5 hours ago, webfact said:

approximately 36 billion Baht

I WISH the exchange rate were that good!

😆

1 minute ago, WorriedNoodle said:

Complete nonsense by the Trump lawyers playing the Austin Powers gazzilion dollars game to deflect. The BBC made a mistake in rearranging Trumps words in a Panorama program, but thats their right in a free speech world where opinion pieces are still allowed in free democracies. The program is no longer broadcast as a gesture, but the message was never changed. Trump has always been a serial liar, called for an insurrection and the message from the Panorama program told the same home truths despite screwing up the process at the same time.

"Complete nonsense"............

 

“Free speech” doesn’t cover fabricating quotes. BBC Panorama spliced Trump’s Jan 6 speech—clips 54 minutes apart—deleting “peacefully and patriotically” to fake a direct violence order.

Leaked memo: “completely misleading.” Chair Samir Shah: edit gave “impression of a direct call for violent action”—official apology issued.

Documentary pulled from iPlayer.

 

Two execs resigned. Message did change—that’s defamation, not “opinion.”

 

Trump a liar? Absolutely. But proven institutional fraud by a taxpayer-funded broadcaster isn’t protected speech—it’s malpractice. $1bn demand (Nov 14 deadline) isn’t Austin Powers; it’s leverage that already forced ABC ($15m), CBS ($16m) payouts.

 

BBC’s already groveling. They’ll pay or fold—precedent hates losing. Consequences aren’t deflection; they’re justice. 

14 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Can they arrest you for not paying?

 

It makes me think of William Hurt doing compulsory exercises in front of the T V a run down flat before he goes to work to change yesterdays history.

 

 

If you watch 'live' TV , or iplayer, in the UK, yes it is an a potential criminal offense and you can be arrested!

Fortunately, I understand more and more folks are not paying the license fee as there are ways around it, like watching only 'catch up' tv .

Trump Targets BBC With $1 Billion Claim Over Documentary

 

_{Good.  I hope he succeeds.  Do I like Trump?  Not at all.  But when "trusted news sources" like BBC indulge in fabricating lies?  You do realize that they can no longer be a "trusted news source."}  

12 minutes ago, mikeymike100 said:

If you watch 'live' TV , or iplayer, in the UK, yes it is an a potential criminal offense and you can be arrested!

Fortunately, I understand more and more folks are not paying the license fee as there are ways around it, like watching only 'catch up' tv .

The UK has turned into a dystopian hell-hole.  About the only profitable industry of the future will be prisons.  I expect by 2030 the UK will have one of the large prison populations in the world per-capita, filled primarily by native Britons sanctioned for "wrong-speak" and "wrong-think."  

The scam artist strike again for some easy, personal money...

 

..

25 minutes ago, mikeymike100 said:

If you watch 'live' TV , or iplayer, in the UK, yes it is an a potential criminal offense and you can be arrested!

Fortunately, I understand more and more folks are not paying the license fee as there are ways around it, like watching only 'catch up' tv .

In other words, you poor Brits have to cheat to live. How Soviet.

 

Great Britain WAS great and is responsible for the birth of the modern world and it makes me cry to hear the stories of Cowcrap your nation is going through.

 

Enough apologizing to the world. You're bloody British ffs. Rule!

All these big money lawsuits will backfired on him and a PR disaster. Trump is already perceived by many as a bully and retributor and this kind of ridiculous amount will only add to his money grabbing image. He has lawsuits for $15B on New York Times, $230 M DOJ claim, $10B Paramount and $10 B lawsuit over WSJ article. These just reinforced people thoughts of him a libel bully and is systemically destroying free press. Compound on his already bad image. Mid term will not be kind to him. 

17 minutes ago, connda said:

Trump Targets BBC With $1 Billion Claim Over Documentary

 

_{Good.  I hope he succeeds.}

Trump's 2 big paydays came from CBS and ABC both of whom have regulated TV stations that require FCC approval for any action,

 

His 2 cases against the NY Times and Wall Street Journal will maybe get as far as the defendants requiring Trump as plaintiff for a deposition.

 

Maybe same with any cased lodged against BBC.

 

Who will pay the fine?

 

The BBC has 24 million payers, so that's only 50 squids from each BBC Licence holder.

 

Just pay, and move on. 

 

I'll be interested to see where these 'resigned' BBC latchikoes go next.

38 minutes ago, mikeymike100 said:

If you watch 'live' TV , or iplayer, in the UK, yes it is an a potential criminal offense and you can be arrested!

Fortunately, I understand more and more folks are not paying the license fee as there are ways around it, like watching only 'catch up' tv .

 

Exactly my UK household's position for over a year now. 

The license fee is to watch "live" TV (broadcast live) so only watching catchup TV (not iPlayer) gets around this.

You can also listen to live radio without a license fee, so my tvs are still connected to an aerial just for this purpose. Or at least that's what I'll say if they come knocking 😁

 

Thankfully I personally won't be contributing to any potential compensation for Trump. 

