his viewers what rupert murdoch had shown him. that the election was stolen. that the trump presidency would be restored. under oath rupert murdoch said he was aware of no evidence whatsoever, of any election fraud in any state and he said under oath that he had no evidence whatsoever that there was anything even slightly wrong with a single dominion voting machine anywhere. all of fox's coverage about dominion, all of it, was based on a woman who calls herself wackadoodle. this woman supplied sydney powell with her theory of the case. everything donald trump, sydney powell and rudy giuliani and fox was saying about dominion came from someone named marlene born. a few hours after all the networks, including fox, called the election for joe biden on saturday, november 7th, 2022. we have this email that day, because sydney powell forwarded it to maria bartiromo, to prove to maria bartiromo that of course there was election fraud. only maria bartiromo believed this. maria bartiromo is the only person at fox who was not trafficking in

on the capitol, he says to paul ryan, rupert murdoch says, everything changed last wednesday. -- he then says could he, meaning trump, could he still resign and get pence to pardon him, then just disappear? would mike pence agree. rupert. so that is rupert murdoch's question. to the former republican speaker of the house. in all of the historical digging that has been done around gerald ford's pardon of reproductive richard nixon, no one, including me who wrote a book that entered that arena, has ever been able to find anything like that, any communication like that. from richard nixon to jerry fort, the kind of communication that report murdaugh is proposing here. richard nixon seemed to believe that it was possibly illegal for him to request -- from jerry forte, the vice president, in order to then hand over the presidency to him by resigning. is what rupert murdoch was advocating there, that trump make a deal with mike pence for -- resigned, pence becomes president, gives him a pardon, could that be illegal deal report murdaugh was proposing? >> so, i have a factual and, legal ans

at worst can only cost rupert murdoch money.orce rupert murdoch to lose control of the company. joining us now is jeffrey sonnenfeld, senior social dean for leadership studies at the yale school of management in a cnbc contributor. professor sonnenfeld, thank you very much for joining us tonight. i have been absolutely fascinated by what you have emailed to me about the possibility and the opportunity for a shareholder revolt in effect here at fox. how would that play out? >> it would play out, there is a major institutional investors, places like vanguard and others, the donor large stake on our behalf. they are custodians of our money. other individual large or owners that control that 61%, it's a derivative lies to. that could be devastating because this litigation itself and the liable of litigation any first amendment and defamation attorney you talked to will say that they have never seen a case that is this clear, this black and white, that the evidence is so strong. they can't lose this. and 1. 5 billion dollars are aski

also with me, who has reported extensively on rupert murdoch for more than two decades. for "the murdochs: emspire of influence." the new court documents get to the heart of why you left fox. you were there for 12 years, right? was any of this a surprise to you that you see, you know, when you see the reporting, you see the text messages, you see rupert murdoch admit it? >> um, the difference between the surprise -- i'm not that surprised. but there is the shock of actually seeing it in black and white on the page. i am still willing to defend a lot of people on the news side at fox. i just think they get drowned out by the much larger and more privileged megaphone of the opinion side. and i think one of the problems is the perception is that news side is just the tail wagging the dog at this point for the opinion side. and that's because what is important and what screams out in all of these filings is they care more about the brand and, quote, unquote, respecting the audience, and what respecting the audience means telling them what they want to hear rather than what t

under oath, rupert murdoch used the word endorsed. the fox defense in the lawsuit is that they were simply offering a platform to newsworthy guests like the pathological liar rudy giuliani, who lied about the election every time he was on fox. under oath robert murdoch was forced to admit it was more than just the guests on fox who were pushing the lie. question -- you are aware now that fox did more than simply host these guests and give them a platform, correct? murdaugh -- i think you have shown me some material in support of that. question. in fact, you are now aware that fox endorsed, at times, this false notion of a stolen election. murdaugh -- not fox, no. but maybe lou dobbs. maybe maria bartiromo. that's as commentators. question. fox host jenin pirro? >> i think so. question? fox host lou dobbs? oh, a lot. question. fox host sean hannity? a bit. some of our commentators were endorsing it. question? about their endorsement of a stolen election? murdaugh. yes, they endorsed. that is rupert murdoch, not stupidly admitting the t

