It’s complete BS! The guy was reelected to the presidency, has earned $ 2 billion in the past year and seems bullet proof. Let’s face it, his supporters thinks he farts rainbows and there’s a pot of gold waiting for them at the other end. You can’t harm the reputation of someone who commits all his crimes out in the open and brags about them.
His supporters would NEVER accuse their gold-plated manly man of farting rainbows. Rainbows now have no meaning to them other than the fear that being in the presence of one will turn them gay.
The lawyers who filed the suit should have anticipated the discovery and their failure to do so was legal malpractice, exposing Trump to reputational and economic harm. That harm will come when the lawyers amend the lawsuit and find themselves on the wrong end of the BBC’s request for damages for having to expend time and money on defending a claim that was dropped only because the client voluntarily decided not to pursue it. If I were the judge, once the amended case was filed, I would enter a show cause order on Trump why he should not not be sanctioned and set a hearing at which he was required to testify under oath. Failure to appear would result in dismissal with prejudice along with his being barred from any further nonsense suits for two years. Grow a bigger pair!
Um. If the BBC’s 12 second montage caused such irreparable damage to trump’s “brand” and reputation (which is indistinguishable from a poorly built outhouse based purely on trump himself, not some British news clip), how did trump go on to get elected? Again?
Honestly, I wish the Brits were even more obvious in their allegations.
Because trump DID instigate that insurrection attempt. It was planned.
Trump has never not cheated in his life, or at least tried to. Why on earth would he approach the 2020 or 2024 elections honestly? It's just not in him. His future was on the line 'cause he knew he's committed crimes and would go to prison. That's why he has to stay in power at any cost--even if he has to destroy the country.
Yup. If he loses power, he can’t keep his thousands of tiny hands on the thousands of lying crimes he’s trying to keep track of and hide (and not always successfully). He’s the very epitome of entitlement and core-deep corruption. And is a textbook malignant narcissist.
All he cares about is himself. Solely. Only. That’s it.
This may seem like a non sequitur, but it kinda isn’t: I thank God and the Universe that the trump’s do not have pets.
I hope this suit will stand as an example for others to follow when Trump continues this behavior of suing anyone he feels wrongs him - because he will. Discovery will never be his friend but it certainly can be ours. Thank you for walking us through the culmination of some of his other suits. They fall out of the news so quickly (by design) and we move on. The pattern of throwing law against the wall to see what sticks and then not discussing how it's ultimately cleaned up needs to be talked about - loudly.
My understanding is that his lawyers started out with solid reputations. Hard to understand why they are so willing to risk it all — perhaps for the money?
Not sure if they could sue him back - but if they decided to do a little "leaking" it could cause him some severe embarrassment. Journalists DO talk to each other. I'm quite sure Ian Hislop could tell a thing or two.
What Richard Friedman said: "a show cause order on Trump why he should not be sanctioned and set a hearing at which he was required to testify under oath. Failure to appear would result in dismissal with prejudice along with his being barred from any further nonsense suits for two years. Grow a bigger pair!"
I get most of my international news from BBC and The Guardian. As with any outlet, you have to use common sense (BBC in particular is sometimes a little confused about how the peculiarly American system works, but both are great alternative perspectives through which to view ourselves. (Plus The Guardian has a great news gathering system worldwide that provides a great deal more context that Americans really should pay more attention too.)
What I want to know is if a class-action lawsuit can be brought against Trump by the people of the United States for the death of all of our security by a thousand cuts. That's what is happening here and we should have legal recourse. I don't see how, under the terms of the US Constitution, we should have to sit here and take this.
Celeste, I was just thinking this last week!!! Our universal "legal injuries" are now multiple and manifest. Cutting pharma support for seniors -- are MAGAs truly that idiotic? Our only action right now is to Vote Blue No Matter Who on Nov. 3.
I'm at the end of my patience with piddling around. Either we bring a massive suit to stop it or we storm the WH and drag him out. The election will solve nothing. But no one will believe that until it happens.
