Wilmington, Delaware (CNN) â€� Newsmax CEO Chris Ruddy knew theÌýright-wing cableÌýoutlet had no evidence to back up its claims that Smartmatic was involved in rigging the 2020 election even as it continued to push the liesÌýon its air, an attorney for the voting technology company alleged on Thursday.
During aÌýkeyÌýpre-trial hearingÌýThursdayÌýin Smartmatic’s defamation case against Newsmax, the attorney, Erik Connolly, cited several instances of employees of theÌýcable network admittingÌýtheyÌýhad no proof of the election fraud claims, includingÌýa Nov.Ìý12,Ìý2020Ìýinternal email from Ruddy in which he said, “We have no evidence.â€�
“And yet they pushed the story after that date 23 more times,� Connolly said.
The attorney said that “some of the hosts were privately expressing doubt about the claims and accusationsâ€� against Smartmatic as they were beingÌýpromoted on the network’s air. Several of theÌýnetwork’s hosts, he said, never believed them and were “joking about the accusations in their text messagesâ€� with one another.
“They did not tell their audience there is no evidence for what is being said here. ‘We have no evidence, the people on our show have no evidence. People are just talking.� They knew that truth,� Connolly said. “They knew they had no evidence.�
The internal Newsmax emails and textÌýmessagesÌýreferenced by Connolly haven’t beenÌýpubliclyÌýreleased and weren’t shown in court during Thursday’s hearing.
After the hearing, Newsmax’s attorneys provided CNN with additional context from the November 2020 Ruddy email. While Ruddy did acknowledge that Newsmax didn’t have evidence of massive fraud, he said the network could continue covering Trump and his allies who were peddling similar claims.
“Newsmax does not have evidence of widespread voter fraud,� Ruddy wrote. “We have no evidence of a voter fraud conspiracy nor do we make such claims on Newsmax.
Ruddy continued, “We have reported on significant evidence of widespread election irregularities and vote fraud. We will continue to report on that. We believe we should not censor allegations made by the President or his lawyers or surrogates.�
In the message, Ruddy also committed to accept the outcome of the election as decided by the Electoral College â€� which NewsmaxÌýÌýin December 2020 after the electors voted â€� and that Newsmax would “encourageâ€� a smooth presidential transition regardless of the outcome.
Connolly concededÌýtoÌýDelaware Superior Court JudgeÌýEric Davis on Thursday thatÌýthe companyÌýdoes “not have a smoking gun email from within Newsmax saying, ‘I hate Smartmatic.’â€� That kind of communication could help meet one of the legal elements required in a defamation case.
During Thursday’s hearing, the judgeÌýalsoÌýdeclined toÌýpostpone the trial,Ìýcurrently set for late September,Ìýbut left open the possibility that he could do so at a later time.ÌýEarlier this month,ÌýNewsmax requested a delay so it can gather more evidence in the wake of a bombshell federal indictment against Smartmatic’s president on foreign bribery charges. Smartmatic denies those allegations.
Misha Tseytlin, an attorney for Newsmax, pushed back strongly on Smartmatic’s claimsÌýin courtÌýThursday, telling the judge that “there is no evidence that we knew anything was false.â€� He argued the outlet was “reporting both sides of a storyâ€� consistent with a directive from Ruddy that was issued onÌýNov. 12, 2020.
In the wake of the 2020 presidential election,ÌýSmartmatic sued Newsmax, claiming that the right-wing network intentionally promoted lies that the company was involved in rigging theÌývote.
The small conservative network isn’t a media juggernaut like Fox News,Ìýbut its ratingsÌýÌýafter the 2020 election.ÌýIn the days afterÌýDonald Trump lost,Ìýhis supporters flocked to Newsmax as itsÌýhostsÌýand guestsÌýquestioned the legitimacy of Joe Biden’s victory.
Beyond Smartmatic, Newsmax also faces a separate defamation case from Dominion Voting Systems, which famouslyÌýÌýlast year for $787 million.ÌýThe Smartmatic case is being overseen by Judge Davis, who presided over the historic Fox-Dominion litigation.
Newsmax denies wrongdoing and maintains that its 2020 coverage is protected by the First Amendment. Notably, unlike Fox News, NewsmaxÌýÌýa “clarificationâ€� in December 2020 declaring that the network hadn’t uncovered any evidenceÌýthat Smartmatic or Dominion ever “manipulated votes in the 2020 election,â€� despite what some guests had claimed.
Owned by Trump allyÌý, Newsmax is home to several former Fox personalities likeÌýÌýand Greta Van Susteren, as well as controversial ex-Trump White House officialÌýÌýand Clinton ally-turned-foe Dick Morris.
AÌýÌýcould have significant implications for the First Amendment and how journalists cover Trump’s election lies, though cases like these are often settled before a trial begins. A courtroom defeat for Newsmax could put the company in real financial peril.
The run-up to Thursday’s hearing was filled with big developments in and out of court.
Smartmatic’s president and two other onetime executivesÌýÌýearlier this month by the Justice Department on foreign bribery charges in connection with an alleged contract-rigging conspiracy in the Philippines. The company denies wrongdoing.
There have also been back-and-forth accusations between Newsmax and Smartmatic of abusing the discovery process. Smartmatic claimed the pro-Trump network engaged in a “cover-upâ€� and intentionallyÌýÌýthat it was entitled to review. A special master looked into the matter recently ruled that Smartmatic hadn’t proven these bombshell claims and declined to sanction Newsmax’s lawyers.
The-CNN-Wire
� & © 2024 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.
