Most of America has figured out that CNN stopped reporting actual news a long time ago.
The network has turned into a lobbying wing of the Democrat party.
But now CNN just got slapped with one lawsuit that could cripple the network.
U.S. District Court Judge Raag Singhal just hit CNN with an enormous defeat that could cost the network hundreds of millions of dollars.
Judge Singhal is allowing well-known Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz’s $300 million lawsuit against CNN for misrepresenting his comments during the first Trump impeachment trial.
According to a Newsmax report, Dershowitz is alleging that CNN provided an edited version of his remarks and a misleading narrative about his views that in turn damaged his reputation as a scholar.
The famed law professor is seeking $300 million in damages.
That’s not just pocket change to a network that is seeing a rapid decline in viewers.
Dershowitz says that CNN commentators Joe Lockhart and Paul Begala specifically misrepresented his comments.
The statement in question is in regards to Dershowitz’s comments in response to Senator Ted Cruz’s question about Donald Trump believing his re-election was in the public interest.
Dershowitz agreed and said all public officials believe that, meaning Trump was not seeking a quid pro quo when he requested the Ukrainian President help him uncover corrupt acts committed by both Joe and Hunter Biden.
He also added that a corrupt motive would make a quid pro quo illegal.
“Every public official that I know believes that his election is in the public interest and, mostly you are right, your election is in the public interest, and if a President does something which he believes will help him get elected in the public interest, that cannot be the kind of quid pro quo that results in impeachment,” Dershowitz stated.
According to Lockhart, this was Dershowitz declaring that Trump had a “license to commit crimes.” Clearly, this is not what Dershowitz said, but that didn’t seem to matter to the CNN commentators.
Lockhart’s cohort Paula Begala then stated, “The Dershowitz Doctrine would make Presidents immune from every criminal act, so long as they could plausibly claim they did it to boost their re-election effort. Campaign finance laws: out the window. Bribery statutes: gone. Extortion: no more.”
There was clear editing going on in the CNN production room.
But CNN attempted to claim the lawsuit was baseless because the network is protected by the fair report privilege.
The fair report privilege allows the media to report on government proceedings without fear of lawsuits.
Unfortunately for the “Corrupt News Network,” Judge Singhal disagreed and declared that Dershowitz’s remarks had clearly been edited.
“CNN presented an abridgment of Dershowitz’ answer to Senator Cruz’ [s] question. The abridgment is not accurate, to the extent that it omitted a crucial qualification: that an illegal motive for a quid pro quo would be corrupt,” Singhal ruled.
Singhal added, “As a result, the commentators’ statements – that Dershowitz believes a President can do anything, even commit crimes if it would help his re-election – are not based upon a fair and accurate summary of Dershowitz’ statement to the Senate.”
Judge Singhal’s ruling is a breath of fresh air in a world where the Democrat-controlled media seems to be getting away with editing the facts to fit their narrative.
Political Animal News will keep you up-to-date with this ongoing story.