Thank you, because your comments are always wise. It's naive to believe the election will go as always, Dems will triumph, and the monster will be tamed. That can't happen. These people are playing for keeps and, obviously from the horrors we see every single day, they will not give up power. Who would make them do so? Congress? Nope. SCOTUS? Nope. It will not be that easy at all. That's the facts.
Last night, I was reading a detailed report about Rump's various plots to derail mail-in voting, abetted by USPS. Even if SCOTUS rejects his latest attempt in that regard (no sure bet there), the process is likely f'd for the midterms, at least in many red states. IOW, he's laying the basis to reject the outcome on the basis of chaotic voting rules/procedures, at the very least.
The "vote harder" and "vote blue no matter who" people may be in for a rude awakening.
I always keep fighting but I'm a realist, a scientist, I make conclusion based on facts. We haven't seen any signs this administration will "concede" and it has all the dirty-fighting helpers it needs. I get frustrated that no one seems to be thinking one step ahead. Here in PA, Shapiro says PA has always had free and fair elections. Honey, THIS ain't "always". We need to make anticipatory plans and I just don't see that happening.
The SCOTUS ruling protects 47 from prosecution for anything that can be considered within his presidential powers. Once he’s out of office we can try, but he likely won’t physically last long enough to ever face justice on this earthly plane.
Fine, he'll be dead. At least he'll be gone. I'm ok with that. If the rest of that crowd had any real power, they'd have figured out that they are already on a slippery slope, and it is not going to be easy to get off it.
That great class action of legal recourse on our behalf is our system of elections, in which each of us has a voice. We have complete control over out nation's future IF we keep standing up, speaking out, speaking up, and refusing to allow the Trump apparatus to undermine how we make our decisions. Haven't you noticed the many thousands of people out there each doing what they can, until it reaches a pitch it can't be ignored? And the analists and the polls are showing that we are gaining. We need you to be out there with us, doing whatever you are capable of, no matter how small. It is adding up. Yes, the courts have a critical role in maintaining our system holding, but it is OUR job to hold those people in government positions from abusing their powers. US.
Love it. I immediately thought about the fact that talc is the softest mineral, so the acronym could also refer to the fact that he's soft in the head…
I vote for “no one.” My sense is that in his entire life, no one has ever told Trump “no.” Thus we have ended up with a president who is not only uninformed, but malevolently so.
I don’t know why, after all this time, trump hasn’t been named a Vexatious Litigant by the courts. His whole life, when he screws up, he calls some smarmy lawyer to bring a lawsuit and get out of it. He even tried to get out of the E Jean Carroll situation AFTER the court finally gave her the awarded judgement money. He doesn’t need to be clogging our court system with these ridiculous lawsuits!
It's a shame that "pattern of behavior" can't be used to disallow what are obviously suits brought to harass. Trump's history of loss in litigation is legendary. It's clear he uses the legal system to punish, not to seek justice.
trumpty dumpty should have to pay for BBC legal expenses at the end of this…
Yes especially since he’s probably getting his representation for free…remember all those law firms that made deals with him?
Trumpty Dumpty! 😆 😂
It’s complete BS! The guy was reelected to the presidency, has earned $ 2 billion in the past year and seems bullet proof. Let’s face it, his supporters thinks he farts rainbows and there’s a pot of gold waiting for them at the other end. You can’t harm the reputation of someone who commits all his crimes out in the open and brags about them.
Agreed. But can we substitute "amassed" for "earned"? He hasn't earned a goddamned penny, probably in his whole life.
His supporters would NEVER accuse their gold-plated manly man of farting rainbows. Rainbows now have no meaning to them other than the fear that being in the presence of one will turn them gay.
He farts clean coal emissions.
The lawyers who filed the suit should have anticipated the discovery and their failure to do so was legal malpractice, exposing Trump to reputational and economic harm. That harm will come when the lawyers amend the lawsuit and find themselves on the wrong end of the BBC’s request for damages for having to expend time and money on defending a claim that was dropped only because the client voluntarily decided not to pursue it. If I were the judge, once the amended case was filed, I would enter a show cause order on Trump why he should not not be sanctioned and set a hearing at which he was required to testify under oath. Failure to appear would result in dismissal with prejudice along with his being barred from any further nonsense suits for two years. Grow a bigger pair!
