As a follow-up to the ongoing defamation lawsuit brought against CNN by former Navy veteran and private security contractor Zachary Young, we see the network dealt a series of legal losses. As we first reported in June, CNN is accused of falsely claiming Young operated an illegal service to extract Afghans out of the country during the ill-fated pullout by U.S. troops in the fall of 2021. As court documents and acquired internal CNN communications have shown, there were issues with the story known within the network as well as discussions that the court agreed could display malice on the part of reporters and producers.

The past couple of weeks have delivered a number of defeats for CNN as the case progresses to a jury trial. The court denied an attempt last week to further delay financial discovery, and the network is now compelled to reveal its full financials. This is for the purpose of establishing the parameters for a punitive damages ruling, something else the lawyers for CNN had previously failed to have dismissed. And this is hardly the only defeats they have faced.

Another aspect of this case CNN has been battling over has been the effort to have anchor Jake Tapper made to testify over network financials. CNN’s lawyers argued to block his being compelled to testify, wanting a protective order by claiming it was done to “harass Mr. Tapper and CNN.” Not only did the court strike down that request, but the judge ruled that he had doubts about Tapper’s claims. Said the judge about Jake’s sworn statement, “I kind of have a hard time believing what Mr. Tapper put in that declaration.” 

NewsBusters has obtained exclusive video from the Monday hearing of the defamation suit against CNN. CNN is trying to stop Jake Tapper from being deposed, Tapper write to the court he has no knowledge of how much his show is worth. The Judge openly says he doesn't believe him. pic.twitter.com/HyCSVzA334

— Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) August 13, 2024

Perhaps nothing shows the desperation seen by CNN’s legal team more than their long-term opposition to the claims they impugned Mr. Young by depicting his business as an illegal operation, describing his services as operating in “the black market.” In previous filings they tried denying this was reported (despite both the reporter and the onscreen graphics using the term), and then worked to dispute the definition of the term “black market” conveyed illegality. The court has essentially mocked this attempt.

Then came the latest salvo from CNN’s legal team. In an abrupt switching of lanes, their new argument was that it was accurate to describe his activities as “black market” operations because they were in defiance of the local Sharia laws. The head lawyer, Deanna K. Shullman, suggested that Young was defying local laws preventing females from traveling.

“This entire defamation case centers on Young’s accusation that CNN implied he engaged in illegal conduct when he arranged, for a substantial fee, to have women smuggled out of Afghanistan…discovery has indicated that those activities he orchestrated and funded, which involved moving women out of Afghanistan, almost certainly were illegal under Taliban rule.”

Two problems exist with this desperation. The first is the early portions of this case saw CNN denying they had called Young’s business operation illegal, and now they have spun a 180 and are saying their reporting of it being illegal was accurate under Sharia law. The second is a problem of basic timing, as Zachary Young was working to get people out of Afghanistan while the prior leadership in the country was crumbling. There was no way to violate Sharia dictates.

But even if the Taliban were in power, the institution of Sharia was not yet codified, so there was no way for Young to be in defiance of any local law. While the new leadership was instituting some restrictions on women after the fall of the country, we see that the Taliban had not instituted Sharia formerly until at least a year after the report on Zachary Young. This was reported by -- CNN.

In the @CNN defamation suit the network lawyers desperately shifted gear, now claiming the plaintiff was in violation of Sharia law when they made the report they are sued over, in the Fall of 2021.
Problem: CNN itself declared Sharia was not instituted until over a year later. pic.twitter.com/RGNdQoAojQ

— Brad Slager - Scrubbing Down In a Bloodbath (@MartiniShark) August 19, 2024

As a probable sign of how poorly things have become for CNN with the suit, a filing was just made indicating that a different law firm would be taking over the lead on this case. Given the track record of motions denied, it seems unlikely this will change much of anything before the scheduled trial date of the first week of January.