CNN’s Alex Marquardt Had ‘No Evidence’ in On-Air Hit Job as Vet Sues for $1B
In an unredacted transcript, CNN’s Alex Marquardt admitted he had “no evidence” linking a Navy veteran to the black market trade of people before airing a controversial report.
Jul. 24 2024, Published 10:47 p.m. ET
CNN’s chief national security correspondent Alex Marquardt testified he had “no evidence” linking a decorated Navy veteran to the black market trade of Afghan refugees before airing a report that sparked a $1 billion defamation lawsuit against the embattled network.
RadarOnline.com obtained an unredacted transcript from Marquardt’s deposition in the ongoing case filed by Zachary Young, who alleges the struggling network wanted viewers to believe he was “operating in a black market.”
Young’s allegations stem from a November 2021 episode of The Lead With Jake Tapper that showed his photo during a discussion about the repercussions of America’s botched withdrawal from Afghanistan.
Article continues below advertisement
Marquardt said during the deposition that the segment, which aired on Jake Tapper’s show, aimed to wrongly “expose” Young for “taking part in this black market that was exploiting Afghans at their most vulnerable time.”
“The clear effect of the first few seconds of the Segment is to set up a false narrative of Young serving desperate Afghans on an illegal market—which he never did,” the lawsuit filed last year in Florida states.
Young’s lawyers argued in a recent filing that the show’s producers “intended to target Young”, and that “Marquardt, the Segment’s author and architect” — “admitted it at deposition.”
When asked, “Did your reporting ever discover anything illegal that was going on with regards to the evacuation process?” Marquardt responded, “No, it didn’t”, the transcript shows.
Article continues below advertisement
The military vet’s photo was broadcast during a discussion about America’s botched withdrawal from Afghanistan.
Article continues below advertisement
The correspondent was then asked: “Did you think Mr. Young was committing a crime?” to which he answered: “No. As far as I knew…he was simply asking for large amounts of money to get Afghans out of the country.”
“You found no evidence of Mr. Young committing a crime, correct?”
“No.”
Marquardt testified that CNN was “using Mr. Young as an example of what was going on here: This black market, the exorbitant fees, the taking advantage of these Afghans – the exploitation.”
Article continues below advertisement
The lawsuit says CNN “aggressively shared” the allegedly defamatory statements “across numerous social medial platforms”.
MORE ON:
CNN
Article continues below advertisement
He explained during the deposition that he and the show’s producers wanted to do the story as a way of “exposing” Young for “taking part in this black market that was exploiting Afghans at their most vulnerable time.”
Young complained that in the resulting report, the alleged “defamatory statements on black markets” were “emblazoned across” photos of LinkedIn messages he sent “and over a photograph of Young’s face”.
Article continues below advertisement
As the filing noted, CNN issued a correction five months later, saying the term “black market” was used “in error”.
But text messages exposed during the court battle revealed that CNN staffers called Young a “s—bag” and “a——” while conceding the story was “full of holes like Swiss cheese” and “very much not ready for prime time”.
Marquardt even reportedly quipped to a colleague: “It’s your funeral bucko”, in reference to Young, before the broadcast.
Article continues below advertisement
The struggling network could be ordered to shell out $1 billion if the court agrees they defamed Young, his lawyers predict.
Article continues below advertisement
The military vet’s lawyers have predicted they could win up to a billion dollars if the court agrees that “CNN published defamatory statements that harmed Mr. Young, ruined his reputation, and destroyed his business.”
After broadcasting the segment, CNN “aggressively shared these same statements across numerous social medial platforms”, the suit alleges.
Article continues below advertisement
In a “partial summary judgement” request last month, Young’s lawyers asked the court to agree that their client “never operated in an illegal market”, and that CNN’s statements regarding the Afghan black markets during the report were “of and concerning” Young.
The network has said it did not intend to cause harm, argued the language used was either opinion or ambiguous, and called the internal communications “journalistic bravado that reflected a sincere belief in the reporting.”
CNN’s lawyers also recently moved to block the veteran’s bid to depose host Jake Tapper in the case, arguing that doing so would cause “annoyance and embarrassment” to Tapper while “providing little useful information.”