yield at rupert murdoch's soundbite machine.ald trump made the case about why he should not be the subject of two investigations by a special prosecutor. appointed by merrick garland. joining us now is senator sheldon whitehouse, democrat of rhode island he's a senate of the judiciary committee. he's a chairman of the senate budget committee. mister chairman thank you very much for joining us tonight. were you surprised that there wasn't any real outrage at all? nothing, not a word of outrage about the actual investigations. that merrick garland is supervising of donald trump. >> yeah, it was not the kind of day donald trump wanted for himself in the judiciary committee. first, he wasn't really the focus of any attention. second, the manufactured outrage of some of our republican colleagues was all devoted to other concerns. and not the investigation of donald trump. >> i just want to show one piece, as reluctant as i am, for this kind of live beating. blitz look at ted cruz moments of trumpism in the hearing. >> as you, know th

absolutely railing against rupert murdoch in the past 24 hours. in a tweet earlier today, i'll read part it to you. he said that rupert murdoch and his group of maga-hating globalist rinos should get out of the news business as soon as

i mean, it's totally indefensible, which is why you have fox saying, if you listen to rupert murdoch or read runner murdoch's deposition, he says, there's certain anchors who did that, but it wasn't everybody, wasn't the management. they're trying to distance themselves from those particular anchors who did it because there's just no defense to that. sidney powell at the time seemed crazy. this is the kraken lawsuit lady. she was the lawyer going out there with all sorts of falsehoods. at the time anybody who had common sense and was paying attention to that would know it's highly circumspect, it's why it got thrown out of court all the time. yet the hosts were putting her on the air, giving her a platform. the fox defenses, they were just covering controversial views. but if you knew those were false you would confront the people with the evidence. you would press them hard. that wasn't happening there. you just saw a moment ago that what maria was doing was saying was wow, these are incredible. these are shocking allegations, suggesting that there might be an air of truth. >> yeah,

house speaker paul ryan, who is now a member of rupert murdoch's incompetent board of directors at fox. trump wrote, rumors are flying high that idiot rhino paul ryan who has greatly hurt the credibility of rupert murdoch with his ridiculous stance that the 2020 election was all peaches and cream will be fired like a dog from the fox board.

then there's this email, again, from rupert murdoch to the ceo of fox news. complaining about an apparent outburst fox host lou dobbs had against republican senator lindsey graham. rupert murdoch asked, could sean, meeting foxes sean kennedy, say something supportive? we can't lose the senate if at all possible. does that we mean we the republican party? does it mean fox news? it is kind of hard to tell where one stops in the other begins. here's another one. again, for murdaugh to the ceo of fox news. this time, november of 2020. after the general election once it was clear, the control of the senate would be decided by runoff elections in georgia. quote, we should concentrate on georgia, helping anyway we can. who is the we hear? it turns out, over an overgrown, that question is hard to answer. when you're talking about the highest levels of fox news. if you have any doubt of the kind of power that rupert murdoch has had over fox, and our national discourse, hear from the man himself. tonight, the voting machine company, dominion, filed their final brief, a

rupert murdoch has no lap from the start. that's why rupert murdoch put the word news in the title up that's a business that he created because rupert murdoch knew that the word and he was who was a lie. and he did not put the word news in the title that business, no one would ever ever think that it was even close to news. just like tucker carlsen says not even close. our job is not to provide a news coverage, tucker carlson said, not even close. and then tucker carlson said, trump has two weeks left. once he's out, he becomes and calculate less powerful, even in the minds of his supporters. my view is that the most important thing we can do, maybe the only thing we can do, is to try to say the things that make america worth living in. for me that begins with a first and second amendments. and the other person says, a great. i just wore we endorsed two weeks time at the time after that he will inspire people to do even more stuff to put those rights in jeopardy. tucker goslyn says, there's no question he well. so there is tu

