court documents revealing how the most prominent Fox News stars and executives privately mocked Donald Trump’s election lies while promoting them publicly. It is part of dominion voting systems 1.6 billion dollar lawsuit against fox an echo network. CNN’s brodd Brian Todd takes a closer look at the damaging message and testimony.

>> Immediately after Joe

Biden’s 2020 victory, Fox News hosts were unabashed in promoting a false declaration that the election had been stolen from Donald Trump.

>> Electronic voting machines

didn’t allow people to vote, apparently. And, that whatever you think, that the cause of, it shakes peoples faith in the system and that is an actual threat to democracy. It will be impossible to ever know the true fair accurate election results.

>> But new court filings show

that in private fox host tucker Carlson, Lauren, Ingram and Sean hannity will really revealing the claims of election fraud in the people who are making. Their private messages in a legal filing that’s part of dominion voting systems 1.6 billion dollar lawsuit against Fox News. One person they insulted, trump campaign lawyer Sydney Powell, of —

>> What we are really dealing

with here and uncovering more by the day is the massive influence of communist money.

>> In one text revealed in the

court, filing tucker Carlson texted Laura Ingraham saying, quote, Sydney Powell is lying. I caught, here it is insane. Ingram responded, quote, Sydney is a complete nut. Nobody will work with her. Ditto with Rudy. A reference to trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani and his post election claims.

>> There was a plan to

essentialized and execute these various acts of voter fraud.

>> In other messages, Sean

hannity said Giuliani was, quote, acting like an insane person. Ingram described Giuliani as an idiot. Fox corporation chairman Rupert Murdoch says it was, quote, really bad that Giuliani was advising trump.

>> This tells you a lot about

Fox News, their internal machinations. It tells you that they have one version of the world. That they keep to themselves. And another version of the world that they broadcast to their viewers. The two are entirely incompatible.

>> But fox kept promoting

election denialism. Why? He followings in the dominion suit showed that fox executives were worried about losing viewers to Newsmax. A smaller conservative channel that was constantly pushing election denial? Trump himself furious that fox had called Arizona for Biden, he had encouraged his followers to switch to Newsmax.

>> Since 2002 Fox News is

basically been the preeminent ratings champion in cable news. And you see here the moment that they see any sign that that might be slipping away, it is panic.

>> But the dominion filings

also say that when then president trump tried to call into fox on January 6th, the day his supporters attacked the capitol. Fox executives refused to put trump on the air.

>> Fox News denies dominion’s

claims of the lawsuit. Says it is proud of its 2020 election coverage. And says those court filings contained cherry-picked quotes that lacked context. In a statement fox accused dominion of creating, quote, noise and confusion. And said the core of this case remains to be about freedom of the press and freedom of speech. Brian Todd, a CNN, Washington.

>> CNN’s senior legal analyst

and former federal prosecutor Elie Honig joins me now. The man never stops, working his new book is untouchable, how powerful people get away with it. You have got a new book and you are working on the Saturday. Thank you for all of that, Elie.

>> Happy to be with, you always,

anytime for you.

>> Can you tell me what these

revelations mean for the lawsuit?

>> So Sarah this really means

that Fox News in some trouble. It is really difficult, legally, to make out a defamation case if you are a plaintiffs like dominion is here. It is not enough to simply show that the media outlets got it wrong. You have to show actual malice. Meaning you have to show that the reporter or whoever is making these statements knew that they had it wrong and said it anyways. And here if you look at this brief that was filed the other day it is remarkable. It opens up with just a straight string of quotes from leading fox anchors and executives that used — terms we heard in the piece. Lies, insane, nuts, I mean, that is about as straightforward evidence as of actual malice as you will realistically see.

>> So with all of that said,

>> So I do think there are real

questions about that damages amount. Dominion is essentially arguing, a, they destroyed all of our business viability going forward. The, we are worth 1.6 billion dollars. But if you look at the paperwork in this case, they are actually have been prior evaluations of dominion at a fraction of what that, is 1.6 billion dollars. In the tens of millions of dollars, it is a large business, it is profitable business. But 1.6 billion is the upper and. It may be an optimistic outcome by dominion. But ultimately it will be up to a judge and later a jury, a jury than a judge to decide just how much damage damages dominion has sustained if there is finding a liability against.

What >> I am assuming there

could be punitive damages and, that is sometimes where there is high numbers coming from. You know, sometimes some of these fall thinkers that we just saw basically mocking Donald Trump and saying that his, you know, idea that this somehow, the election was rigged. As you say. It he didn’t buy, it they actually thought it was insane. But on the air, that is not what they said. They seem to just be agreeing with him and pushing his lies.

Listen to this >> So much for

those claims that voter fraud never happens? Of course it happens. They knew would happened when they told us it would never happen. Because they are liars.

>> I could see these people

hand over what appeared to be white envelopes. I thought, that was our ballots.

>> Today, no more reports of

dead people voting beyond the grave, amazing system we set up.

>> This is disgusting and we

cannot allow Americas election to be corrupted. We cannot.

>> What is also disgusting is

pushing a lie when it comes to

democracy.

One, that clearly some of those

people spewing that stuff

didn’t believe themselves.

What are your thoughts now

after seeing this new released

quote pile?

>> I think this is exactly what

we will see if this case does

go to trial.

If the parties are not sale.

We will see the plaintiffs here,

dominion offering the kind of

side by side.

He clips that you just showed

put next to those text behind

the scenes which are saying

that in some cases the exact

opposite and I think the

argument to a jury is that this

is the definition of actual

malice.

It is one thing to get it wrong,

the media enjoys very broad

first amendment protections and

as it should be under our

constitution.

But the first amendment does

not without a limit.

And the limit sat under the law,

really, of all states but

including Delaware where this

lawsuit is.

Is that you cannot

intentionally spread a

falsehood about another person.

So I think that is the argument

we are going to see from the

plaintiffs here.

This was intentional, they knew

what they were doing and as you

said, the plaintiffs here have

a theory about what the motive

was.

The motive was they didn’t want

to lose readings.

They were terrified for their

waterline and I think that is a

good summary of what the

plaintiffs cases.

>> You talked about the first

amendment.

And that is of course a really

important amendment to us

personally.

But also to anyone who wants to

say whatever they want to say.

And fox statement has sort of

two alluded to that.

This is all about the freedom

of the press.

And freedom of speech.

And dominion voting systems is

cherry-picking things.

Does that hold water?

>> Well, they are right that

the first amendment is very

broad.

They are right that it should

be abroad.

They are right that all of us

in the media and elsewhere rely

on the very broad first

amendment.

But it is not limitless.

It doesn’t mean anyone can say

anything they want at anytime.

Even if they know it is wrong.

Without any consequence.

I see that Fox News is sort of

responsive that these quotes

are cherry-picked.

I guess they, are that’s what

you do in discovery, you go

through tens of thousands of

pages and you say here is the

best evidence.

You want to call that

cherry-picking fine but that is

what lawsuits are all about.

And in terms of them being out

of context, I mean, the brief

that was filed the other day

actually has quite a bit of

context.

In some cases you will see the

entire tax for you will see

several exchanges back and

forth.

So it is one thing to say that

of context, it is another thing

to show and maybe they can

convince the jury, who knows,

that it is out of meaningful

context.

>> Well I hate talking about

the media, frankly.

Because we should be telling

people stories.

But this is a story that