The orange blob and his band of crooked lawyers were counting on BBC to cave and negotiate a settlement.
The orange blob and company are total idiotic fools.
He hires such nincompoops. Cannot tell his xss from a hole in the ground these days.
Brilliant suggestion!
Is he represented here by one of these firms that decided to give T. free services? I won't be surprised by a kind of soft sabotage on their side...
Um. If the BBC’s 12 second montage caused such irreparable damage to trump’s “brand” and reputation (which is indistinguishable from a poorly built outhouse based purely on trump himself, not some British news clip), how did trump go on to get elected? Again?
Honestly, I wish the Brits were even more obvious in their allegations.
Because trump DID instigate that insurrection attempt. It was planned.
Agree.
Trump NEVER says it outright. It's always "Nudge, nudge, wink, wink. . ."
How did he get 'elected' again? That's a question for Elon Musk.
Omigosh, yes! I doubt seriously if he won honestly. In fact, I’d bet a big chunk of money that he didn’t.
Trump has never not cheated in his life, or at least tried to. Why on earth would he approach the 2020 or 2024 elections honestly? It's just not in him. His future was on the line 'cause he knew he's committed crimes and would go to prison. That's why he has to stay in power at any cost--even if he has to destroy the country.
Yup. If he loses power, he can’t keep his thousands of tiny hands on the thousands of lying crimes he’s trying to keep track of and hide (and not always successfully). He’s the very epitome of entitlement and core-deep corruption. And is a textbook malignant narcissist.
All he cares about is himself. Solely. Only. That’s it.
This may seem like a non sequitur, but it kinda isn’t: I thank God and the Universe that the trump’s do not have pets.
I hope this suit will stand as an example for others to follow when Trump continues this behavior of suing anyone he feels wrongs him - because he will. Discovery will never be his friend but it certainly can be ours. Thank you for walking us through the culmination of some of his other suits. They fall out of the news so quickly (by design) and we move on. The pattern of throwing law against the wall to see what sticks and then not discussing how it's ultimately cleaned up needs to be talked about - loudly.
The lesson is one just has to stand up to this orange idiot-wish more law firms , universities etc had learned this earlier-
Stand up to him and he folds like a cheap suit -
You ever notice that his suits are 5 sizes too big-to hide his fat ass
I can still see his diapered ass because the back of his suits stick out. Ugh
Yep. Saw a picture of him the other day - and I thought his jacket had got caught over the back of his chair.
Turned out it was just his ass. . . and it's wrappings.
His DIAPERED fat ass, you mean?
One of tRump's true superpowers is finding incompetent lawyers to represent him and risk disbarment.
My understanding is that his lawyers started out with solid reputations. Hard to understand why they are so willing to risk it all — perhaps for the money?
He pays all his personal legal bills with OPM. You might be right.
Should Trump drop his suit, could the BBC turn around and sue him right back?
They should, whether they can or not.
Not sure if they could sue him back - but if they decided to do a little "leaking" it could cause him some severe embarrassment. Journalists DO talk to each other. I'm quite sure Ian Hislop could tell a thing or two.
What Richard Friedman said: "a show cause order on Trump why he should not be sanctioned and set a hearing at which he was required to testify under oath. Failure to appear would result in dismissal with prejudice along with his being barred from any further nonsense suits for two years. Grow a bigger pair!"
When did that happen? I was out for a few hours.
Proposed by Richard Friedman, not a done deal.
Excellent news! BBC is good for something besides detective shows & Jools Holland.
I get most of my international news from BBC and The Guardian. As with any outlet, you have to use common sense (BBC in particular is sometimes a little confused about how the peculiarly American system works, but both are great alternative perspectives through which to view ourselves. (Plus The Guardian has a great news gathering system worldwide that provides a great deal more context that Americans really should pay more attention too.)
As do I. My attempt at humor fell flat.
What I want to know is if a class-action lawsuit can be brought against Trump by the people of the United States for the death of all of our security by a thousand cuts. That's what is happening here and we should have legal recourse. I don't see how, under the terms of the US Constitution, we should have to sit here and take this.
