Trump campaign says it is suing New York Times over Russia opinion piece

By Steve Holland

 

FILE PHOTO: People line up for taxi across the street from the New York Times head office in New York, February 7, 2013. REUTERS/Carlo Allegri/File Photo

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Donald Trump's re-election campaign said on Wednesday it was filing a libel suit accusing the New York Times <NYT.N> of intentionally publishing a false opinion article that suggested Russia and the campaign had an overarching deal in the 2016 U.S. election.

 

In an escalation of the Republican president's long-running battle with the news media, campaign officials said the lawsuit was being filed in state court in New York.

 

Asked about the suit at a White House news conference later on Wednesday, Trump said the New York Times had "got a lot wrong over the last number of years."

 

Trump said he would let the lawsuit "work its way through the courts. And there'll be more coming." He did not elaborate.

 

Separately, Trump assailed two other news organizations that he frequently criticizes, the cable TV news channels CNN and MSNBC, accusing them of presenting the danger from the coronavirus in as bad a light as possible and upsetting financial markets.

 

A campaign statement said the aim of the suit against the Times, among the most prominent American news organizations, was to hold the newspaper "accountable for intentionally publishing false statements against President Trump's campaign."

 

The lawsuit relates to a March 27, 2019, opinion article written by Max Frankel, who served as executive editor of the New York Times from 1986 to 1994.

 

A draft copy of the suit, attached to a campaign news release, accused the newspaper of "extreme bias against and animosity toward the campaign," and cited what it called the Times' "exuberance to improperly influence the presidential election in November 2020."

 

Trump is seeking re-election on Nov. 3.

 

In a statement, a New York Times spokesperson said: "The Trump Campaign has turned to the courts to try to punish an opinion writer for having an opinion they find unacceptable. Fortunately, the law protects the right of Americans to express their judgements and conclusions, especially about events of public importance. We look forward to vindicating that right in this case."

 

The newspaper's spokesperson said it had not been served with the suit and learned about it through media reports.

 

Trump's criticism of what he calls liberal bias in the U.S. news media plays well with his conservative political base and generates applause at his political rallies, where his supporters often jeer journalists. Trump regularly refers to various news media outlets as "fake news" and has called elements of the U.S. news media "the enemy of the American people."

 

The New York Times was involved in a landmark 1964 Supreme Court ruling that has served as a safeguard for media reporting on public figures. In the case New York Times v. Sullivan, the court decided that the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment protection for freedom of the press allows even statements that are false to be published as long as the publication was not done with "actual malice."

 

The suit, according to the draft copy released by the campaign, accused the newspaper of a "malicious motive" and "reckless disregard for the truth."

 

Benjamin Zipursky, a professor at Fordham University School of Law, said the lawsuit was unlikely to succeed because U.S. defamation law does not allow liability for a sincerely held belief about a public figure, like Trump. He said judges would be sceptical of the claims and inclined to dismiss them.

 

"They're going to be very concerned with the First Amendment implications of allowing a case like this to move forward," he said.

 

SANDERS ASSAILS LAWSUIT

Senator Bernie Sanders, the front-runner in the race for the Democratic nomination to face Trump in the November election, denounced the lawsuit.

 

"Trump has called the press the 'enemy of the people,' and now - taking a page from his dictator friends around the world - is trying to dismantle the right to a free press in the First Amendment by suing the New York Times for publishing an opinion column about his dangerous relationship with Russia," Sanders said.

 

Former Special Counsel Robert Mueller documented Moscow's campaign of hacking and social media propaganda to boost Trump's 2016 candidacy and harm his Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton.

 

Mueller's report documented numerous contacts between people associated with Trump's campaign and Russians. Mueller found insufficient evidence to show a criminal conspiracy between Trump's team and Russia but did not exonerate Trump of obstruction of justice related to the investigation.

 

In the opinion piece, Frankel stated, "Collusion - or a lack of it - turns out to have been the rhetorical trap that ensnared President Trump's pursuers."

 

Frankel added, "There was no need for detailed electoral collusion between the Trump campaign and Vladimir Putin's oligarchy because they had an overarching deal: the quid of help in the campaign against Hillary Clinton for the quo of a new pro-Russian foreign policy, starting with relief from the Obama administration's burdensome economic sanctions. The Trumpites knew about the quid and held out the prospect of the quo."

 

Quid pro quo is a Latin term meaning a favour in exchange for a favour.

 

Trump in January 2018 criticized U.S. defamation laws as "a sham and a disgrace" following publication of a book by author Michael Wolff called "Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House," which among other things questioned the president's mental health.

 

Conservative Justice Clarence Thomas last year urged his Supreme Court colleagues to consider overturning the New York Times v. Sullivan precedent.

 

In a statement on the suit, Jenna Ellis, senior legal adviser to Trump's campaign, said, "The statements were and are 100 percent false and defamatory.

 

The complaint alleges The Times was aware of the falsity at the time it published them, but did so for the intentional purpose of hurting the campaign, while misleading its own readers in the process."

