2 hours ago, riclag said:

and another $5 billion for violating Florida's unfair trade practices act, according to reports from late 2025

AI via Gemini:

 

Under Florida's consumer protection statute, primarily the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (FDUTPA), who can sue includes individual consumers, the consumer's estate, trust, or group, and even other businesses or commercial entities harmed by deceptive practices, allowing for private lawsuits to recover damages and stop misconduct. 

 

Who Can Bring a Suit:
Individual Consumers: Anyone who is a purchaser or lessee (not for resale) of goods or services for personal, family, or household use.

 

What They Can Sue For (FDUTPA):
Unconscionable, Unfair, or Deceptive Acts: False advertising, misleading sales, "bait and switch," or failure to disclose important info.
Unfair Competition: Unfair methods used in trade or commerce. 

 

 

 

 

Holding  companies accountable , many  chose to settle rather than fight costly litigation, often admitting errors ,apologies/regret notes in several cases. No court forced payments, it was voluntary settlements. BBC will fold like a cheap suit ,just like the others.

 The heinous depths the far left went through by slicing & dicing a Documentary,the intentional deception of this  attempted October surprise by a world famous news source is  tragic,it  got caught, Its priceless. Time to settle up 

8 hours ago, riclag said:

I think collecting on a fake news story deception perpetuated by  the world famous state sponsored BBC  will make the left news reporters dig a little deeper as they try to spin public opinion next time, its up to $10 billion. 

 

google ai overview:

 

"Yes, it's official: Donald Trump has filed a $10 billion defamation lawsuit against the BBC in a Miami federal court, alleging the broadcaster defamed him by deceptively editing his speech before the January 6th Capitol riot, making it seem he called for violence, despite the BBC apologizing for an "error of judgment" and admitting the edit was misleading. Trump's legal team claims the BBC showed no "meaningful institutional changes" and has a history of bias, seeking $5 billion for defamation and another $5 billion for violating Florida's unfair trade practices act, according to reports from late 2025".

 

 

 

'Outrageous': Ed Davey SLAMS Trump's BBC suit as an ATTACK on free media"

 

Ed Davey says Trump's lawsuit against the BBC outrageous and an "attack on free media". But how exactly is suing over a deceptively edited video, released days before the  election of the century an assault on press freedom. Trump lawyers  should up the anti.

video:0:28

 

 

On 12/18/2025 at 1:57 AM, riclag said:

But how exactly is suing over a deceptively edited video, released days before the  election of the century an assault on press freedom.

Great. Find someone in Florida who actually saw it before the election not who MAYBE saw it.

On 12/18/2025 at 1:57 AM, riclag said:

'Outrageous': Ed Davey SLAMS Trump's BBC suit as an ATTACK on free media"

 

Ed Davey says Trump's lawsuit against the BBC outrageous and an "attack on free media". But how exactly is suing over a deceptively edited video, released days before the  election of the century an assault on press freedom. Trump lawyers  should up the anti.

video:0:28

 

 

 

Davey has a habit of muttering dumb stuff - not the sharpest knife in the drawer.

REDUX from World

 

Legal experts have said arguments over jurisdiction could play a central role, with the case hinging on whether anyone in Florida saw the documentary. The filing says the episode may have been available to viewers in Florida using a VPN or via the BritBox streaming service.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0mx28vlp4wo

 

NB And the Trump v BBC complaint makes no specific mention that anyone 'actually' saw it 'actually' being the word used in the Trump v ABC complaint. 

 

Posts with content from unapproved social media sources and the replies have been removed:

 

General approach and policy.

We maintain a strict policy of accepting links or content only from mainstream and recognized media sources to ensure that information posted by members is both verifiable and trustworthy. We strive to remain impartial, prioritizing content that meets these standards and removing content that, in our opinion, does not.

 

Consequently, we do not accept content from social media platforms unless it originates from a credible, professional, and qualified source. This approach is essential for upholding the integrity and credibility of the information shared within our community."

On 12/20/2025 at 9:14 AM, nauseus said:

 

Davey has a habit of muttering dumb stuff - not the sharpest knife in the drawer.

Its time to settle up ! If they don't & if they do, the leftist BBC attempt at deception will lose.

"Why the BBC may be forced to settle with Trump - and what happens if they don't"

 

He's saying that  viewers in Florida watched the documentary because that's what it says in the complaint without ever saying what is the 'fact'. This is a $10 billion lawsuit and, as of now, there  is no proof that anyone in Florida watched it.

