Alex Marquardt of CNN is reluctant to acknowledge that he earns money while reporting on war zones: "I don't go there to get paid."

In court on Monday, CNN correspondent Alex Marquardt admitted that he had made money while covering war zones in an attempt to distance himself from Navy veteran Zachary Young, the plaintiff in a high-stakes defamation trial against his network.

CNN accused Young of profiting off desperate people trying to flee Afghanistan after the Biden administration's military withdrawal, suggesting he was involved in "black market" dealings and damaging his professional reputation.

Young was repeatedly criticized by Marquardt, the correspondent who led the report, for charging "exorbitant" prices for evacuations in the Taliban-controlled country. Additionally, Marquardt suggested that making money from war was unethical.

Freedman, Young's lead counsel, confronted Marquardt about his own enrichment while serving as a correspondent overseas.

Do you report in war zones for free, Freedman?

"Regardless of whether I go to a war zone or not, I will still receive my salary," Marquardt stated. "I could engage in various forms of journalism that would not endanger my life, and I would still earn a salary."

Freedman followed the statement that Sir goes to war zones and reports, and is compensated for that service.

"Not always correct," Marquardt pushed back.

Freedman responded, "You go to war zones for free and report on them without pay?"

Did Marquardt dodge the question about the last time he was in a war zone, sir?

The CNN correspondent was criticized by Freedman for not responding to a straightforward inquiry.

Freedman asked, "You were compensated for your work in war zones as a reporter for CNN and other news outlets, is that correct?"

Marquardt stated that he does not visit the place to receive payment, but rather to report on the events.

"Freedman exclaimed, "Why can't you just admit it, sir? It's so easy to admit! You're paid as a journalist, correct?""

"Correct," Marquardt answered.

Freedman inquired, "You report from war zones, do you?"

"Sometimes," Marquardt said.

Freedman confirmed that he reports from war zones.

"Not in over a year," Marquardt pushed back.

"Freedman responded, "I'll say it like you, Sir. You sometimes report from war zones, right?""

"Correct," Marquardt said.

Freedman inquired, "Are you compensated for your time when you're in a war zone?"

"Yes," Marquardt said.

Freedman questioned, "You're compensated for your time in war zones, but wouldn't it be wrong if God were to be paid for it too?" He gestured towards Young, his client.

"There's a very big difference," Marquardt insisted.

Marquardt was questioned by Freedman regarding his accusations against Young, who he claimed "exploited" individuals seeking to rescue their loved ones in Afghanistan.

Freedman inquired, "Did you take advantage of the war to report?"

"No," Marquardt answered.

"Did CNN use the war situation to run ads while reporting on it? Freedman asked, to which Marquardt responded "No.""

"May I put it this way, did Mr. Young take advantage of the war situation by evacuating individuals from it?" Freedman responded.

"If he was making money, yes," Marquardt said.

Is it only CNN that can profit from war, or are only journalists permitted to do so? Freedman inquired.

Marquardt stated that she doesn't believe CNN earns money because journalists don't profit from war.

Marquardt responded to Freedman's question about whether Young, who rescued 22 women and a baby from Afghanistan, should be considered a hero even if they were paid for their services, by stating that they would need more information about the specific circumstances.

The trial resumed Tuesday and is being streamed live on Planet Chronicle Digital.