Melania Trump settles defamation claim against blogger

[webfact]

Melania Trump settles defamation claim against blogger

By Joseph Ax
REUTERS

 

First Lady Melania Trump and U.S. President Donald Trump (not pictured) attend the 60th Annual Red Cross Gala at Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach, Florida, U.S., February 4, 2017. REUTERS/Carlos Barria/Files

 

NEW YORK (Reuters) - First lady Melania Trump has settled a defamation lawsuit for a "substantial sum" against a Maryland blogger who wrote about unsubstantiated rumors she had worked as an escort and falsely said she suffered a breakdown, Trump's lawyer said on Tuesday.

 

"I acknowledge that these false statements were very harmful and hurtful to Mrs. Trump and her family, and therefore I sincerely apologize to Mrs. Trump, her son, her husband and her parents for making these false statements," the blogger, Webster Tarpley, wrote in a statement released by Trump's lawyer.

 

A lawyer for Tarpley confirmed the accuracy of the statement in an email and said the case had been resolved. Neither side would divulge the amount of the settlement, though Trump's lawyer Charles Harder called it a "substantial sum."

 

Trump, who is married to U.S. President Donald Trump, filed the lawsuit last year against both Tarpley and the Daily Mail, a British tabloid, after the newspaper published an article that falsely alleged she had worked for an escort service.

 

The article cited a Slovenian magazine's report that a modeling agency with which Trump worked in New York in the 1990s also served as an escort business.

 

The Daily Mail published a retraction and apology after the lawsuit was filed, saying in a statement it had not intended to state or suggest that Trump had worked as an escort.

 

Last week, a Maryland judge dismissed the claims against the Daily Mail on jurisdictional grounds while allowing the lawsuit to continue against Tarpley. The settlement ends that case.

 

On Monday, Trump filed a new $150 million lawsuit against Mail Media, the Daily Mail's owner, in New York state court, claiming the article had cost her millions of dollars in potential business.

 

Trump had a "unique, once-in-a-lifetime opportunity" to launch numerous product lines, including jewelry, apparel, shoes and cosmetics at a time when she is "one of the most photographed women in the world," according to the new lawsuit.

 

A spokesman for the Daily Mail did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Tuesday.

 

Harder, Trump's lawyer, has represented several celebrities and won a $140 million invasion of privacy verdict for wrestler Hulk Hogan against the now-defunct Gawker last year.

 

Trump, a native of Slovenia, moved to the United States in the 1990s and in 2005 married Donald Trump, who entered the White House on Jan. 20.

 

(Reporting by Joseph Ax; Editing by Daniel Wallis and Howard Goller)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-02-08

[F4UCorsair]

About time jerks hiding behind a keyboard were held accountable, and I hope it keeps him poor for years to come, but I expect he'll now hide behind bankruptcy laws.

[Chip Allen]

So defamation lawsuits are going to be the way to stifle media coverage? Not so different from another country I could name. 

[wgdanson]

Why did they have to tell us that Donald Trump was 'not pictured' in the first sentence?

 

[Fookhaht]

58 minutes ago, wgdanson said:

Why did they have to tell us that Donald Trump was 'not pictured' in the first sentence?

 

Journalistic practice--when a caption mentions someone not pictured.  

[ubonjoe]

Some off topic inflammatory posts and the expected replies have been removed.

[Enoon]

2 hours ago, wgdanson said:

Why did they have to tell us that Donald Trump was 'not pictured' in the first sentence?

 

 

And why have they used a photo of Joan Rivers for this article?

 

 

[smotherb]

4 hours ago, F4UCorsair said:

About time jerks hiding behind a keyboard were held accountable, and I hope it keeps him poor for years to come, but I expect he'll now hide behind bankruptcy laws.

Oh, I thought the blogger, Webster Tarpley, was the recipient of the substantial sum out of court settlement for simply denying his previous claims--silly me huh?

[RuamRudy]

 

6 hours ago, webfact said:

Trump had a "unique, once-in-a-lifetime opportunity" to launch numerous product lines, including jewelry, apparel, shoes and cosmetics at a time when she is "one of the most photographed women in the world," according to the new lawsuit.