 

 

 

The Scandal continues ,as the notorious deception of a speech one week before a major presidential election is reported  by the accused state  news, the BBC.  I want to see this come to trial. I want to see the people involved on the stand to explain the  details of the deception . 

 

"The BBC has announced a shake-up of a key editorial committee following criticism of how the broadcaster handled concerns about the editing of a Donald Trump speech and other issues.

An internal review, published on Friday, said BBC executives did not act "quickly or decisively enough following the discovery of the misleading edit of a speech by President Trump in a Panorama programme".

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cj9yp7v37jyo

 

 

31 minutes ago, riclag said:

I want to see this come to trial.

It first has to get past the pre-trial stage.

 

The ABC suit mentions people that 'actually' saw it.  The words 'actually saw it' is not in the BBC complaint.

On 12/21/2025 at 10:19 AM, riclag said:

Its time to settle up ! If they don't & if they do, the leftist BBC attempt at deception will lose.

"Why the BBC may be forced to settle with Trump - and what happens if they don't"

 

 

All sorts of opinions can be found.

 

 

Ultimately, the BBC could just ignore a Florida court's judgement. The BBC has no significant assets in Florida. I suppose the US government could ban the BBC from the US, but that will not stop the BBC reporting on events in the US. Instead you will likely have Gary O'Donoghue reporting from somewhere near Brownsville, on the Mexican side, prefacing reports "due to reporting restrictions, we are unable to....."

17 hours ago, riclag said:

The Scandal continues ,as the notorious deception of a speech one week before a major presidential election is reported  by the accused state  news, the BBC.  I want to see this come to trial. I want to see the people involved on the stand to explain the  details of the deception . 

 

"The BBC has announced a shake-up of a key editorial committee following criticism of how the broadcaster handled concerns about the editing of a Donald Trump speech and other issues.

An internal review, published on Friday, said BBC executives did not act "quickly or decisively enough following the discovery of the misleading edit of a speech by President Trump in a Panorama programme".

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cj9yp7v37jyo

 

 

 

No one will appear on a "stand". It will just be a courtroom full of expensive lawyers. The couet will have no powers to compel non-Americans to do anything.

 

A similar situation occurred when that American woman killed a British motorcylist after she deliberately drove on the wrong side of the road. She fled the country, and refused to attend a British court after repeated requests. British courts had no power to compel an American who had fled justice to attend a court. The Killer got away with it. The US President at the time tried to bribe the biker's family with cash to go away. They refused.

 

Change your avatar.

 

As a result of you using an English Flag, you have now deprived any English person on the forum using that particular avatar, which is one of the default images provided by the forum software, to represent themselves.

 

I find that your use of the English Flag as your avatar to be deceptive and dishonest.

 

 

Off topic a bit, but talking of court cases, Trump is starting to lose as a judge rules he broke the law in sending people to El Salvador without due process. 

https://www.kpbs.org/news/politics/2025/12/22/federal-judge-rules-the-u-s-violated-due-process-with-alien-enemies-act-deportations

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/5660475-trump-administration-venezuelan-deportees-return-ruling/

 

A setback.

19 minutes ago, Purdey said:

A setback.

Or Bombshell! in reverse. But there's always:

 

Liberal activist judges legislating from the bench and preventing Trump from doing the job he was elected to do. (TM)

23 hours ago, riclag said:

The Scandal continues ,as the notorious deception of a speech one week before a major presidential election is reported  by the accused state  news, the BBC.  I want to see this come to trial. I want to see the people involved on the stand to explain the  details of the deception . 

 

"The BBC has announced a shake-up of a key editorial committee following criticism of how the broadcaster handled concerns about the editing of a Donald Trump speech and other issues.

An internal review, published on Friday, said BBC executives did not act "quickly or decisively enough following the discovery of the misleading edit of a speech by President Trump in a Panorama programme".

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cj9yp7v37jyo

 

 

The fact that they(BBC) apologized & two top officials resigned after it was discovered, "it being" the deceptive fake news documentary published within 8 days of the election screams for accountability.

There must be accountability ,a trial with the perps on the witness stand under oath.

 

 

Google ai overview :

 

"U.S. President Donald Trump has filed a $10 billion defamation lawsuit against the BBC over a documentary that he claims deceptively edited his January 6, 2021, speech to portray him as directly calling for violence. The lawsuit was filed in a federal court in Miami in December 2025". 

