Connect with us

Published

on

Why would the most notoriously cash-strapped man in America waste money on frivolous lawsuits?

On Monday, Donald Trumpwhose lawyers recently announced that he cant come up with the money to post a $454 million bond in his civil fraud casefired off yet another suit against a news organization that reported facts he didnt like. The targets this time are ABC News and its anchor George Stephanopoulos, who Trump alleges defamed him by stating that Trump had been found liable for raping E. Jean Carroll.

The case looks like a sure loser. Trump was technically found liable under New York law for sexual abuse, not for rape, but the judge in the civil case ruled that, by forcibly penetrating Carrolls vagina with his fingers, Mr. Trump in fact did rape Ms. Carroll as that term commonly is used and understood. But no matter. The Stephanopoulos suit slots into a well-worn groove for Trump, who for years has lodged periodic lawsuits against alleged purveyors of fake news about him. Targets have included The Washington Post, The New York Times, CNN, Bob Woodward, and a Wisconsin TV station that ran an attack ad against him during the 2020 campaign. Trump has even gone after the board of the Pulitzer Prizes for awarding Pulitzers to the Post and the Times for their coverage of his connections to Russia.

Filing these suits has been costly for Trumpor rather, for donors to his campaign and affiliated political action committees, who have footed millions of dollars in legal fees. Not one of Trumps media lawsuits has ever succeeded, nor is one ever likely to, given both the underlying facts and the towering bar a president or former president faces in proving defamation. In one case against The New York Times, a judge found Trumps argument so flimsy that he ordered Trump to pay the Times legal fees. In other cases, such as the one involving the Wisconsin station, the suit was quietly withdrawn a few months after it was filed.

David A. Graham: Trumps money problems are very real and very bad

So why does he keep doing it? On a basic level, this appears to be just Trump being Trumppeevish, headstrong, and narcissistic. For decades, his love-hate relationship with reporters has tended to flare into legal action, as it did in 2006 when he sued the writer Tim OBrien over a few pages in a book that questioned Trumps personal wealth. As Trump told me in an interview in 2016, he knew he couldnt win that suit (he didnt) but brought it anyway to score a few points. I spent a couple of bucks on legal fees, and [OBriens publisher] spent a whole lot more, he said then. I did it to make his life miserable, which Im happy about.

But Trumps quixotic legal crusades are not as irrational as they appear. Suing the press serves as a branding exercise and a fundraising tool. The lawsuits show his supporters that Trump is taking the fight to those lying journalistsso wont you contribute a few dollars to the cause? They thus have become an end unto themselves, part of an infinite loop: sue, publicize the suit, solicit and collect donations, sue again. The cases may be weak on the legal merits, but they further his narrative of being persecuted by the radical left media, Brett Kappel, a campaign-finance lawyer who has researched Trumps legal actions against the press, told me.

This narrative has been a fixture of Trumps fundraising pitches for years. A few weeks after his inauguration, in 2017, one of his fundraising committees sent out an email urging donors to do your part to fight back against the medias attacks and deceptions by sending contributions that would help cut through the noise of news reports. Even before Trump filed a lawsuit against CNN in August 2022 (for describing his election lies as the Big Lie), his campaign was using the nonexistent suit to drum up contributions. Im calling on my best and most dedicated supporters to add their names to stand with me in my impending LAWSUIT against Fake News CNN, read a fundraising email. A second email sent out under Trumps name a few hours later struck a sterner tone: Im going to look over the names of the first 45 Patriots who added their names to publicly stand with their President AGAINST CNN.

When Trump got around to filing the suit two months later, the appeals began anew. I am SUING the Corrupt News Network (CNN) for DEFAMING and SLANDERING my name, the campaign email read, in a chaotic typographical style reminiscent of a ransom note. Theyve called me a LIAR, and so far, Ive been proven RIGHT about EVERYTHING. Remember, when they come after ME, they are really coming after YOU Im calling on YOU to rush in a donation of ANY AMOUNT RIGHT NOW to make a statement that you PROUDLY stand with me. The suit was dismissed last year by a federal judge appointed by Trump. Trump is appealing.

Of course, the cost of suing news organizations is a pittance compared with what Trumps donors are spending on his criminal defense. But it isnt cheap. According to Federal Election Commission records culled by Kappel, the Trump-controlled Save America PAC shelled out nearly $500,000 to the firm that sued the Pulitzer Prize board on Trumps behalf in 2022. It paid $211,000 last year to another law firm that handled Trumps litigation against CNN, among other matters, and an additional $203,000 to the firm handling the appeal.