Regardless of who is on the White House, this seems very unbecoming and undignified for the FLOTUS.

[boomerangutang]

           I've seen and heard evidence that Melania was a paid escort in her younger years.  Perhaps they're all fake stories.  But what if it's later proven that she was a paid escort (code for; high priced prostitute), does she then have to pay back the settlement amount?  Of course not.   

 

Personally, I don't care.  Some of my best friends are prostitutes.

[JKfarang]

4 hours ago, F4UCorsair said:

About time jerks hiding behind a keyboard were held accountable, and I hope it keeps him poor for years to come, but I expect he'll now hide behind bankruptcy laws.

 

Interesting idea considering that The Donald himself has apparently used US bankruptcy laws to his advantage on multiple occasions.

[F4UCorsair]

2 minutes ago, JKfarang said:

 

Interesting idea considering that The Donald himself has apparently used US bankruptcy laws to his advantage on multiple occasions.

But Irrelevant  to this thread, which Is about  his wife taking legal action and winning a settlement.

 

[steve187]

4 hours ago, wgdanson said:

Why did they have to tell us that Donald Trump was 'not pictured' in the first sentence?

 

he has an invisible button, like a panic button for when he tweets something dodgy

[F4UCorsair]

21 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

Regardless of who is on the White House, this seems very unbecoming and undignified for the FLOTUS.

So some loser hiding behind a keyboard can say whatever he chooses with Impunity?

 

If jerks like him  aren't challenged they see It as weakness and continue their Idiotic behaviour.  Others may even learn something from It.....as Emperor Qing said, "Kill one...frighten a thousand!"

 

Edited February 8, 2017 by F4UCorsair

[JKfarang]

1 minute ago, F4UCorsair said:

But Irrelevant  to this thread, which Is about  his wife taking legal action and winning a settlement.

 

 

I was just thinking that maybe the blogger could consult her husband for "expert" advice on avoiding the payment of any settlement. In which case, it would become relevant.

[RuamRudy]

Just now, F4UCorsair said:

So some loser hiding behind a keyboard can say whatever he chooses with Impunity?

 

 

Not at all - I imagine it would be devastating for any woman to be labelled a prostitute, regardless of whether there was merit in the claim. But the justification given for her damages claim against the Daily Mail is trashy in the extreme - it sounds like she is planning to turn the White House into an extension of QVC.

[SaintLouisBlues]

10 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

I imagine it would be devastating for any woman to be labelled a prostitute

Seriously? I thought there is a thriving subculture of memoirs from women who operate as escorts. You have only to google "call girl memoirs" to see that. Then there's the famous statement by Nell Gwynn the actress and mistress to King Charles II "Good people I am the Protestant whore" (when her carriage was mistaken for that of her Catholic rival)

[F4UCorsair]

4 minutes ago, JKfarang said:

 

I was just thinking that maybe the blogger could consult her husband for "expert" advice on avoiding the payment of any settlement. In which case, it would become relevant.

And then a reason for you to start another thread, but not relevant to this one.

[Jonmarleesco]

7 hours ago, webfact said:

Trump, who is married to U.S. President Donald Trump ...

I think one would have to be Rip van Winkle not to be well aware of that.

[Baerboxer]

5 hours ago, Chip Allen said:

So defamation lawsuits are going to be the way to stifle media coverage? Not so different from another country I could name. 

 

So let's see, you think it's ok for some prick to accuse someone, falsely, of being a prostitute and having a breakdown because they don't like her husband? a

 

And that there should be no redress at Law?

 

 

[Baerboxer]

49 minutes ago, SaintLouisBlues said:

Seriously? I thought there is a thriving subculture of memoirs from women who operate as escorts. You have only to google "call girl memoirs" to see that. Then there's the famous statement by Nell Gwynn the actress and mistress to King Charles II "Good people I am the Protestant whore" (when her carriage was mistaken for that of her Catholic rival)

 

And you decide, based on a few famous cases, that all females are happy to be labelled a prostitute?