anyway, rupert murdoch, you've built this, buddy. you made this.all been suffering the consequences. fox news helped to form this base for decades. they've certainly up for modern american conservatism in all of its present reality, but they also do not control it, and they know that. and now, that central fact on display in the dominion funds, that central fact is the root of just what is so destructive and dangerous about our politics right now. helps lower a1c, and it's covered by medicare. before dexcom g6, i was frustrated. all of that finger-pricking and all of that pain, my a1c was still stuck. my diabetes was out of control. i was tired. (female announcer) dexcom g6 sends your glucose numbers to your phone or receiver without painful fingersticks. the arrow shows the direction your glucose is heading: up, down, or steady, so you can make better decisions about food and activity in the moment. after using dexcom g6, my a1c has never been lower. i lead line dancing three times a week, i exercise, and i'm just living a great life now. it's so

rupert murdoch, his son bachmann.do you think their social networks consist of typical fox viewers? do you think these people spend their time hanging out and rural, red america, working class folks who live in places like east palestine, ohio? are those the content of people joining them at the country club's are hanging out with him, the super bowl boxes? of course not,. they are totally out of touch with these people, to people that watch the network. and at some level, they know that, and it's stocks them, once them, always worried that too much distance will grow up between them and their multi million dollar councils and the viewers out there in the countryside, and so sure they are, but they go through the same song and dance. the murdoch empire clearly putting its thumb on the scale for florida governor ron desantis, potential republican nominee, who so far does seem to have the best shot of beating trump. so there is this recent fawning in a near post profile that infuriated the ex president over the fox nati

rupert murdoch replied, no. he was also asked, have you ever believe that dominion committed election fraud by rigging the 2020 election? rupert murdoch responded, no, i have never seen any evidence. the filing also include this email from january 2021, from rupert murdoch, two fox news ceo suzanne scott, where he says, still getting mud thrown at us. maybe shawn and laura went to four. of course, he's referring to primetime anchors laura ingraham and sean hannity. with, that let's get help smarter with the help of our lead panel panel tonight. i -- jeff geoff bennett -- pbs's chief washington correspondent and an msnbc political contributor. jeremy peters joins, as political chair -- jeremy, i want you to be here because you go inside fox news inside every day. you are reporting, what sticks out to you in the most in this file? >> i think what you see first and foremost is almost a kind of contempt for president trump, coming from someone likely sources, namely tucker carlson and his producers. the reason why t

to testify at a trial because as this judge put it rupert murdoch does have this special role at fox corporation, and he was aware of the guests appearing on fox news air. in fact, rupert murdoch even acknowledged his deposition that he could have stopped trump's legal team from appearing on the networks air, but he didn't so fox news attorneys. they're saying that any appearance by rupert murdoch on the witness stand or his son ceo lachlan murdoch, they say it would just create an undue burden. it would create a media media circus. and in response to that guy's, the judge did say this morning that he would consider if they were brought in to put them either via zoom or other teleconferencing platform . but you know this case very high stakes. it's not only a $1.6 billion defamation case, but this is also a very important case when it comes to the implications of the first amendment. fox news is saying that they are fully protected. by the first amendment here, so this could be a big case about that issue as well. um and oliver to some of what jessica was just talking about. we're he

i think that -- and jonah knows rupert murdoch better than i. i don't know him at all, but i would argue that rupert murdoch has not only tarnished and damaged his legacy, but he's also done a great deal of damage to democracies throughout the world, because these lies fundamentally erode what we believe our democracy to be. and the fact that he had his soldiers and lieutenants carrying it out should be a problem. but no, i don't believe any host at cnn or msnbc, particularly can get away with the same things that tucker and sean get away with, particularly with these lies. >> jonah, there's attention turning towards the fox board of directors, former house speaker paul ryan is trying to defend his role behind the scenes in a new interview with charlie sykes. take a listen. >> if you are on the board of directors of a company that's pumping toxic sludge, racism, disinformation and attacks on democracy, if you don't stand up now, then when? >> i do. i have a responsibility to offer my opinion and i do that. but i don't go on tv and do it. so i ha

