Posted on 05/17/2016 5:24:40 PM PDT by GrandJediMasterYoda
Donald Trump attorney demands retraction from New York Times
A Trump Organization attorney suggested Monday night that Donald Trump might sue the New York Times over a Sunday front page story about his behavior around women. Then on Tuesday morning, another Trump attorney said "I don't think that this is going to end up in litigation," but called on The Times to retract the story and apologize. The newspaper will not be doing that. It is standing firmly behind the story, which was the product of weeks of intensive reporting. The controversy is the latest illustration of how Trump runs against the media while simultaneously courting media attention.
(Excerpt) Read more at money.cnn.com ...
DT is a political candidate and public figure who voluntarily thrust himself (no pun intended) into the public view
as such, he has essentially no viable legal basis to sue for defamation and the NYT knows it.
but of course, the threat makes for a good (refutation and) headline for DT
Megan Twohey and Megyn Kelly. How come incredibly smug women are named Megan?
Most definitely! Big time!
I’m no lawyer so I don’t know, but that sounds like a crazy law. You mean to tell me ANY news organization can basically attribute anything to a candidate? I think you are right because some of the stuff I read is so far out there it’s crazy.
You can read about the male reporter here, in an older article questioning his objectivity. (Hint: His “tweets” set forth in this article show him be a rabid Trump hater).
The “actual malice” standard applies, and yes is difficult to prove. What would be interesting is for an interviewee such as Ms. Brewer Lane to record the interview herself, including the assurances made by the reporter. Then, if it can be shown that the newspaper printed untrue things and it the recording could prove that they knew them to be false at the time, then he should be able to win a lawsuit.
chances of ever getting such evidence.....asymptotic to zero
Trump probably has no legal grounds to sue, but his former girlfriend might be a different story, if what she says about the Times’ misrepresentation of her quotes and violating of their deal is true. All legalities aside, it does take some major clangers to make a big, self-aggrandizing, moralistic show out of standing behind your story when your #1 source is publicly condemning it as a giant pack of lies and misquotations.
without a candidate’s being able to prove actual malice, and that’s a real reach believe me..... yes, pretty much the press can print just about any damned thing it wishes about a political candidate
The more Trump fights the leftist slime machine the better he’s gonna’ look to the voters.
the standard for defamation of a political candidate or public official is along the lines of NYT v. Sullivan, which is approximately like this.... “actual knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard of same”
and that’s almost impossible for a plaintiff to prove in most cases, and as a voluntary public figure there’s no question but that DT would have the burden of proof
besides, it usually takes years for such a claim, or almost any real case nowadays for that matter, to work its way through the courts (ask Barry Goldwater, for instance, his 1964 case didn’t get decided until some four or five years later and then there was appeal...) point being, 99 percent of the litigation threat is just “I will consume your firm’s legal defense budget”...
FYI.
SUE what is left of those ba$tard$. Take it all!!
After what he alleged about Cruz’s dad being an associate of Oswald?
Did he ever hear the 5+ years of “Bushitler” shouts from the Left? Does he not know what passes for “politics” these days?
Does he plan to spend 4 years of his presidency taking everyone to court for slander or libel?
Not exactly accurate. It Trump can show actual malice (probably not that tough wrt the Slimes), he could still have a case.
Well said.
I wonder if there are a couple hot mike recordings that could go to actual knowledge or reckless disregard standards.
TWB
The alternative is to challenge the reporters to a duel, hehe.
its possible
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.