 

I'd be quiet about that when your're out socially. Might have some life changing consequences.

[elgordo38]

5 hours ago, Chip Allen said:

So defamation lawsuits are going to be the way to stifle media coverage? Not so different from another country I could name. 

She learned this lawsuit maneuver from a master. Hire people to do work for you then stiff them and force them to sue you and your deep bench of lawyers. You usually end of loosing or running out of money and he counted on this. In the future the courts will really be getting a workout. 

Edited February 8, 2017 by elgordo38

[Tawan Dok Krating Daeng]

6 hours ago, F4UCorsair said:

About time jerks hiding behind a keyboard were held accountable, and I hope it keeps him poor for years to come, but I expect he'll now hide behind bankruptcy laws.

 

In August 2016 a Slovenian Magazine named Suzy published an article claiming that she worked for an escort agency. The claim was repeated in the UK Daily Mail and by a blogger, Mr. Webster Griffin Tarpley. Ms. Trump sued the Dail Mail in a Maryland court for $150m. The text of the complaint is here https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3038385-MelaniaTrump.html. The suit was dismissed 5 days ago. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/melania-trump-daily-mail-lawsuit-escort-claim-first-lady-us-maryland-county-judge-dismiss-mailonline-a7560931.html

 

Melania Trump did not sue the Slovenian magazine. She did sue the blogger. I wonder at the timing of the settlement so soon after the dismissal of the Daily Mail suit. One suspects the settlement would have been something along the lines of "Sorry. Won't do it again, luv".

 

These are the facts. I realize that they do not count to the Alt Right in their attempt to define reality. You do not address the core of the case which is the alleged employment by Melanie Trump as a paid escort but only the issue that an individual blogger posted a claim by another source that this is the case. So let's take the assumption that Melania Trump worked Henas a paid escort as a given. The issue then becomes the ability of people to publish information. In which case, we see the intolerance of the Alt Right for freedom of speech. We see the selfish and self serving notion that having a few dollars in your pocket allows you to consider yourself superior to others and not subject to th rules. You may use your resources to play the system to your advantage.

 

No issue of fact has been decided by either the Maryland dismissal or the settlement involving Mr. Tarpley.

 

We then get the Alt Right's remedy. A bunch of juvenile name calling and a Taliban like call for the 'lesser people' to be frightened off. Well, Mr. Tarpley is not hiding behind a keyboard. He name is known. Your name, however is not. You allege that he will use bankruptcy laws to avoid financial penalties. Rather ironic when we are talking about the Trump family. But wait...to the rich <deleted> of the world, playing the system is a sign of strength so Trump's multiple bankruptcies become smart business strategy. I guess Mr. Tarpley's right to free speech does not rise to this level in the minds of the selfish, self satisfied, 'successful' people.

 

We are then provided with some alternative facts to justify the Taliban-style reprimand of Mr. Tarpley. Kill one to frighten ten thousand. Straight from the Genghis Khan school of governance I guess. I have researched the saying. Nobody claims that Emperor Qin said this. Some say it was Sun Tzu but it is not in any translation of 'The Art of War' that i have. Others say it was Confucius. https://books.google.co.th/books?id=T3bAfe2xIH0C&pg=PA144&lpg=PA144&dq=clutterbuck+kill+one+to+terrorise+thousands&source=bl&ots=zS5xFshB2m&sig=fjWn87ZFm6PXbnVKPtDOO240kxY&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiXg7nW-__RAhUKOY8KHRlxBJAQ6AEIGjAA#v=onepage&q=clutterbuck kill one to terrorise thousands&f=false

 

Henry Prunkun, from Charles Sturt University quotes Clutterbuck in his essay "The First Pillar of Terror – Kill One, Frighten Ten Thousand: a Critical Discussion of the Doctrinal Shift Associated with the ‘New Terrorism’ "

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1350/pojo.2014.87.3.660. In fact he misattributes the quote to Sun Tzu. In any case, it was not who you said it was. Should I be surprised?