rupert murdoch testimony guts what i think is the best potential defense for fox.ed is these were newsworthy comments by the then president and his top advisers and we're reporting them. now murdoch admitted we endorsed them but he tried to draw this distinction, not fox but the anchors. who is fox if not the voices of the top journalists and reporters. >> and it is interesting, lauer s a, this dominion $1.6 billion defamation case against fox is set to head to trial next month. are you surprised they haven't settled in. >> well that price tag, i'm not sure the going rate for the settlement. but again if the business decisions motivated potentially the misinformation and the endorsement of the lies, the idea of acting in conscious disregard for the truth, not following a 24/7 news cycle or perhaps mistakes are made as the information comes in later. but deliberately trying to skew the news or trying to defame dominion and there was great consequences it might very well be they've had except extensive settlement discussions. it is still on the calendar seems to me m

hosts continue to oppose push trump's -- with rupert murdoch questioning if they went too far. then, tucker carlson cherry-picking, and flat out misrepresenting the events of january 6th. the condemnation we are hearing from some republican lawmakers, and the brutal kidnapping in mexico, two americans, dead to survivors back on american soil. the warnings to americans traveling to that area, as the 11th hour gets underway on this tuesday night. >> good evening once again, i'm stephanie ruhle, we have still to get into a mountain of new evidence tonight, a brand-new court filing and the 1.6 billion dollar defamation, suit from dominion voting systems, against fox news. drop just a few hours ago, the latest trove of documents, includes text messages, emails, and depositions that reveal even more about what was going on inside the network. as the regularly push donald trump's lies that the 2020 election was stolen. this shows the fox news chairman rupert murdoch himself -- he was asked, quote, have you ever believe that dominion engage in an effort to engage in corruption. there's

real estate tycoon were tight even just a few years ago. >> thank you to my very good friend, rupert murdoching and while he held the white house. >> mr. president, thank you so much. >> reporter: murdoch's outlets covered it extensively and the president gave them access beyond other news organizations. >> good to see you, sir. >> thank you both very much. we never had a more beautiful set than this, did we? >> reporter: but then trump lost to joe biden, january 6th erupted, the mid-terms went less well than expected for republicans, and murdoch's media empire which once seemed to revolve around trump hinted at a new center of gravity. >> all right, he's the man everyone's talking about, florida governor ron desantis. >> reporter: in the dominion case filings murdoch star tucker carlson quoted from an internal message we are very, very close to being able to ignore trump most nights. i truly can't wait. team trump is pushing back. >> okay, murdoch, here's the way it's going to be, brother. you've disrespected donald j. trump long enough. but. >> but all the revelations on the dominion case

not because rupert murdoch is forgetful, it's because the donald trump phenomenon and trump-ism and trump presidency were profitable to fox corp., because it's properties depend upon it. and that's why murdoch as these documents have shown, i don't believe january 6th was good for the country. i don't think the election was stolen. these people are crazy but he does nothing to stop it because it feeds his bottom line. >> i feel like people need to start understanding fox and rupert murdoch, the goal is not the news. the goal is to create more republicans and sustain the republican party just like the goal in britain was to make sure that the conservatives always win because he wants these political outcomes and he happens to have a media empire that can produce it. 61% of republicans right now do not believe the election was fair and think trump was the real winner of the election. >> why are we using the same system that they used in venezuela? >> these systems are democrat own, how can we trust the checks and balances of these votes, whether it's dominion voting machines or a mail-in ba

rupert murdoch said no. next question was, have you ever seen any credible evidence to suggests that dominion was engaged in a massive coordinated effort to steal the president and election? no. the third question was, have you ever believed that dominion was engaged in a massive in court effort to steal the 2020 presidential election? again, no. fourth question you have never believed that dominion was involved in an effort to delegitimized and destroy votes for donald trump, correct? i'm open to persuasion, but no, i've ever seen. leigh, why does that matter? >> because the standard that dominion is taken upon itself to meet. is that those persons at fox, responsible for broadcasting the information about dominion that has, in many instances, been acknowledged now by fox to be false, at the time, either knew it was false or believed it was probably false. at the top of the food chain, of course, is robert murdoch. and dominion has made an effort to show, that rupert murdoch was hands on. that is, he was aw

