Lawyer: CNN Journo Dug For Dirt On Vet 7 Times, Came Up Empty

CNN Chief National Security Correspondent Alex Marquardt tried to find dirt on U.S. Navy veteran Zachary Young several times and found no evidence of wrongdoing — yet still went forward with the allegedly defamatory story anyway, according to Marquardt’s testimony.

Young sued CNN after it published a report in November of 2021 that he claims falsely accused him of exploiting Afghans desperate to be evacuated from Afghanistan on a “black market.” Notably, a court found Young “did not act illegally or criminally.”

Marquardt took the stand for the first time on Monday and testified that he was indeed “looking into” — as described in text messages shown to jurors involving Marquardt — “scams, deceptions, black markets” when he began his preliminary reporting on Afghanistan evacuations. While Marquardt later testified that he was “never … going after [Young],” lawyers for Young made a case that Marquardt tried seven times to find evidence that Young was involved in wrongdoing but came up empty-handed.

For example, in one exchange between Marquardt and Mustafa Kazemi (who was evacuated from Afghanistan by an NGO), Marquardt asked: “Have you heard of Zachary Young?”

“No I have not,” Kazemi responded.

Marquardt testified that he “was always going to be digging into what Mr. Young was doing,” even though he also testified that his report was just about the “high prices” that “regular people” were paying to be evacuated out of Afghanistan. Young testified that he worked with corporations to evacuate individuals who had sponsors rather than seeking money directly from Afghans. But Marquardt appeared determined to focus on Young, at least according to messages shown to the jury.

For example, Young’s attorney presented jurors with a message Marquardt sent in which he said he “zeroed in on” Young and another in which Marquardt said he was “watching” Young.

So why the focus on Young?

[READ NEXT: ‘Jake Tapper’s Lead-In Did That’: Editor Takes The Stand To Defend Allegedly Defamatory CNN Report On Navy Vet]

Judge William Henry, who is overseeing the case, previously found that CNN had a narrative it wanted to peddle and used Young as its scapegoat, noting how, before talking to Young, Marquardt pitched the story about Young using terms like “shadowy black market,” “fraud” and “extortion.” Henry said that CNN did this despite having “no evidence” to back up its “black market” insinuations.

“Then fortuitously, a door was opened to obtain information for the piece when Young reached out to [CNN Reporter Katie Bo] Lillis,” Henry ruled, according to Fox News. “Once Young stopped cooperating with the investigative reporters, Marquardt found his ‘fall guy’ — Young.”

Marquardt also testified on Monday that he “didn’t know whether people like Mr. Young could actually deliver.” Notably, Young successfully evacuated 22 women and one child out of Afghanistan on behalf of the corporations he was working for, but that detail wasn’t included in CNN’s reporting. Marquardt further testified that he didn’t bother calling Audible — a client of Young’s — because “it didn’t make sense” to him “why Audible was operating in Afghanistan.”

Similarly, Marquardt also agreed Monday that he had “no evidence” that Young ever exploited any Afghans. Marquardt later tried to claim he meant that Young was “exploiting the situation and not the people.”

The jury was also shown text messages between Marquardt and Jill Kornetsky, a CNN source, in which Marquardt said the final version of the story was “likely not as harsh about Young as [Kornetsky] hoped” for, with Kornetsky responding: “Parasites can be hard to exterminate.”

“Yeah,” Marquardt agreed in the message exchange.

The message exchange was shown after Marquardt testified that the story wasn’t pitched to “take down” Young and that he doesn’t “do hit pieces.”

Subsequent message exchanges presented to jurors show Marquardt boasting about how he was going to “nail this Zachary Young mf-cker” and how his story would be Young’s “funeral.”

Jurors will continue to hear from Marquardt during cross-examination.

Brianna Lyman is an elections correspondent at The Federalist. Brianna graduated from Fordham University with a degree in International Political Economy. Her work has been featured on Newsmax, Fox News, Fox Business and RealClearPolitics. Follow Brianna on X: @briannalyman2