0:00

A Monday night court filing in the defamation

0:03

lawsuit brought by Dominion voting systems

0:05

against Fox News revealed a

0:07

new admission by Rupert Murdoch, the network's

0:10

owner. Murdoch acknowledged that several

0:12

Fox hosts knowingly repeated false

0:15

claimed that the twenty twenty presidential election

0:17

was stolen. Laura Barron Lopez

0:19

has more. The latest revelation

0:21

from Murdoch deposition follows another

0:23

filing in the case that showed some of

0:26

the some of Fox's biggest stars

0:28

privately dismissed former president Trump's

0:30

election fraud lies. PUBLICALLY, HOWEVER,

0:33

THEY GAVE AIR TIME AND SUPPORT TO

0:35

THOSE KNOWN FALSEHOODS AND BRUING

0:37

CONSPIRACY THEORIES. The findings

0:39

come as house speaker Kevin McCarthy has

0:41

given Fox hosts Tucker Carlson first

0:44

access to more than forty thousand hours

0:46

of the security footage from January six.

0:48

HERE TO DISCUSS IS SYMPHATHY WHO

0:51

SERVED HIS CHIEF INVESTIGATIVE COUNCIL TO

0:53

THE CELEC HOUSE COMMITTEE ON THE JANUARY VI

0:55

ATTACK. Tim, thanks so much for joining

0:57

us. Thanks for helping me, Laura. In Dominion's

0:59

Court filing, they included exchanges from

1:01

Murdoch's deposition. just want to run through a

1:03

little bit of that with you right now. IN

1:06

IT, DOMINIAN ATTORNEY ASKED MURDOG,

1:08

YOU ARE NOW AWARE THAT FOX ENDORS

1:10

AT TIMES THESE FALSE NOTIONS OF A STOLEN

1:13

ELECTION. MURDOG, NOT FOX NO,

1:15

NOT Fox, but maybe Lou Dobbs, maybe

1:17

Maria Bartaramo as commentators.

1:20

The attorney then asked him about other

1:23

hosts Fox hosts Janine Piro. Murdoch,

1:25

I think so. Fox hosts Lou Dobbs.

1:27

Oh, a lot. Fox hosts Sean Hannity

1:30

a bit. FINALLY THE

1:32

ATTORNEY ASKED ABOUT -- THIS IS SPECIFICALLY

1:34

ABOUT THEIR ENDORSEMENT OF A STOLEN ELECTION.

1:37

MURDOC, YES, THEY ENDORSED. YOU

1:39

INVESTIGATED THE JANUARY

1:41

VI ATTACK FOR MONTHS. HOW

1:44

DID FOX NEWS'S COVERAGE AND THE

1:46

LIES ABOUT ELECTION FRAUD IN THE WEEKS

1:48

AND MONTHS CONTRIBUTE

1:50

TO JANUARY six. LOOK, WHAT

1:52

THE FOX NEWS HOST WERE REPEATING

1:55

WITHOUT FOUNDATION WAS PART OF A CORRIS

1:58

of repeated bogus

2:01

theories of election fraud. They came from

2:03

the former president himself, they

2:05

came in the form of social media post,

2:07

repeated. They came in the form of

2:09

fundraising material sent out

2:11

by the Trump campaign, which became essentially

2:13

a stop the steal money machine.

2:17

So there were lots of different places, Laura,

2:19

where this false narrative, no

2:21

foundation, in fact, was repeated.

2:23

And it absolutely had a lot to do

2:26

with people getting really

2:28

angry and going to the capital believing

2:30

genuinely, albeit misguidedly, that

2:32

the election had been stolen. AND NOW

2:35

SPEAKER McARTHY IS HANDING OVER

2:37

FOOTAGE. TENS OF THOUSANDS OF HOURS

2:39

OF FOOTAGE TO FOX HOST TUCKER CARLS

2:42

AND WHAT'S THE IMPACT of that footage being

2:44

shared. Look, it's dangerous. We got

2:46

access. The committee got access to that footage

2:48

under really tight controls. We

2:50

had a dedicated terminal. Only a

2:52

couple of staff had access to it. It was

2:54

password protected. And then even

2:57

after we reviewed footage, if we were gonna

2:59

use any of it, in a

3:01

public hearing. We had to negotiate with

3:03

the capital police to try to trim

3:05

how much of it might compromise a

3:07

camera location or

3:10

a root of evacuation or

3:12

any security issue. So

3:14

we took very seriously the law enforcement

3:16

sensitivity of that information and took

3:18

steps to minimize the potential

3:20

damage of disclosure. I don't know

3:23

if mister Carlson

3:25

or or others who might get access to it will abide

3:27

by those same rules. That's why it's dangerous.

