The King of Defamation Sues The NY Times for Defamation
File under This will Give You Whiplash, Trump filed suit today against The NY Times for an opinion piece claiming libel and defamation. He didn’t like that the piece pointed out the obvious that his campaign had a quid pro quo with Russia to damage Hillary for Trump’s benefit. As we are all painfully aware, Trump spews a stream of insults, falsehoods, lies, and defamation in a continuous stream, including public and private figures. His case will be almost impossible to prove, and this being NY state court, the case will likely be dismissed in short order. No matter, though, Trump loves to threaten legal action against critics as a tactic to silence them.
This won’t work, but it just shows how far we’ve fallen that the president of the United States is now attempting to use the courts to punish his political critics.
Witness intimidation, media intimidation, etc, etc, etc, yet Republicons in the Senate refused to remove the menace* to democracy. On the positive side, hope every time Donnie* tweets or does something st00pid it costs Moscow Mitch and Senate Republicons a few thousand votes toward their re-election efforts and cements Donnie’s* re-election chances like an oversize pair of hip waders full of concrete in sea state 9 conditions. Blue Tsunami, please!
1PLEASE put me on that jury!
2Trump still hasn’t figured out the threat of a lawsuit filed as a public figure acting in the public arena doesn’t exert the same fear as if he were a private citizen. As you say JJ, his claim will be hard to prove.
He’s a slow learner. Just eat your mashed potatoes mixed with cauliflower Donnie.
3I think that’s “The King OF Defamation”.
4Rick, soap on that cauliflower. Donnie* should have his mashed potatoes with more butter than the potato can hold with loads of gravy and 4 scoops of ice cream tonight. You and ‘doctor’ Ronny are being very mean to Fred and Mary’s widdle boy.
Mike, ITA. What’s the maximum allowable damages we could award to the NYT?
5Maybe Donnie will have to get deposed. That could be fun!
6Hmmm, it’s called discovery….. bwahahaha
7@ Ms Sharon Greiff: Yes, discovery. Plus, doctrine of unclean hands (the defamation king should be barred by equity from suing others for defamation.)
Plus, how would this harm Trump’s reputation?
Plus, hasn’t Trump just waived any objections to lawsuits because they distract him from his duties?
Sadly, I predicted in 2016 that if Trump were elected, we’d see NY Times v Sullivan overturned. I expect a 5:4 decision stating that only Democrats are barred from suing for defamation – IOKIYAR!
8I’m trying to remember . . . Who was it who said President Obama was a Muslim communist born in Kenya? Hmmm. Maybe that person should be sued for libel and defamation. If only I could remember who that was.
9RepubAnon @ 8:
10Nail on the head. N.Y. Times vs. Sullivan is the logical next step in the process of legitimizing the destruction of our constitutionally mandated democracy. The total obliteration of the fourth estate. Except when it serves as a mouthpiece for the executive.
El Jefe’s right of course. It’ll go nowhere.
This time. But in the reality of the MAGA’S it’ll be more proof of the deep state. Precedent is a wonderful/terrible thing
Wonderful so far.
11But will the current majority of Supremes uphold the constitutional precedent when it finally makes it before them? Because if donald f king trump wins a second term, I guarantee it will. That’ll be when the terrible side of precedent rears its ravenous head.
It’s time for New York State to consider sanctioning attorneys for filing his Orangeness’ frivolous suits.
12