 

25 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

All these big money lawsuits will backfired on him and a PR disaster. Trump is already perceived by many as a bully and retributor and this kind of ridiculous amount will only add to his money grabbing image. He has lawsuits for $15B on New York Times, $230 M DOJ claim, $10B Paramount and $10 B lawsuit over WSJ article. These just reinforced people thoughts of him a libel bully and is systemically destroying free press. 

Trump’s media lawsuits are not backfiring—they’re racking up wins and forcing accountability.

So far, he’s secured over $51 million in settlements, including $15 million from ABC, $16 million from CBS, and $25 million from Meta, proving these aren’t empty threats but calculated strikes against verifiable defamation.

 

Ongoing cases like the $15 billion suit against The New York Times and $10 billion against the Wall Street Journal remain active, with media outlets scrambling to avoid discovery that could expose internal bias.

 

His track record shows a ~70% success rate in winning or settling these cases, turning “fake news” into a profitable and strategic defense.

The “bully” label is media spin that doesn’t match reality. Trump’s approval rating sits at 55% post-election, higher than during his 2024 campaign, with voters viewing him as a fighter against elite institutions rather than a vindictive figure. He’s pledged to donate settlement proceeds to charity or his presidential library, undercutting the “money-grabbing” narrative. These lawsuits aren’t destroying the free press—they’re holding it to account when it fabricates or misleads, just as Dominion did with Fox News in 2023. In the end, “backfiring” is just cope from outlets now writing checks instead of corrections.

5 hours ago, Celsius said:

BBC getting BBCed

Trump being Trump and vindictive as usual.

 

How about the 30,xxx lies that he has spewed over the years?

 

What are they worth?

 

Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone.

37 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

All these big money lawsuits will backfired on him and a PR disaster.

Not to the beneficiaries of the charities he donates the money to.

7 minutes ago, billd766 said:

Trump being Trump and vindictive as usual.

 

How about the 30,xxx lies that he has spewed over the years?

 

What are they worth?

 

Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone.

Trump’s 30,573 false or misleading claims (WaPo tally, 2017-2021) are real, documented, and damning.

Each one’s worth exactly zero in a defamation courtroom when the plaintiff is a public figure—he has to prove actual malice + falsity + material harm.BBC failed on all three:

 

Falsity: spliced clips 54 minutes apart, deleted “peacefully and patriotically,” created a fake quote. Leaked memo: “completely misleading.” Chair: edit gave “impression of direct call for violent action.”

 

Actual malice: aired days before the 2024 election, knowing the full speech existed. That’s reckless disregard for truth.

Harm: broadcast worldwide on iPlayer, BBC America, YouTube—reached millions of US voters.

 

Trump’s lies don’t grant the BBC a free pass to fabricate evidence. “Let he who is without sin” is a Bible verse, not Florida defamation law.BBC already admitted guilt: full apology, doc deleted, two execs resigned. Now they face a $1bn suit with a Nov 14 deadline.

Past score: ABC paid $15m, CBS $16m. Sin all you want—when you get caught forging quotes, you pay. Stones are flying, and the BBC’s glass house just shattered. 

43 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

In other words, you poor Brits have to cheat to live. How Soviet.

 

Great Britain WAS great and is responsible for the birth of the modern world and it makes me cry to hear the stories of Cowcrap your nation is going through.

 

Enough apologizing to the world. You're bloody British ffs. Rule!

Thankfully I am not a Brit, but I did live there for a while.

 

It's actually worse than you think. 

If caught ( letters, or visits), you could face prosecution, a fine up to £1,000 (or £2,000 in Guernsey/Jersey), court costs, and a criminal record. Non-payment of the fine can lead to imprisonment (rare—only ~5 cases/year).

3 minutes ago, mikeymike100 said:

Past score: ABC paid $15m, CBS $16m

Both ABC and CBS settled as they both own major market TV stations that are subject to FCC licensing and regulation.

The cheek and hypocrisy on display from the thin-skinned bully is staggerring. The man who practically invented and popularised fake news calling out fake news. Renowned for his complete lack of self awareness, no doubt the irony has competely passed him and his idiotic acolytes competely by.

3 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

Both ABC and CBS settled as they both own major market TV stations that are subject to FCC licensing and regulation.

Translation: They got caught slandering on bandwidths owned by the American people.

Just now, Summerinsiam said:

The cheek and hypocrisy on display from the thin-skinned bully is staggerring. The man who practically invented and popularised fake news calling out fake news. Renowned for his complete lack of self awareness, no doubt the irony has competely passed him and his idiotic acolytes competely by.

Translation: I can only screech because Trump is winning, again. And again. 

The BBC is a bag of tricks.

8 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Translation: They got caught slandering on bandwidths owned by the American people.

Stephanopoulos definitely screwed up. The CBS suit was actually as a violation of Texas consumer product law as in false advertising ... maybe.

26 minutes ago, PaoloR said:

"Reputational harm"  That's hilarious! The Orange Buffoon has a reputation so low it could not suffer harm from anything anyone ever said.

Threaten to sue for some ridiculous sum - good luck "you're not in Kansas now"!

"Reputational harm" is legal fact, not comedy.

US courts don’t care if you’re hated. They care if false statements were made with actual malice and caused measurable damage.BBC forged a quote: spliced clips 54 mins apart, deleted “peacefully and patriotically,” aired days before the 2024 election.