there's another reason why an apology would be hard for rupert murdoch and fox news.would have to tell their viewers, a, we told you something that wasn't true. more than that, we knew it wasn't true, and we knew we should have been telling it to your endorsing it or amplifying it uncritically is so many of the shows did. that's a real buy in from fox news right now, because you know what? right now people inside fox, and i've talked to a lot of them, know that they showed a kind of disdain and content and and best patronizing their audience by saying they're going through the stages of grief so we can't tell them the truth. that's what we saw a loud and clear in a lot of these documents. >> when we have showing respect to people is telling the truth, maybe that's my naive view. but catie, here's a question for me, as it all comes out. and i think it relates a little too david, and i think he's on to something here. why not settle? this this is just humiliating, mortifying stuff. cringe east. off desperate stuff. two faced. all of it. why not settle? >> i will also ad

dominion has obviously expressed interest in calling rupert murdoch to the stand.his week, a judge the judge that's presiding over this case suggested that he might want to also see rupert murdoch. take the stand. now this could come via zoom or or some other form. it doesn't have to necessarily be in person. but it will be notable particularly because rupert murdoch himself ironically, gave some of the most damaging, uh, in his deposition. it was one of the more damaging depositions. he admitted in his deposition that some of us top stars sean hannity, maria bartiromo and others endorsed election lies. so they weren't just covering those lies like fox has been arguing they endorsed those election lies so particularly damaging stuff from murdoch and he could take the stand. i should also note that we're still waiting in the here. um what? what witnesses, dominion would call to the stand. ensure this go to trial and you could see outside murdoch. you could see people like tucker carlson, sean hannity, fox news ceo suzanne scott. they could all potentially be on that

in an ononline post saying why is rupert murdoch throwing his

rupert murdoch said no. next question, have you ever seen any credible evidence to suggest that dominion was engaged in a massive and coordinated effort to steal the 2020 presidential elections, no. third, did you ever believe they were involved in an effort to steal the presidential elections? no. the fourth question you've never believed that douminion was involved in an effort to steal votes, no. why does that matter? >> because the standard that dominion has taken upon itself to meet is that those persons at fox responsible for broadcasting the information about dominion that has in many instances been acknowledged now by fox to be false at the time either knew it was false or believed it was probably false and at the top of the food chain, of course, is rupert murdoch, and dominion has made an effort to show that rupert murdoch was hands-on, that is, that he was aware of what people were saying on his air, that he had the ability to stop these guests from appearing and repeating these things that he app

"why is rupert murdoch throwing his anchors under the table, which also happens to be killing his case and infuriating his viewers, who will again be leaving in drives, they already are. there is massive evidence of voter fraud and irregularities in the presidential election. just look at the documentary '2000 mules' and you will see large-scale ballot stuffing caught on government cameras, votes cast without legislature's

white house also posted today, i think that fox board member rhino paul ryan now put his boss rupert murdoch and great legal jeopardy by convincing him to go against his news anchors and there

we got testimony from rupert murdoch.here was no merit to the election fraud claims trump and his allies were making from the start. they let their anchors spew the lies and platform the lies anyway. among the damaging revelations, murdoch believed fox hosts were all on some level endorsing the big lie. he knew it was wrong to give a platform to the pillow guy, mike lindell because he was paying fox a lot of money. fox has responded to the filings by saying, dominion misconstrued the facts by cherry picking sound bites. they would know. what it comes down to are pictureswork that broadcast lies to their viewers to protect their bottom line and their audience share. who at this moment in possession of thousands of hours of security footage from the capitol insurrection. it's a dangerous situation that chuck schumer spoke about on the senate floor earlier today. >> they need to stop giving a platform to dangerous and entirely unfounded conspiracy theories that eat at the wellspring of our democracy. they need to admit on th