 

Is your fake outrage consistent with Virtue Signalling? Is your propagation of Alt Right PC an indication that you are a snowflake? You are outraged on behalf of Melanie Trump for no other reason than you blind devotion to her husband, who is not even your Leader - or perhaps it is lust driving you. In any case, the most unqualified unfit and unready person in the World to occupy the White House has no reason to expect that he or is family can manufacture their history and image with impunity just because of wealth and temporary political power. I hope keyboard warriors across the world continue to prod and pick and tease at any and all bits of information to expose this gigantic, woeful caricature that is now known as 45.

Edited February 8, 2017 by Tawan Dok Krating Daeng

[wprime]

5 hours ago, Chip Allen said:

So defamation lawsuits are going to be the way to stifle media coverage? Not so different from another country I could name. 

 

There's a difference, in the US truth is an absolute defense against defamation - see Crown v. Zenger.

 

In Thailand there is no such precedent.

[IAMHERE]

7 hours ago, Chip Allen said:

So defamation lawsuits are going to be the way to stifle media coverage? Not so different from another country I could name. 

better not

[Chip Allen]

2 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

So let's see, you think it's ok for some prick to accuse someone, falsely, of being a prostitute and having a breakdown because they don't like her husband? a

 

And that there should be no redress at Law?

 

 

In politics, you are fair game. That's the way it has always been and that's the way it should stay. If you can't stand the heat, get your ass AND your family OUT of politics. All's fair. Their wealth makes them immune to most any repercussions anyway. They CERTAINLY aren't concerned about their reputation. This was just political revenge by petulant, spoiled children.

[Chip Allen]

3 hours ago, F4UCorsair said:

So some loser hiding behind a keyboard can say whatever he chooses with Impunity?

 

If jerks like him  aren't challenged they see It as weakness and continue their Idiotic behaviour.  

 

It's called "Freedom of Speech". Certainly not relevant in Thailand, but the USA has held it as the highest ideal. Looks like those days are ending. Money rules.

[Opl]

"Melania Trump Sues the Daily Mail for Hurting Her 'Once-in-a-Lifetime Opportunity' to Make Millions as First Lady"

 

Trump’s lawyer, Charles Harder, argues for the first time that the article damaged the first lady’s “once-in-a-lifetime opportunity” to make millions by launching a “broad-based commercial brand.”

 

http://people.com/politics/melania-trump-sues-daily-mail-millions-first-lady/

 

What's at stake in Melania Trump lawsuit: The first lady's reputation, earning potential

 

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/02/07/politics/melania-trump-lawsuit-earning-potential/index.html

 

"... But Harder and a White House spokeswoman -- in identically worded statements -- both denied the first lady intends to profit while in her current position, despite language used in the suit to imply she would be pocketing millions in endorsement money while her husband is in office."

 

 

Edited February 8, 2017 by Opl

[Ulysses G.]

4 hours ago, Chip Allen said:

In politics, you are fair game. That's the way it has always been and that's the way it should stay. 

You are NOT fair game for defamation. That is why the blogging idiot had to appologize for making false statements and was punished financially.

[Tawan Dok Krating Daeng]

1 hour ago, Ulysses G. said:

You are NOT fair game for defamation. That is why the blogging idiot had to appologize for making false statements and was punished financially.

 

A settlement means that the 'blogger' did not HAVE to apologise. He chose to accept whatever deal was on the table. Wealthy people are able to use their wealth to skew the system. It may have been that the defendant did not have the resources for a legal battle. Since I do not believe that he originated the statement against Ms. Trump that she thought defamatory, but merely published the Suzi allegation, he may have had strong legal grounds to mount a defense. We will never know because it is now all under wraps.

 

Public persons are fair game and well they should be. Nor for slander or libel based on untruths but for scrutiny and reportage. The truth is an absolute defense against charges of defamation but it takes resources to establish the truth. There are other defenses against defamation. Strengthening defamation laws in the US would be contrary to the idea of equal protection.