 

(Reporting by Steve Holland; Additional reporting by Lawrence Hurley and Brendan Pierson; Editing by Will Dunham, Howard Goller and Rosalba O'Brien)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2020-02-27

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

All Trump and his minions can do is SUE

 

Fortunately jurors are smarter than this cabal is, so they never win, but it least it churns the economy for the lawyers 

How do you sue someone because of an opinion.

He promises to sue is legendary. He promised to sue all women that accused him, sue the media for negative stories and even sue Bill Maher after his orangutan  joke. No much successes but not stopping him either. 

What I find interesting is the timing. Only reason is to use this in the campaign.

The occurrence of negative opinions of Mr. Trump , spurned in  part by hatred, ignorance and vindictiveness has spread far and wide in the activist liberal news media especially when it comes to the Russia hoax imop. So many articles about this bias

https://www.npr.org/2017/10/02/555092743/study-news-coverage-of-trump-more-negative-than-for-other-presidents

 

Trump / Pence 2020

 

3 hours ago, webfact said:

A draft copy of the suit, attached to a campaign news release, accused the newspaper of "extreme bias against and animosity toward the campaign," and cited what it called the Times' "exuberance to improperly influence the presidential election in November 2020."

 

Edited February 27, 20206 yr by riclag

23 minutes ago, stevenl said:

What I find interesting is the timing. Only reason is to use this in the campaign.

IMO just more deflection and red meat for his supporters. Also cowardly as the President cannot be counter sued for his false statements, his vile insults aimed at individuals and so on. One hopes his continuing campaign attacking the fabric of Western society will severely backfire with an massive vote to remove him from Office in 11/20.

5 minutes ago, riclag said:

https://www.npr.org/2017/10/02/555092743/study-news-coverage-of-trump-more-negative-than-for-other-presidents <SNIP>

Not surprising is it - trump is a vile individual

21 minutes ago, simple1 said:

IMO just more deflection and red meat for his supporters. Also cowardly as the President cannot be counter sued for his false statements, his vile insults aimed at individuals and so on. One hopes his continuing campaign attacking the fabric of Western society will severely backfire with an massive vote to remove him from Office in 11/20.

The first President to have a game plan for the left leaning media, fight back! It was in  the making for years ,prior to his  coming down the escalator! 

 

He and others underestimated the power of the heads in the intel agencies though!

 

Chuck Schummer said it best when he said , 6 ways to sunday 

Edited February 27, 20206 yr by riclag

Funny as Trump and his supporters are always banging on about 'MUh FrEEzE PeACh'

45 minutes ago, riclag said:

The first President to have a game plan for the left leaning media,

Left learning media? What planet are you on? 

13 minutes ago, PremiumLane said:

Left learning media? What planet are you on? 

 

Don't think he's on any planet... Based on his posts, I'd say, outer space is more likely!  

Trump will retract as soon as this gets to the ‘Disclosure’ phase.

1 hour ago, riclag said:

The occurrence of negative opinions of Mr. Trump , spurned in  part by hatred, ignorance and vindictiveness has spread far and wide in the activist liberal news media especially when it comes to the Russia hoax imop. So many articles about this bias

https://www.npr.org/2017/10/02/555092743/study-news-coverage-of-trump-more-negative-than-for-other-presidents

 

Trump / Pence 2020

 

 

There’s a lot more to be negative about this President than his predecessors.

 

But you, blame the news bringer.

2 hours ago, riclag said:

The occurrence of negative opinions of Mr. Trump , spurned in  part by hatred, ignorance and vindictiveness has spread far and wide in the activist liberal news media especially when it comes to the Russia hoax imop. So many articles about this bias

https://www.npr.org/2017/10/02/555092743/study-news-coverage-of-trump-more-negative-than-for-other-presidents

 

Trump / Pence 2020

 

 

 

Most negative for the most negatively campaigning of Presidents.

 

"Hatred, ignorance and vindictiveness" has always been, and remains, Trumps basic electioneering strategy.

 

Attributes maintained during his term in office.

 

Targeting all and sundry in order to indulge his core, cave dwelling, supporters and his own ugly prejudices.

 

You have a problem with him "reaping what he sowed"?

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 27, 20206 yr by Enoon

1 hour ago, PremiumLane said:

Left learning media? What planet are you on? 

You have doubts as to  leanings! What universe are you from  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_bias_in_the_United_States

Edited February 27, 20206 yr by riclag

2 hours ago, simple1 said:

IMO just more deflection and red meat for his supporters. Also cowardly as the President cannot be counter sued for his false statements, his vile insults aimed at individuals and so on. One hopes his continuing campaign attacking the fabric of Western society will severely backfire with an massive vote to remove him from Office in 11/20.

But why wait one year after publication? All I can think of as reasonable explanation is the upcoming elections.