>> under delaware law, you basically are guaranteed that people like rupert murdoch, lachlan murdoch,e corporate executives are going to have to testify. what gets a little trickier is whether or not the hosts like jeanine pirro, sean hannity, the people most closely involved in this lawsuit, whether or not they will have to testify in person. i think it's probably pretty unsustainable that if fox is presenting this case to a jury, they are not going to have to at least put some of these folks on the stand, because it's going to look pretty bad if they're just relying on these old videotaped depositions during the case. but it's guaranteed either way to be like the media trial of -- this will make the amber heard/johnny depp trial look like a cake walk. this will be the media trial of the century. >> today the lawyers for fox argued that rupert murdoch should be excused from testifying because it would be an inconvenience. no duh, yeah, it's going to be an inconvenience. is a judge going to buy that? >> i was listening in on that hearing. the judge was extremely skeptical to the point

on january 21st, 2021, the first full day of joe biden's administration, fox chairman rupert murdochto fox news' ceo suzanne scott that some of the top talent went too far. >> disturbing irregularities have been found and must be investigated to the fullest. >> reporter: during his deposition, murdoch was believed to you believe dominion was engaged in a massive and coordinated effort to steal the election? murdoch replied, no. fox now saying dominion is cherry picking emails and documents to release. dominion has been caught red handed using more distortions and misinformation in their campaign to smear fox news and trample on free speech. but dominion says the emails, texts and deposition testimony speak for themselves. the revelations didn't come as a surprise to at least one republican. >> i'm not surprised that intelligent people realize that what they were saying on the air was untruthful, and i'm just disappointed that they would sell their personal integrity so cheaply. >> reporter: we are expecting new evidence to be released tonight. some of the documents already coming in,

lawyers for dominion voting systems have already asked the court to let them call rupert murdoch and his ceo son, lachlan if the case goes to trial next month, is resisting the efforts, saying the murdochs have limited knowledge of how fox news made editorial decisions and would be burdened by having to appear in person, the judge said it is possible they could appear over videoconferencing if called. both have already given depositions in the case with rupert murdoch, acknowledging some fox news hosts endorsed election conspiracy theories and then saying, i would have liked us to be stronger in denouncing it. in hindsight, in the days after the 2020 election, fox news repeatedly featured guests like sidney powell. it is one huge, huge criminal conspiracy, and others accused dominion of using its machines and software to rig the 2020 election. fox news says it can't be liable for airing inherently newsworthy allegations from public figures like powell and trump's former attorney, rudy giuliani. judge eric davis question to fox lawyer asking if top executives had the power to block the

what was rupert murdoch's genius debate tip just snort adderall and never stop talking for 90 minutesh, you've got to be kidding. >> not malicious >> chris, he's so wrong when he makes a statement like that. >> in fact, no - >> oh, well, that's a big statement. >> i support the - >> that means you just lost the radical left >> i support it. >> they said they would it would take -- no, you are number two >> china ate your lunch, joe he said, "stupid bastards. >> mister, please -- >> he said - >> sir >> good debate prep, rupert. "remember, donald, everyone trusts a screamer! [ light laughter ] this is an especially shocking revelation, but of course, it's also not surprising. there's been a long symbiotic relationship between fox news and the republican party, and that relationship only intensified during the trump era. on-air personalities like sean hannity and jeanine pirro actually campaigned on stage with trump at a rally in 2018. and even after trump's presidency was over, fox host tucker carlson was seen cackling wildly next to trump while watching a saudi-funded golf tournament a

and finally, yesterday, it was revealed two days ago that rupert murdoch didn't believe it, number one, but his regrets are not good enough. we need him to take the next step and the next step is to tell the carlsons, the ingrahams and all these other commentators to stop spreading the big lie, to admit what they said was wrong, help restore some of the faith that we have lost in our democracy due to what their network's propaganda has put forward so we can get it back, and we're waiting to hear from rupert murdoch on that right now. >> look, fox needs to reckon with the lies that it spread, and it may literally have to pay for the lies that it spread, but is it the role of government officials to demand that media organizations say things or tell media organizations what to put on their air waves. >> well, you know, it's hardly the first time that people have said channel 4 should have done this, "the new york times" should have done that. that's not unusual, but what has happened here is, john, very unusual. this is not simply telling them what to do. this is telling them, showing th

