutions nationwide. (man) for our not-so-small business too. (vo) get internet that keeps your business ready for anything. from verizon. frustrated by skin tags? dr. scholl's has the breakthrough you've been waiting for. the first fda-cleared at-home skin tag remover clinically proven to remove skin tags

safely in as little as one treatment. ever since the mid-term elections last year we've seen and we've tried to report here on this show the republican party fall further into lunacy, frankly, and disarray, continuing to ignite culture wars as the last gasp at political relevancy. one of their main targets of their attacks and of legislating is the lgbtq community the community is now facing an assault not just on their rights more than any other time in u.s. history but on their safety, on their security, on their sense of belonging here. since january of this year more than 400 bills targeting lgbtq rights particularly tr trans rights, transgender rights have been introduced in state legislatures across our country,

more than doubling the amount from just last year and equaling more than the number of such bills introduced in the last four years combined. it illustrates a few things including a coordinated campaign by the american right to roll back the rights that lgbtq americans have fought for and gained over the last decade. and as we near the beginning of pride month our dear friend chasten buttigieg is out with the new version of his best selling. this version he's adapted for young adults to focus on his younger years telling his story how he learned to embrace himself and his identity in hopes of inspiring young people across the country to do the same from chasten's book, quote, we're currently living through enormous plit skl and social changes both in our country and around the world and choices and actions we make every day affect the environment, global health, the economy, and our fellow citizens, human and civil

rightsch i think peter and i are a group of young politicians and activists who can reexamine how we all live and act with one another in the world i don't want to waste the chance i've been given to be a part of the most important conversations we're having in the community. chasten buttigieg jones us right now. >> i love the book i love having you onto talk about the book and i love this version of the book. i want to ask you being a parent -- as you know already your ribs break because your heart explodes and you have two at once so that's like extra ribs popping what i find amazing is that anyone who's a parent can stand by and do nothing while we legislate hate >> one of the reasons i wanted to write the book when i started writing i think i was thinking as a teacher then we have the kids, and then

as i was writing the book everything was much more raw and emotional. >> that never stops. >> i think about what i would want to say to them. what if i weren't here someday and there could be something they could pick up and know, you know, what their dad believed in and what their dad would want to say. my mom lost her father when she was very young, when she was 13. and that has stuck with me what would happen if my kids grew up in a world without me and what would i want to say to them so this book is my way as a teacher and parent and someone who cares deeply to share that message with people they are not alone, especially on people you are not alone. you are not defined by the opinions of other people especially their hateful opinions you're not defined by your surroundings i grew up in conservative rural michigan where i thought i was othe gay person and thought something was wrong with me. had i had this book to tell me

there's nothing wrong with you, wid, you're going to go up and be fine and ignore the loud voices right now >> you're going to make me cry if you're a girl you feel like you're alone with sisters. you feel like you're the only person in the world dealing with whatever it is you're dealing with no matter what. and then you add on this intentional, specific, accelerating repeated targeting of the lgbtq community in america. how do we -- how do we hold those families up and say we see you and we've got you? >> one of the reasons i also wrote the book was for teachers and parents and for adults to have those type of conversations that are conversation prompts in the back of the book one of the ways we can begin by changing the narrative is by having those conversations in f place. when i was younger we didn't have those type of conversations. i didn't know anything about gay people or lgbtq people growing up because we didn't talk about it it was brushed under the rug, it

was a taboo subject, and we othered people in so many different ways one of the things people can do right now is put their allyship in action. if you're a parent, join the local chapter of pflag if you're just a person who cares about the future of the country and the protections that are there aren't there for lgbtq people, you got get off the couch. you got to do more than post a rainbow on social media one month out of the year. show up at your school board cs make your voice heard even if it's the only voice. i can't imagine what it would have meant for me if when i was youngerto have one person stan up and say, it could be a better way. what if we included everybody? what if we started talk about these people in other ways that seeps into your bones and

you dhar wcarry it with you. i carried it with me for a long time we have the change the national narrative. i think we all thought we were done you can't just put the work on the community itself i'm glad we're having this conversation. >> i think that's really important. certainly viewers of this program share a mission and a world view about equality, but it's the action piece that i think -- and i think it can all feel overwhelm the right comes for everybody. they're coming for health care if you're a woman, for your right to vote, if they think you're anything other than someone who will vote for them but those are true, and they're really coming for the gay community, for banning drag shows in places where you can get a gun easier than you can adopt a puppy, targeting through legislation things that should absolutely be between a family and a doctor what do you say to a kid who -- you can't bubble a kid away from the news