Leaked memo: “completely misleading.” Two execs resigned. Doc pulled. Full apology issued.That’s textbook defamation under Florida law—where BBC streams via iPlayer and BBC America.

Trump’s team already invoked it in the Nov 10 letter.“Not in Kansas”? Wrong state—Florida’s his turf, and BBC has US assets, offices, and millions of American viewers. Juries here award hundreds of millions (Fox-Dominion: $787m). ABC paid $15m. CBS $16m. $1bn demand? Leverage, not fantasy.Deadline: Nov 14.

15 minutes ago, mikeymike100 said:

Thankfully I am not a Brit, but I did live there for a while.

 

It's actually worse than you think. 

If caught ( letters, or visits), you could face prosecution, a fine up to £1,000 (or £2,000 in Guernsey/Jersey), court costs, and a criminal record. Non-payment of the fine can lead to imprisonment (rare—only ~5 cases/year).

The claims are worth ONLY the amount that the court thinks. NOT what you, I, Trump or the plaintiff thinks. If yjr courts think the claim is worth $1,000,000 or zero, that is what THEY and NOT you will award.

16 minutes ago, billd766 said:

The claims are worth ONLY the amount that the court thinks. NOT what you, I, Trump or the plaintiff thinks. If yjr courts think the claim is worth $1,000,000 or zero, that is what THEY and NOT you will award.

AI quickie:

 

The minimum damage amount for a Florida case to be heard in federal court is over $75,000, which is a requirement for federal diversity jurisdiction

There is much wrong with the BBC at present but PLEASE ignore the stupidity of this deranged imbecile. Hasn't a hope in hell in winning any lawsuit.

From BBC Chair Shah BBC website:

 

The editing of President Trump's speech on January 6th has attracted significant attention.

 

This issue was the subject of discussion at EGSC in January 2025 and again in May 2025. There was concern expressed by members of the Committee, as well as Mr Prescott, of the way programme was edited.

 

However, the EGSC also heard from BBC News that the purpose of editing the clip, was to convey the message of the speech made by President Trump so that Panorama's audience could better understand how it had been received by President Trump's supporters and what was happening on the ground at that time.

 

This issue was considered and discussed as part of a wider review of the BBC's US Election coverage, commissioned by the Committee, rather than handled as a specific programme complaint, given it had not attracted significant audience feedback and had been transmitted before the US election, so the point wasn't pursued further at that time. The points raised in the review were relayed to the Panorama team, including the decision making on this edit. With hindsight, it would have been better to take more formal action.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx2p1v77gl2o

1 hour ago, mikeymike100 said:

Actual malice: aired days before the 2024 election, knowing the full speech existed. That’s reckless disregard for truth.

Harm: broadcast worldwide on iPlayer, BBC America, YouTube—reached millions of US voters.

Utter rubbish. Its an opinion piece that has as much right to be broadcast as the hate and bile out of Fox News or any opinion based journalism.

4 hours ago, JAG said:

The BBC has come spectacularly unstuck, however it's bias goes far deeper and is far more extensive than their coverage of Trump's speech on January 6th 2020. For a great many years, decades really, their flagship news and current affairs outputs, namely Panorama and Question Time, have maintained editorial positions which have been hostile towards political parties and views which they dislike. That has been the case, frankly, as far back as Mrs Thatcher's government; and more recently has manifested itself in their reaction to and coverage of recent Conservative governments, Brexit and Farage and Reform UK.

 

I welcome their embarrassment, both deserved and damaging to a domestic and international reputation which they have long cynically sheltered behind. A major review and restructuring of their management and productions is long overdue, although I am sceptical about it's outcome - I rather expect more of the same - nothing will change until their generous, apparently untouchable and largely unaccountable public funding through the license fee is reformed.

 

That said, I don't think a foreign potentate should be able to hold them to ransom by threatening to sue for vast sums of money in a foreign court. Even if a Florida Court were to award Trump massive damages, would they be enforceable? The program was made and broadcast in the UK, by a British undertaking. I really don't see why a Florida court should have jurisdiction. Any attempt to win legal redress ( if appropriate) should be made through the British courts.

 

3 hours ago, brewsterbudgen said:

I believe the case is to be filed in a Florida court (unless it's a bluff).  

 

3 hours ago, Smokey and the Bandit said:

This is why its being filed in the US, in Florida. Trump is no fool, when it comes to suing ?😅

 

There's always that itsy bitsy issue of "DISCOVERY" that seems to make Trump, (and indeed Mrs Trump, in the case of Michael Wolff), shy away from following through. "Sue! Sue! Sue!" is the Roy Cohn mantra and playbook that his devout pupil Trump has followed all his life, with some success, including the recent awards by US media companies to Trump's personal fortune.

 

 

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

Yes you can be taken to court and fined.

 

If you do not pay the fine you can be jailed. 

 

Absolutely disgusting extortion to pay for left wing propaganda that most Brits don't even want. Defund the lying grifters. 

 

...except in the US, and your name is Donald Trump. I think he still owes for a number of cases he lost, (E Jean Carroll, The Trump Organisation et al).