CNN staffers say Alex Marquardt’s exit ‘obviously’ linked to defamation trail

CNN separated from its chief national security correspondent, Alex Marquardt, from Monday and many of his colleagues now forms say that he is “obviously” linked to the expensive defamation trial earlier this year.

“Obviously, the judicial case is an essential reason why it is obvious,” said an initiate of CNN Digital Fox News.

Marquardt was at the center of a defamation case brought against him and CNN in January by the veteran of the American navy Zachary Young. An Florida jury found that CNN broadcast Young and judged that he could ask for punitive damages following a November 2021 report. The report described the young person as a shaded profiteer who exploited “desperate Afghans” trying to flee Afghanistan during the chaotic military withdrawal of the Biden administration from the country managed by the Taliban, implying that Young operated on a “black market”.

Alex Marquardt in CNN after eight years; The journalist was the center of an expensive defamation test

The jury had initially granted young people of $ 5 million in financial and emotional damage before Young and CNN reach an uncompromising regulation, suggesting that the network gave much more money. The foreman of the jury Later, told Fox News Digital They were ready to charge CNN “somewhere in the district of $ 50 to 100 million” in punitive damages.

CNN defamation test: losing the expected case but always bad bruising for the network, says Insider

“He did not do anything else that is not going well. So if he has been dismissed, it must be a main reason. It’s just the logical thing,” said CNN staff.

Despite the certainty among CNN staff that Marquardt’s departure was directly linked to the colony of Young, they remained perplexed by the timing since he came almost five months after the trial.

The first staff member said: “I don’t know how many strategies take place in things these days.”

It seemed that Marquardt was in good standing with CNN even after the trial as he continued to make regular appearances on the antennaMore recently last Tuesday. He even served as a filling anchor The Memorial Day.

“Alex is in our wave because he is an experienced veteran journalist with valuable information about the news,” a spokesperson for CNN in Fox News Digital said in late January after the trial.

But according to the status newsletter, the dismissal of Marquardt is the result of a “post-state ethical compliance review” launched by CNN earlier this year in which he and others involved in the defamatory report were interviewed. Marquardt was informed of the network’s decision on Friday, citing “unpertified editorial differences”.

The bar to prove the defamation before the court is historically high, as many prosecution is rejected or cause a regulation before proceeding. Young’s trial against CNN was a rare case where a jury found the network responsible for defamation, but a regulation was then concluded. It was perhaps because of the overwhelming evidence that the Young legal team gathered during the discovery, a large part involving Marquardt itself.

“”[W]I will nail this young Zachary Young MF — Uh, “told Marquardt to a colleague in an exchange of messages in 2021 before finishing the report. This comment was referenced several times by Young lawyers throughout the trial.

“I always thought he was a professional. But these internal messages left CNN without any other choice,” a second member of CNN staff at Fox News Digital told.

Alex Marquardt de CNN hesitates to admit that he has made money to cover the war areas: “I am not going to be paid”

The second CNN staff member insisted: “It is difficult not to make any link” between the brutal exit of Marquardt and the defamation trial.

“He was a chief correspondent. A chief. There was no shipment. Nothing like it. Everything entered the right night,” said the second initiate of CNN. “He was a great journalist on the ground, really good in war areas. This is what is a shame.”

Marquardt was vague about its sudden exit from CNN, publishing on X, “some new personal: I leave CNN after 8 formidable years. Difficult to say goodbye, but it was an honor to work among the best of the company. Thank you deeply to my comrades in the national security team and the phenomenal teammates that I worked with the United States and the car.”

CNN refused to comment, citing a policy not to discuss “personnel issues”. The network did not respond to requests for additional comments. Marquardt did not respond to requests for comments.

In a post-proroes interview, Young said that he had not forgiven Marquardt, appealing to remaining provocative on the stand of the witness at the trial.

“We gave Mr. Marquardt many opportunities during the deposit, then again at the trial to apologize. And, you know, the answer was no,” Young told Fox News Digital. “He always holds behind his work. He is very proud of what he did. His successful element on me to destroy my life.”

“It’s not my biggest fan,” added Young.

On the stand of witnesses, Marquardt insisted that his report was not a “successful play” on Young and that he was proud of his work.

“I was not trying to shoot anyone. I brought no one,” Marquardt testified.

CNN DEFAMATION TRIAL: The applicant accuses the network to fuck a critical telephone call for the “theater”

Click here to obtain the Fox News app

CNN launched air apology in March 2022 after Young threatened to take legal action. But throughout the trial, Marquardt and several members of CNN staff said they had not thought that the excuses were necessary. The main vice-president of the CNN, Adam Levine, admitted to the jurors that the apologies were only a legal decision.

“Alex Marquardt had sent an email:” I will nail this young Zachary. “At that time, he seemed to have put a target on Mr. Young’s back, and he was not going to let him come up until he achieved his goal … He was obvious to the whole jury that he had come out to do so,” said the counterman of the Katy Svitenko jury in February.

It was the moment when Svitenko decided that it was defamation with malice.

“The jury agreed roughly … These emails among CNN employees were quite bad. And not only one, it was several, at different levels of the company,” she said.

Brian Flood of Fox News contributed to this report.