they see that legislation targeting this community is all that the right wants to talk about. >> yeah, well, there's a reason they want to talk about it some of them have come forward and admitted they threw spaghetti at the wall and wanted to see what would stick. right now what's sticking is lgbtq community, it's always abortion, and especially the trans community. especially because that is something a lot of people don't know about certainly in my neck of theed woos people came around orn gay rights, marriage equality, but still might have questions about trans americans. part of having that conversation for me is saying, if you have a lot of questions but not the answers then you need to start doing some listening for many people on the right they're, one, scared, and two, confused instead of sitting down and listening to trans americans, they're demonizing them. it's an easy thing to other people

it's very easy work to make people feel smaller hearted, hateful, surround yourself, you know, with people who think the way you do and say everybody else is twisted and wrong. i think when it comes to this anti-trans legislation, it could do them a great service, roll up your sleeves, sit down, and meet with transamericans who just want to exist. i'm talking about just existing safely in this country trans americans don't want anything different than what you or i want. they want to go to school. >> safely. >> and exist safely. but instead, the right has found that they can get the three cs out of this issue -- clout, cliques, and cash. they can fundraise off it, get a lot of social media activity off it, and they fire up their base by stoking fear and anger about a subject that a lot of people don't know that much about even me as a gay man, i don't

know what it is like to be a trans american >> of course this is identity, right? i don't either. >> i'm part of an acronym, but that doesn't mean i can sit here and say i know exactly what the trans community is going through, but what i can do is use my platform and listen, and i think a lot of people need to be doing more listening and elevating trans voices so we can hear from a community that is being targeted repeatedly. even for me as a gay man what i say is i'm trusting the science and leaders on this. the wider american -- >> you're so brilliant i'm part of an acronym i'm on delayed synapses. say more than that that's amazing. >> i think if you are not a straight, cisgender, white man in this country, you have been

othered. if you're not straight, you're part of the growing acronym that are going to be attacked by a political party. >> eventually. >> yeah, that wants america to be life in a narrow and specific way. even though we've all been lumped into this category, i have a lot of privileges that some trans people do not have, so when i am asking the questions and doing the listening i'm trusting the wider medical american community who have all said gender affirming care saves lives these decisions are being made by parents, you know and i turn to them and i listen to them because i can't just say, well i'm part lgbtq community, so i get it all. >> it's such an important thing to say and use our platforms to say. doesn't mean we have any higher level of experience. i peel the same way, but i don't want to insert myself into a conversation between a family trying to support their child more than they love life and their doctors.

why would anybody be part of that conversation or decision making >> i don't know why the party who says they're the party of family values is constantly inserting themselves into family matters when it comes to things like that. gender-affirming care, which has been repeatedly labeled as safe care, it is care that is made with a doctor and a parent and whichever teenager is seeking that care. that wider medical community is the community that i'm going to trust and rely on because i believe in science and i believe in listening to people who are smarter than me on issues i don't know a lot about. >> it is all part of this -- i'm not an immunoologist either, but when the vaccine came out, i took it. you've got people like dr. oz saying it's just a woman, a doctor they're saying the quiet part out loud. >> it's easier to stoke fear and

anxiety. that's why we use our platforms. and that's why alleyship requires more than posting on social media it's a rallying call right now, and if you believe that people are deserving of those rights you got to speak up. >> will you then come back this month so we don't just have to do this at the beginning will you come back >> sure. >> because i think there's more from the book to spend time on there's nothing like feeling seen and heard, and especially by someone like you. so let's spend more time on more of the book. >> you got it. thank you. >> thank you so much for being here i know you're busy i know you have little people. >> getting on a plane and going back to the little ones. >> chasten's book is out now quick break for us we'll be right back.

you're doing business in an app driven, multi-cloud world. that's why you choose vmware. with flexible multi-cloud services that enable digital innovation and enterprise control, vmware helps you keep your cloud options open. (christina) with verizon business unlimited, i get 5g, truly unlimited data and enterprise control, and unlimited hotspot data. so no matter what... i'm running this kitchen. (vo) make the switch. it's your business. it's your verizon.

thank you so much for letting us into your homes during these eventful and extraordinary times. we are grateful. "the beat" wit