ken mccord. they re saying there is a false cover story. how high does it go? can you prove it? the fox story suggested it might go as high as murdoch. that s why i make the connection of murdoch to the wall street journal which did the groundbreaking reporting on this issue. i guess this segment is about fox news not the wall street journal. okay. well i think that there is it s also about the efforts of this former fox reporter to basically break her silence and come forward with more information. i mean, my view, jacob, either they have it or they don t, right? if they can t prove this and just making wild allegations, it kind of goes away. if they can go to congress and prove at a high level fox, not the journal, was doing something wrong that led to michael cohen s now confessed crime, that could be a story. well, everybody wants to simplify the story about fox and murdoch and say they re in trump s camp, but it s much more complicated than that. in my opinio
but this lawyer is saying a former employee that makes this denial is wrong. we think we will be able to show that ken mccord is a liar. do you have material about him specifically if you re making that allegation? for one thing he didn t stop the story and that will be evident. you re saying that whole nar tiff, he wrote that he was the one personally intervening was not him. was it someone more senior than him? yes. it was someone famous? we ll let congress decide whether or not to hold a hearing in public. so i think it is interesting to juxtapose that murdoch was involved in suppressing this story and also recognizing that it was the wall street journal