from rupert murdoch on down to the show producers, they knew what they were saying was not true.was a lie most of they did it anyway. to take a step back what it means in practice, fox went from calling some election results to accepting the election to the mid-november and to accept or that, they did more than 600 segments last two period alone, specifically attacking the election results, promoting the conspiracy theories. in their coverage they helped build a scaffolding for the big lie which became the fuel of the january 6 insurrection. behind the scenes, they really did know. they were attacking the promoters. you alluded to some of that in your intro. rudy giuliani, sidney powell -- they called her alluded take on the same bed they had her on their show, texting each other and admonishing the ridiculousness of this but they did it anyway. they had it on the air anyway. worse, rupert murdoch and fox executives were penalizing other fox personalities that were tryingo either sort of softened the claims that fox ne was pushing about dominion and the broader election as well a

this is rupert murdoch, lachlan mourdock's personal phone.scored a major legal victory over the summer that the judge allowed them to do that. >> why didn't they settle before that? >> that's when fox fired its last legal team and hired this new one. i think they haven't dominion wn dollars and an apology, effectively, and fox probably could do the billion dollars but it's not going to apologize. i think the people at dominion see this as something bigger than just a numerical figure. if you read their brief when they initially filed this case, it's very clear they see democracy itself on the line, and if you can get away with spreading the kinds of lies that people on fox did, then, you know, what good is the first amendment? so it's interesting that they've definitely taken a -- well, fox especially, that rupert has settled as you point out, for much lower stakes, right? i think they think because they can get in front of a jury and maybe persuade one or two people that, you know, defamation cases are really hard to win, and there's reasona

look we've seen rupert murdoch up out and about in various reports. emember seeing him at the super bowl with the elon musk. he just had an engagement party recently, but ultimately whether or not he pushes murdoch to come to the stand. it will be the big question because lawyers from both sides are trying to figure out how they're going to maneuver their legal cases ahead of april 17th. and of course, the murdochs would be the linchpin of any major trial heading into next month. oliver i'm anxious to get your assessment on rupert murdoch and this case, what do you think? rupert murdoch is very important . obviously at fox, the buck stops with rupert murdoch, and he has said things like the fact that he said some of his top hosts like sean hannity endorsed election lies, which is obviously very different than covering them as a journalist. endorsing it means something totally different. and so i think the dominion is going to want to bring him to the stand. they've expressed interest in doing that. and it seems from everything we've heard from the judg

and bear in mind, rupert murdoch's corporate obituary has been written before and proved premature. a decade ago. the phone hacking scandal in the u. k. cost his company, hundreds of millions dollars in losses and landed news corp in front of a commission of inquiry that judge called for tougher regulation of british newspapers. a recommendation the conservative government, which news corp, backed, chose to ignore. but the british inquiry did not have the kind of evidence. the u. s. court does. back then murdock could deny he knew of the wrong building. this time he can on the, on some legal powers and the public inquiry parliament. but it's not like an american locate that is in black and white admissions and muddled step position that he knew is unfolded in the muse of a life. that was something could be inferred by the extent of 20 years with eagle or system newspaper gathering techniques of the u. k. but out of the in here we have it not just a smoking gun, the gun itself. if the trial goes forward, you're going to have these fox news anchors i, you know, on the stand under oh,

