Eliana Johnson

And the question is, why did they settle? Why did they settle and why did they settle now? Was it that they didn't want to be involved in litigation with the sitting president of the United States? Or was it that they knew very embarrassing and unflattering things would come out in the discovery process or that Stephanopoulos would be forced to make embarrassing admissions in a deposition?

We don't know. But to me, there are some serious unanswered questions about why the settlement was made and around the timing of it that lead to speculation around those things. I have to assume that it was one of those things and that paying $15 million now was less painful for them than going through a potentially humiliating or embarrassing discovery process.

We don't know. But to me, there are some serious unanswered questions about why the settlement was made and around the timing of it that lead to speculation around those things. I have to assume that it was one of those things and that paying $15 million now was less painful for them than going through a potentially humiliating or embarrassing discovery process.

We don't know. But to me, there are some serious unanswered questions about why the settlement was made and around the timing of it that lead to speculation around those things. I have to assume that it was one of those things and that paying $15 million now was less painful for them than going through a potentially humiliating or embarrassing discovery process.

I'm actually not sure if in their own mind they even distinguish between sexual assault and rape and that they themselves may be so convinced that Trump is guilty. That they elided the two things.

I'm actually not sure if in their own mind they even distinguish between sexual assault and rape and that they themselves may be so convinced that Trump is guilty. That they elided the two things.

I'm actually not sure if in their own mind they even distinguish between sexual assault and rape and that they themselves may be so convinced that Trump is guilty. That they elided the two things.

You know, we just don't know what happened behind the scenes, but it's perfectly plausible to me that they dislike their visceral dislike of Trump goes so far that that they weren't all that familiar with the distinctions that the jury made, frankly.

You know, we just don't know what happened behind the scenes, but it's perfectly plausible to me that they dislike their visceral dislike of Trump goes so far that that they weren't all that familiar with the distinctions that the jury made, frankly.

You know, we just don't know what happened behind the scenes, but it's perfectly plausible to me that they dislike their visceral dislike of Trump goes so far that that they weren't all that familiar with the distinctions that the jury made, frankly.

Right. It's a really bad look. And I would add to this, it sets a... A scary precedent for two other libel suits that are underway, one against CNN and one against NBC. that are far stronger cases and have progressed much further than ABC News let this one progress.

Right. It's a really bad look. And I would add to this, it sets a... A scary precedent for two other libel suits that are underway, one against CNN and one against NBC. that are far stronger cases and have progressed much further than ABC News let this one progress.

Right. It's a really bad look. And I would add to this, it sets a... A scary precedent for two other libel suits that are underway, one against CNN and one against NBC. that are far stronger cases and have progressed much further than ABC News let this one progress.

The one against CNN is about an incident that occurred on Jake Tapper's show where a former military veteran who was, or a military veteran who was working to extract Afghans out of Afghanistan during the collapse of the government there, CNN insinuated that he was engaged in fraud.

The one against CNN is about an incident that occurred on Jake Tapper's show where a former military veteran who was, or a military veteran who was working to extract Afghans out of Afghanistan during the collapse of the government there, CNN insinuated that he was engaged in fraud.

The one against CNN is about an incident that occurred on Jake Tapper's show where a former military veteran who was, or a military veteran who was working to extract Afghans out of Afghanistan during the collapse of the government there, CNN insinuated that he was engaged in fraud.

And at MSNBC, where they called a doctor working in immigrant detention facilities, a uterus collector, arguing that he was performing hysterectomies unnecessarily. And those suits, you know, Jake Tapper's deposition was taken. Um, and dirt came out in that. So, um, this has to be sending a chill, not just through ABC, but like CNN and MSNBC cannot be feeling good today.

And at MSNBC, where they called a doctor working in immigrant detention facilities, a uterus collector, arguing that he was performing hysterectomies unnecessarily. And those suits, you know, Jake Tapper's deposition was taken. Um, and dirt came out in that. So, um, this has to be sending a chill, not just through ABC, but like CNN and MSNBC cannot be feeling good today.

And at MSNBC, where they called a doctor working in immigrant detention facilities, a uterus collector, arguing that he was performing hysterectomies unnecessarily. And those suits, you know, Jake Tapper's deposition was taken. Um, and dirt came out in that. So, um, this has to be sending a chill, not just through ABC, but like CNN and MSNBC cannot be feeling good today.

Well, that's where the malice comes in, where not only have you been apprised that you made a factual error that impugned somebody's character. by saying a falsehood about them on national television, you then go and repeat it and dig your heels in once again on national television.