ProPublica has quite a scoop of a story, highlighting how various witnesses and potential witnesses in the long list of lawsuits Donald Trump is facing, suddenly, coincidentally, seem to be getting…
At this point, does anyone except Trump not know when he’s bluffing? I mean, just think of the discovery this news publication could get if he did sue.
If he filed a suit, he’d be guaranteeing not just access, but court-enforced access, to the most relevant, secret documents proving his witness tampering.
I imagine that many of his supporters think he isn’t bluffing. I don’t think this is intended to prove it’s a lies, but to signal to his less dedicated supporters that the publication is lying to hurt him. We can predict how this headline will be framed on Fox.
The letter warned that if the outlet and its reporters “continue their reckless campaign of defamation, President Trump will evaluate all legal remedies.”
The only legal remedy they’re suggesting here is a defamation/libel suit. If Trump is asserting that ProPublica’s reporting on these oh so coincidental payments is false, then he will have to prove its falsehood. Furthermore, he will have to prove that ProPublica acted with actual malice.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !politics@beehaw.org
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it’s a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
Where possible, post the original source of information.
If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
He threatens to sue. He doesn’t have the money or bandwidth to actually sue.
At this point, does anyone except Trump not know when he’s bluffing? I mean, just think of the discovery this news publication could get if he did sue.
If he filed a suit, he’d be guaranteeing not just access, but court-enforced access, to the most relevant, secret documents proving his witness tampering.
I imagine that many of his supporters think he isn’t bluffing. I don’t think this is intended to prove it’s a lies, but to signal to his less dedicated supporters that the publication is lying to hurt him. We can predict how this headline will be framed on Fox.
I hope he does, that would be hilarious. I don’t think I’ll ever get tired of seeing him get his ass handed to him in court.
He’ll sue ProPublica, the case will go to court and he’ll payout the witnesses 🤣
I double dog dare ya.
The only legal remedy they’re suggesting here is a defamation/libel suit. If Trump is asserting that ProPublica’s reporting on these oh so coincidental payments is false, then he will have to prove its falsehood. Furthermore, he will have to prove that ProPublica acted with actual malice.
You’re out of your element, Donny.
But, but… Dragging things out forever in court is his only move?
Sadly. All his base sees is he claims it’s defamation. Therefor it is. 🤦