HUGH HEWITT: Let me go to the Fox News litigation, which I’m sure you’re following. Would you rather be Murdoch’s lawyers or Dominion’s lawyers right now?
FORMER GOV. CHRIS CHRISTIE (R-NJ): Well, I have to say it’s a split, right? On the facts of the case, I’d rather be the Dominion lawyers, because it’s pretty obvious that there was some real, real bad stuff going on at Fox News, regarding what they were saying behind the scenes versus what they were saying when the camera was on.
But I’ve always wondered, what are the damages, Hugh? I’m worried about — not worried about, but wondered about — can Dominion really prove actual damages? Can they prove reputational damages? Can they prove that they lost business because of this? I haven’t heard anything from Dominion that proves that, and certainly doesn’t prove it to the tune of $1.6 billion. Now, could there be a possibility for punitive damages? Yes. But you still have to show some actual damages, as you know, and I don’t know what the actual damages are. So, I think Dominion will have a very good time in proving their case, and probably one of the better cases of actual malice you’re ever going to see, given some of the stuff we’ve already been exposed to from the difference between internal conversations and on-air conversations
But on the other hand, I don’t know what the damages are. And, you know, if you can’t prove damages, you could wind up like, you know, the case Donald Trump brought against the NFL when he was a USFL owner. You know, you win the case, you wind up with $3. And, I think that diminishes not only the monetary value of the case, but the importance of the case. So —
HEWITT: When you say Fox News has done some bad things — I don’t comment on it, because I haven’t seen all the texts and emails. I don’t know if we’re getting a selective leak of WhatsApp conversations. I don’t know anything about that. But what do you think is the bad news for Fox in these exchanges?
CHRISTIE: I think the bad news for Fox in the exchanges is when you have commentators who are saying that they don’t believe this stuff, they think these people are crazy, and then they’re putting them on the air to be able to spout the things that they think are untrue and crazy. And, I think that that skirts towards the area of actual malice. It skirts towards the area of saying, you know, that not only that something is false, but that you know it’s false. And that’s more problematic.