rupert murdoch is a particular billionaire backer. almost felt the emperor had no clothes and they couldn't we think they are. >> that's right. it's like the scene in "the hangover" where they steal the tiger from mike tyson, they wake up and the tiger's in the bathroom. the tiger's in the bathroom, right? they've gone too far. they've lost control of their own network, their audience. now that doesn't give me any comfort, because it means that this audience is very powerful and potentially very scary, and fox news is willing to do their bidding. and i think it gets really interesting now, you know, they've kind of become, you know, anti-trump sort of maybe, right -- >> conditionally. >> conditionally. he hasn't been on their air since november. there's maybe this war. they weren't at cpac. does this, you know, mean there's going to be a crackup coming? i don't know. but it sort of -- it all feels like kind of unhinged, a little terrifying. >> we're going over on time. you both make great points. when you wake up and it's a real tiger

that's the core of this whole thing in black and white from rupert murdoch. e also seeing transcripts of murdoch's deposition where he repeatedly denies any evidence exists that dominion was behind any election fraud loud and clear. >> i have one of the excerpts right here. led m he is asked, have you ever seen evidence to suggest that dominion was engaged in an effort to steal the 2020 presidential election? he says no. he is asked, have you ever believed dominion was engaged in an effort to steal the 2020 presidential election? he says no. he's asked, you've never believed dominion was involved in an effort to destroy votes for donald trump, correct? he replies, i'm open to persuasion, but no, i've never seen it. truly remarkable. right now both sides of this historic case are asking a judge to resolve it in their favor without a trial. if that doesn't happen, this will go to trial in delaware april 17th. it will be a historic case. there's really never been anything like this. it will absolutely be one to watch. evidence like this, again, not helpful for fo

and just to be clear, it's not just me saying hannity endorsed that lie it's hannity's boss, rupert murdoch court filing, this week, features a partial transcript of a deposition with murdoch where he admits that fox hosts endorsed the bogus claim that the 2020 election was stolen here's part of that conversation between murdoch and the attorney questioning him. now, as i read this, i just want you to know, i can't really do a rupert murdoch impression. so instead, i'm gonna read his answers in the most cartoonish australian accent i can manage [ light laughter ] here we go "you are aware, now, that fox did more than simply host these guests and give them a platform, correct? "i think you've shown me - [ laughter ] -- some material in support of that." [ light laughter ] "in fact, you are now aware that fox endorsed, at times, this false notion of a stolen election." "not fox, no yeah, not fox, but maybe lou dobbs. maybe maria. those are commentators." [ light laughter ] "we went through fox host, maria bartiromo, yes?" "yep, come on. "fox host, jeanine pirro?" "i think so. "fox business ho

jim dominion has obviously expressed interest in calling rupert murdoch to the stand. and earlier this week, a judge the judge that's presiding over this case suggested that he might want to also see rupert murdoch . take the stand. now this could come via zoom or some other form . it doesn't have to necessarily be in person. but it will be notable particularly because rupert murdoch himself ironically gave some of the most damaging. uh, in his deposition. it was one of them. damaging depositions. he admitted in his deposition that some of us top stars sean hannity, maria bartiromo and others endorsed election lies so they weren't just covering those lies like fox has been arguing they endorsed those election lies particularly damaging stuff from murdoch and he could take the stand. and this past week. i mean, there was a lot that we learned in this case. help us sort through what stood out to you. well this past week you saw both dominion and fox news in court, making oral arguments. they're basically both asking the judge to declare them the winner without a trial. t

listening on that hearing and the judge was extremely skeptical to the point of being irritated that rupert murdoch's testimony could somehow be excluded according to the lawyers arguments. he said, look, murdoch just got engaged. i have read he is looking forward to spending time at his home in california and montana and new york. a guy of his means can easily fly from new york to delaware to testify in this trial. i think that set the tone. it was almost as if he was chastising the lawyer. putting them on notice and saying i am tired of your office location and year constant objections. and when it comes to the trial, you better be careful. i talked to be bumbled sides of the case. fox and dominion and the one take away from this hearing today was that the fox lawyers were really put on notice by this judge. >> how about the woman that seem to be on both sides of this case at the same time? abby grossberg. a former fox producer dominion is requesting having her as a witness. she is currently suing fox news cleaning that fox lawyers pressured her into giving false testimony in this case. testimony t