3:30

If it's just posted, it'll make it easier for people

3:32

to evade those security protections

3:34

in the

3:34

future. Howard Bauchner: There's been a lot of footage

3:37

already out there whether through

3:39

your investigation or other people's

3:41

personal body cameras. Some

3:43

capital police officers told my

3:45

colleague, Lisa Day AND THAT THEY'RE NOT NECESSARILY

3:48

WORRIED ABOUT THE SECURITY RISK OR

3:50

ABOUT PEOPLE FINDING OUT CAMERA LOCATIONS

3:52

BUT WHAT THEY ARE WORRIED ABOUT IS

3:55

THE POTENTIAL FOR FOX TO CHARY

3:57

PICK A NARRATIVE OUT OF THAT FOOTAGE LIKE

3:59

THIS. Reporter:

4:01

THE DOJ HAS BEEN ALLOWED TO PROSECUT

4:04

IN JAIL hundreds of non

4:06

violent political protesters whose

4:08

crime was having the wrong opinions. He

4:11

said non violent there, but what do you say to that

4:13

from the capital police Look,

4:15

there's no question that you can look at all of that

4:18

footage and find some people that were there

4:21

and not engaging in violence. Not everybody

4:23

was assaulting police officers, not everyone

4:25

was breaking windows. That doesn't take away from

4:27

the fact that this was a riot, that this was a

4:29

violent attack on the United States capital. So

4:31

it's a bit misleading to take a piece of footage

4:34

from over here where there are people walking

4:36

with signs, when fifty feet away,

4:38

there were people getting police officers and

4:41

breaking windows. Again, it is important

4:43

to look at the entirety of what happened,

4:45

not everyone there was bent on

4:47

violence. There's no question that there were some people

4:49

there. Who were not violent.

4:51

The crimes extend beyond violence. The crimes involve

4:54

breaching a barrier and trespassing

4:56

on the Capitol grounds. And there are a lot of people that have

4:58

been charged with non violent offenses who

5:01

have been pleading guilty to those crimes

5:03

misdemeanors and not getting jail

5:04

time. There are degrees of culpability as there

5:07

are in in any mass demonstration event.

5:09

Looking at the bigger picture, your

5:11

ultimate report, your committee recommended

5:14

that Donald Trump, the former president, be

5:16

charged, In court, you

5:18

have to, as you know, show specific actions

5:20

and convince a jury beyond a reasonable

5:22

doubt. So what specifically did the former

5:24

president do that you think he should be charged

5:26

for? Yeah. So degrees of culpability, he

5:29

is the main proximate cause of

5:31

the riot. The committee found evidence

5:34

of his specific intent to

5:37

obstruct interfere or

5:39

impede the joint session. That's the main

5:41

statute as obstruction of an official proceeding.

5:43

And there's lots of evidence of specific

5:45

intent that president Trump and his co conspirators

5:48

took to ensure that

5:50

the joint session did not go forward that

5:52

the transfer of power did not occur.

5:54

That started well before January sixth

5:57

with efforts to use the justice department,

5:59

misuse the justice department, pressure state officials

6:01

put pressure on the vice president and

6:03

then ultimately on January sixth itself

6:06

of really incendiary speech to crowd

6:08

that he knew was armed and was angry,

6:10

and then inaction once the riot occurred,

6:13

despite repeated encouragement to

6:15

Quell violence to say something publicly, he

6:17

did not act. All of that informed the committee's

6:19

recommendation that there's

6:21

evidence of the violation of federal crimes

6:24

by the former president and by others in his

6:26

immediate circle.

6:27

AND THE SPECIAL COUNCIL INVESTIGATION

6:29

COULD POTENTIALLY GET MORE EVIDENCE THAN WHAT

6:32

YOUR COMMITTEE WAS ABLE TO GET. NAMELY

6:35

in your investigation, you spoke to

6:37

senior staff, to former vice president Mike

6:39

Pence. And there's a fight going on

6:41

right now about whether or not THE FORMER VICE

6:43

PRESIDENT WILL TESTIFY BEFORE FEDERAL GRAND JURY.

6:46

PRIVILEGES ASIDE ON THE SUBSTANCE,

6:48

GIVEN WHAT YOU LEARNED IN YOUR INVESTIGATION, Do

6:51

you think that a vice

6:53

president Mike Pence testimony would

6:55

have vital information about

6:57

what Trump did in

6:59

in his

7:00

actions, his statements around

7:02

in the lead up to January sixth?

7:04

Yes. Absolutely. And it's predictable that

7:06

the special counts would want to speak to him. We

7:08

did speak to his chief of staff. We talked to his chief

7:10

counsel. We talked to his national security adviser. We talked

7:12

to everyone around him. But the

7:14

first hand account of the vice president himself.

7:17

Conversations that he had with the president before

7:19

January sixth, his lived experience during

7:21

that day would be directly relevant.

7:24

Again, they would bear potentially upon

7:26

the president's state of mind. That's the crucial

7:28

issue for the special council. And

7:31

the vice president who had a lot of direct communication

7:33

with the president might provide really direct information

7:36

about that. Separate from him, the Justice Department

7:39

could actually push through privileged assertions

7:41

that limited us. There are a lot of witnesses

7:43

like some of those vice presidential staffers

7:46

who asserted an executive privilege and said,

7:48

I'll tell you about what happened. But four,

7:50

I can't really talk about direct communications that

7:52

I witnessed between the president and the vice president. That's

7:55

protected by privilege. A grand jury investigation

7:57

arguably overcomes that assertion. That

7:59

may be litigated quickly. That's another

8:02

procedural benefit that the Department of Justice

8:04

that we didn't have. So those issues could be

8:06

resolved and they could get new first hand accounts

8:08

that we weren't able to get because of just the

8:10

difference between the congressional process and

8:13

the criminal justice

8:13

process.

8:14

Timothy Hayphy. Thank you so much for your time.

8:16

Thank

8:16

you.