3 minutes ago, riclag said:

You have doubts as to  leanings 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_bias_in_the_United_States

From your link, not good for conservative media

Quote

Perceived liberal bias was cited by Roger Ailes as a reason for setting up Fox News . From the late 20th Century, a right wing media ecosystem grew up in parallel to mainstream journalism, leading to an asymmetric polarization in conservative media. While The Wall Street Journal always leaned conservative, it is nonetheless part of the journalistic mainstream, committed primarily to factual reporting. New right-leaning media outlets including Breitbart News, NewsMax, and WorldNetDaily instead have a core mission to promote a conservative or right-wing agenda.Analysis of social media shares in the 2016 election cycle shows that consumers of conservative media are much less likely than consumers of partisan liberal media to share mainstream sources, leading to an echo chamber effect with high insularity and drifting towards extremes. Where mainstream and left-leaning media imposes reputational costs on those who propagate rumor, and coalescences around corrected narratives, the conservative media ecosystem creates positive feedbacks for bias-confirming statements as a central feature of its normal operation.

 

8 minutes ago, stevenl said:

From your link, not good for conservative media

 

Your opinion ,My opinion there is two sides to everything. Thank god Mr. Trump has his twitter feed using it to get his message across as a expression of freedom of speech while  not relying  on the opposition media ! 

Read through that wiki article about the history of the media and how its changed and evolved through out the years! Not good, imop could be the damnation of the western society 

Edited February 27, 20206 yr by riclag

Just now, stevenl said:

But why wait one year after publication? All I can think of as reasonable explanation is the upcoming elections.

Fair enough. At the same time how much longer will US voters put up with the man with his constant efforts to suppress Freedom of Speech which one reads is allegedly untouchable for US citizens. Seems to me Dems are not currently leveraging the very rich field of trumps attacks on the Constitution. I hope the Dems do not waste the excellent opportunity to remove trump with internal bickering.

33 minutes ago, riclag said:

You have doubts as to  leanings! What universe are you from  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_bias_in_the_United_States

 

Ah, you have to understand the left wing liberal PC mentality.

 

Any media sources they approve of and comments they like and approve of are "totally unbiased, free press".

 

And media sources they don't approve of and comments they don't like or approve of are "biased, fake news from fascists, nazis, racists, etc etc etc.

 

Unfortunately, they are completely intolerant of any view but theirs, and believe destroying different views by any means is acceptable.

Edited February 27, 20206 yr by Baerboxer

2 hours ago, riclag said:

The occurrence of negative opinions of Mr. Trump , spurned in  part by hatred, ignorance and vindictiveness has spread far and wide in the activist liberal news media especially when it comes to the Russia hoax imop. So many articles about this bias

https://www.npr.org/2017/10/02/555092743/study-news-coverage-of-trump-more-negative-than-for-other-presidents

 

Trump / Pence 2020

 

 

Indeed. 

Since Trump's win over Hillary Clinton the press has become just an organ of the Democrat Party. 

Bias doesn't begin to describe it. 

 

MAGA 

19 minutes ago, riclag said:

Your opinion ,My opinion there is two sides to everything. Thank god Mr. Trump has his twitter feed using it to get his message across as a expression of freedom of speech while  not relying  on the opposition media ! 

Read through that wiki article about the history of the media and how its changed and evolved through out the years! Not good, imop could be the damnation of the western society 

You give us a link to prove that the media are left leaning. I give you a quote from your link, stating that the conservative readers suffer from bias confirmation.

 

Your reaction to that post clearly shows the article is correct, at least for you: confirmation bias.

34 minutes ago, riclag said:

You have doubts as to  leanings! What universe are you from  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_bias_in_the_United_States

As often, your source does not particularly support your point. It seems to show more bias on the conservative side, but maybe the authors are left-leaning too? Lol!

3 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Ah, you have to understand the left wing liberal PC mentality.

 

Any media sources they approve of and comments they like and approve of are "totally unbiased, free press".

 

And media sources they don't approve of and comments they don't lie or approve of are "biased, fake news from fascists, nazis, racists, etc etc etc.

 

Unfortunately, they are completely intolerant of any view but theirs, and believe destroying different views by any means is acceptable.

We were having a very civilized discussion here.

22 minutes ago, riclag said:

Your opinion ,My opinion there is two sides to everything. Thank god Mr. Trump has his twitter feed using it to get his message across as a expression of freedom of speech while  not relying  on the opposition media ! 

Read through that wiki article about the history of the media and how its changed and evolved through out the years! Not good, imop could be the damnation of the western society 

Most of his messages are lies, I.e. Crowdstrike is an Ukrainian company, lol!

1 hour ago, PremiumLane said:

Left learning media? What planet are you on? 

Full of lefties

6 minutes ago, candide said:

As often, your source does not particularly support your point. It seems to show more bias on the conservative side, but maybe the authors are left-leaning too? Lol!

Wiki is very left. Big example tje climate scan.

 

 https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/media-bias-left-study/

2 minutes ago, UbonThani said:

Wiki is very left. Big example tje climate scan.

 

That is what happens when the scientific consensus is against you, nothing to do with left or right.