Celeste, I was just thinking this last week!!! Our universal "legal injuries" are now multiple and manifest. Cutting pharma support for seniors -- are MAGAs truly that idiotic? Our only action right now is to Vote Blue No Matter Who on Nov. 3.
I'm at the end of my patience with piddling around. Either we bring a massive suit to stop it or we storm the WH and drag him out. The election will solve nothing. But no one will believe that until it happens.
Agree 100% on your last point, Celeste.
Thank you, because your comments are always wise. It's naive to believe the election will go as always, Dems will triumph, and the monster will be tamed. That can't happen. These people are playing for keeps and, obviously from the horrors we see every single day, they will not give up power. Who would make them do so? Congress? Nope. SCOTUS? Nope. It will not be that easy at all. That's the facts.
Thanks! Back at ya!
Last night, I was reading a detailed report about Rump's various plots to derail mail-in voting, abetted by USPS. Even if SCOTUS rejects his latest attempt in that regard (no sure bet there), the process is likely f'd for the midterms, at least in many red states. IOW, he's laying the basis to reject the outcome on the basis of chaotic voting rules/procedures, at the very least.
The "vote harder" and "vote blue no matter who" people may be in for a rude awakening.
I always keep fighting but I'm a realist, a scientist, I make conclusion based on facts. We haven't seen any signs this administration will "concede" and it has all the dirty-fighting helpers it needs. I get frustrated that no one seems to be thinking one step ahead. Here in PA, Shapiro says PA has always had free and fair elections. Honey, THIS ain't "always". We need to make anticipatory plans and I just don't see that happening.
The SCOTUS ruling protects 47 from prosecution for anything that can be considered within his presidential powers. Once he’s out of office we can try, but he likely won’t physically last long enough to ever face justice on this earthly plane.
Fine, he'll be dead. At least he'll be gone. I'm ok with that. If the rest of that crowd had any real power, they'd have figured out that they are already on a slippery slope, and it is not going to be easy to get off it.
That great class action of legal recourse on our behalf is our system of elections, in which each of us has a voice. We have complete control over out nation's future IF we keep standing up, speaking out, speaking up, and refusing to allow the Trump apparatus to undermine how we make our decisions. Haven't you noticed the many thousands of people out there each doing what they can, until it reaches a pitch it can't be ignored? And the analists and the polls are showing that we are gaining. We need you to be out there with us, doing whatever you are capable of, no matter how small. It is adding up. Yes, the courts have a critical role in maintaining our system holding, but it is OUR job to hold those people in government positions from abusing their powers. US.
The conclusion to the BBC case is looking pretty obvious: TACO. Anything requiring honesty from trump or complying with the law results in TACO.
How about TALC - Trump Always Loses Cases.
Love it. I immediately thought about the fact that talc is the softest mineral, so the acronym could also refer to the fact that he's soft in the head…
And the squishiness in the seat of his pants.
Yes, but ICK!!
Thank you, Jay. An outstanding report. Bravo, BBC! 👏🏼
I vote for “no one.” My sense is that in his entire life, no one has ever told Trump “no.” Thus we have ended up with a president who is not only uninformed, but malevolently so.
I don’t know why, after all this time, trump hasn’t been named a Vexatious Litigant by the courts. His whole life, when he screws up, he calls some smarmy lawyer to bring a lawsuit and get out of it. He even tried to get out of the E Jean Carroll situation AFTER the court finally gave her the awarded judgement money. He doesn’t need to be clogging our court system with these ridiculous lawsuits!
I’ve lost track — isn’t he facing another lawsuit from E.Jean or someone for close to $100 million?
It's a shame that "pattern of behavior" can't be used to disallow what are obviously suits brought to harass. Trump's history of loss in litigation is legendary. It's clear he uses the legal system to punish, not to seek justice.
>60 and counting.
If the BBC succeeds in getting Trump's data, are they free to disclose it publicly or must they keep it confidential?
Wouldn't it have to be produced in court?
I didn't follow the O.J. Simpson case - but I'd watch this one, complete with a six pack and a bucket of pop-corn.
Great question. Anonymous could always leak them.
No longer Anonymous. Miles Taylor - have seen him from time to time on MS NOW.