AI via Gemini:

Attorney Brito uses the words and claim 'actually viewed' in the ABC - Stephanopoulos suit but does not make it here with BBC

 

Gemini Take 2

Date set for the historic scandal : $10B lawsuit caused by BBC's deceptive fake video.

Feb 2027.

The (BBC) statement added: "We are not going to make further comment on ongoing legal proceedings."

The BBC has indicated in previous filings that it will submit a motion to dismiss the case by 17 March 202(6. The latest order does not impact that forthcoming filing.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cqxdwlqx8qqo

Hot off the presses, BBC's outgoing DG ,Mr Davie just warned the network is on shaky ground facing a crisis from lack of trust, audience drops, brutal finances and potencial massive legal heat from Trump's $10B lawsuit over their fake news Jan 6 doc footage. FAFO continues, BBC might be the next to pay up big time.

"BBC boss warns network faces existential crisis amid Trump’s crushing lawsuit"

Its back in the News again, A reporter asked about the video,that was maligned purposefully that the BBC put out trying to make Mr. Trump look bad in the weeks before the 2024 Election.

I love SkyNews Australia.

Trump doubles down on $10 billion lawsuit as BBC tries to escape court battle

NB: BBC attorneys have filed their motion to dismiss the Trump suit. Team Trump has 2 weeks to respond although they may request an extension:

"Put simply - the documentary was never aired in Florida - or the US. It wasn't available to watch in the US on iPlayer, online or any other streaming platforms including BritBox and BBC Select.

Trump's lawsuit had claimed people in Florida may have accessed the programme using a virtual private network (VPN) or via the streaming service BritBox, but the BBC argued this was not correct. ( my bold)

"We have therefore challenged jurisdiction of the Florida court and filed a motion to dismiss the president's claim."

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c17845kz2yno

47 minutes ago, riclag said:

Its back in the News again, A reporter asked about the video,that was maligned purposefully that the BBC put out trying to make Mr. Trump look bad in the weeks before the 2024 Election.

I love SkyNews Australia.

Trump doubles down on $10 billion lawsuit as BBC tries to escape court battle

That Oval Office meeting with the Irish officials was a perfect opportunity for the press & the POTUS to dig into the International news networks dishonesty in covering the Greatest of all time Presidents, Potus Trump.

"He added: “It was very inaccurate news, it was fake news.

“I’m very proud of the term ‘fake news’ because it was my term, I came up with it – but it’s no longer accurate".

https://www.the-independent.com/news/uk/home-news/trump-bbc-lawsuit-panorama-iran-war-b2940492.html

Spending your whole day posting Trump/Maga crap probably should have a mental illness named after it.

The BBC is as leftist and woke as any organisation you could find in the UK. Riddled with LBGTQ++ alphabet as they come. And they did wrong.

But where the hell does Trump come up with his figure of 20 billion? The guy is a grifter.

2 hours ago, phetphet said:

The BBC is as leftist and woke as any organisation you could find in the UK. Riddled with LBGTQ++ alphabet as they come. And they did wrong.

But where the hell does Trump come up with his figure of 20 billion? The guy is a grifter.

Expert legal advice ,Probably start high and work your way to a out of court settlement. Defamation suits happen this way. They admitted wrong doing and must be held accountatble.

Best to leave it up to the legal experts.

They manipulated a video ,similar to many deep fake attacks on the candidate that time, a fake story 2 weeks out from the most consequential election in history, should be worth millions.

One of the best things about the suit is its in Florida.

Trump sued the BBC in December for both defamation and for a violation of Florida’s Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act for $5 billion apiece, seeking $10 billion total.

 https://www.foxnews.com/media/trump-bbc-agree-mediator-10-billion-lawsuit-over-jan-6-documentary-editing-controversy

As per the defamation claim, the Florida deceptive trade practices is one of the best best things so long as the court rules that it is a viable Florida case.

If no one saw it only that there was an "immense likelihood" that someone actually saw it, then the deceptive claims are moot.

BBC admitted wrongdoing. They deliberately manipulated a false hood.

There are 2 factors here long before the case will ever be a determination that the BBC acted with malice:

Florida defamation law:

Key Elements of a Florida Defamation Case

Publication: The false statement was communicated to a third party (written or oral).

As of yet the Trump team has yet to prove anyone in Florida saw the Panorama doc.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) allows for case dismissal if a complaint fails to state a claim that is plausible on its face, not merely possible.

What seems IM-plausible to me is that, if the Trump team are so certain someone in Florida actually saw it, they would by now have been able to find at least one such person.