Secret CNN Correspondence Revealed in Explosive Defamation Case Against Jake Tapper

Tapper’s segment and report from Alex Marquardt painted a portrait of scammers who charged “exorbitant fees” and took advantage of desperate people.

“In our world today, the US government, the Biden administration, says it has assisted in the departure of at least 377 US citizens and 279 US lawful permanent residents from Afghanistan since August 31,” anchor Tapper reported.

“Yet many Afghans, Afghans desperate to flee Taliban rule and Afghans who say their lives are at risk, remain behind.

“As CNN’s Alex Marquardt has discovered, Afghans seeking to leave the country face a black market full of promises, demands for exorbitant fees and no guarantee of safety or success.”

“In another post, the person offering these evacuations, Zackary Young, wrote, ‘availability is extremely limited and demand is high.’ Jake, he continues, ‘that’s unfortunately how the economy works,'” Marquardt reported.

Tapper replied: “Unfortunately, hmm. Alex Marquardt thank you very much for this important report.”

In court filings, Young said the report defamed him because “the overall essence of CNN’s reporting was that of an investigative report to uncover bad actors preying on desperate people in a chaotic time.”

He said language like “exorbitant” might be a matter of opinion, but there is “no doubt that the term ‘black market’ implies illegality.”

To support his claims, Young produced secret communications from CNN in an attempt to prove that the network acted with actual malice, a legal standard one must provide in defamation cases that shows one party’s intent to harm another party to inflict.

The explosive internal messages and emails show that CNN had internal concerns about the completeness and veracity of the reporting.

Nevertheless, CNN’s three independent divisions – legal, standards and practices, and editorial – approved the broadcast.

Young also provided the court with a message exchange he had with Marquardt just hours before publication, in which he advised that there were factual inaccuracies in the reporting.

But the most damaging documents came in the form of internal communications showing that “CNN employees had little respect for him (Young),” according to the First District Court of Appeal in Florida, which recently ruled in Young’s favor and allowed him to amend his complaint. in a step that paves the way for the case to go to trial.

The First District Court of Appeal ruled that Young and company had presented sufficient evidence showing CNN’s actual malice and that the network’s conduct had risen to the level necessary to permit an award of damages.

The court said, “In those messages, CNN employees called him a ‘s—bag’ and ‘a-hole’ and noted that they were ‘going to get this Zachary Young mf—er.’

“Marquardt called him ‘f—ing Young’ and joked, ‘It’s your funeral bucko.'”

CNN argued that there was no intent to cause harm, that the language used was opinionated or ambiguous and called the internal communications “journalistic bravado that reflected a genuine belief in the reporting.”

But the court concluded: “The issue on appeal concerns proper pleading, not ultimate proof.

“We must consider whether Young has made a reasonable offer of proof at this stage to provide a reasonable basis for recovering damages.

“After reviewing the entirety of the evidence presented in the light most favorable to Young, we conclude that this was the case.

“Young has presented sufficient evidence of actual malice, express malice and a level of conduct egregious enough to open the door for him to seek damages.

Whether Young can ultimately prevail is not the question before us. The court properly exercised its role as gatekeeper and granted Young’s motion to amend.”