The biggest recipient, by far, has been the attorney Charles Harder, the defamation specialist who represented Hulk Hogan in his successful suit against Gawker Media in 2016. From early 2018 to May 2021, according to FEC records, Harder took $4.4 million in fees from Trump-affiliated organizations. At one point in 2020, Harders Beverly Hills firm received more money than any other firm doing work for Trump.

From the January/February 2024 issue: Is journalism ready?

Harders work on Trumps behalf didnt produce anything close to his career-making Hogan verdict, which resulted in a $140 million award that drove Gawker into bankruptcy. Harder took the lead in Trumps effort to suppress publication of Michael Wolffs book Fire and Fury in 2018; he sent cease-and-desist letters to Wolff and his publisher, Henry Holt and Co., before the books release, claiming that it contained libelous passages. The book was released as scheduled and became a best seller, and Trump didnt sue. In 2020, Harder handled Trumps lawsuit against the Times, alleging that an opinion piece by the former Times editor Max Frankel was defamatory. A judge dismissed that suit in 2021. (Harder, who no longer represents Trump, declined to comment for this story.)

Whether Trumps beat-the-press strategy is a net financial winner, once all the donations are collected and the attorney fees are subtracted, is hard to say. But Trumps filing of another hopeless lawsuit this week suggests that the math may be in his favor. Why bother paying lawyers millions of dollars to sue and appeal if the return on investment is less than zero? Trump may be petty and irrational, but he has never been accused of neglecting his own financial interests. (A Trump spokesperson didnt return a request for comment.)

At the moment, of course, Trump has much bigger headaches. As of this writing, hes days away from having his assets seized to satisfy that civil-fraud judgment. His overall fundraising has lagged President Joe Bidens. And he is burning through his supporters money to pay for his criminal defense. Despite all that, he still finds a way to keep filing lawsuits against the media. You almost have to admire the commitment.

Continue Reading

World

Trapped journalists rescued after mob sets fire to Bangladesh newspaper offices

Published

on

By

Trapped journalists rescued after mob sets fire to Bangladesh newspaper offices

Protesters have stormed the headquarters of two major newspapers in Bangladesh, amid widespread unrest following the death of a political activist. 

A mob set fire to the offices of the Bengali-language Prothom Alo daily newspaper and the English-language Daily Star in the capital Dhaka, leaving journalists and other staff stuck inside.

The Bengali-language Prothom Alo daily  was one of the two newspapers that were targeted. Pic: AP.
Image:
The Bengali-language Prothom Alo daily was one of the two newspapers that were targeted. Pic: AP.

One of the Daily Star’s journalists, Zyma Islam, wrote on Facebook: “I can’t breathe anymore. There’s too much smoke.”

Both dailies stopped updating their online editions after the attacks and did not publish broadsheets on Friday.

Troops were deployed to the Star building and firefighters had to rescue the journalists trapped inside. The blaze was brought under control early on Friday.

The latest protests erupted a year after the July Revolution ousted PM Sheikh Hasina. Pic: PA.
Image:
The latest protests erupted a year after the July Revolution ousted PM Sheikh Hasina. Pic: PA.

Political activist Sharif Osman Hadi died in hospital late on Thursday, six days after the youth leader was shot while riding on a rickshaw in Dhaka.

Bangladesh’s interim government urged people on Friday to resist violence as police and paramilitary troops fanned out
across the capital and other cities following the protests overnight. They have sparked concerns of fresh unrest ahead of national elections, which Mr Hadi had been due to stand in.

More on Bangladesh

He was a prominent activist in the political uprising last year that forced the then Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina to flee the country. Mr Hadi spent six days on life support in a hospital in Singapore before he succumbed to his injuries.

Mr Hadi died a week after he was shot by a man on a motorbike. Pic: PA.
Image:
Mr Hadi died a week after he was shot by a man on a motorbike. Pic: PA.

Hundreds of protesters took to the streets following news of Mr Hadi’s death on Thursday night, where they rallied at Shahbagh Square near the Dhaka University campus, according to media reports.

A group of demonstrators gathered outside the head office of the Muslim-majority country’s leading Bengali-language Prothom Alo daily, before vandalising the building and setting it on fire.

A few hundred yards away, another group of protesters pushed into the Daily Star offices and set fire to the building. The protesters are believed to have targeted the papers for their alleged links with India and closeness to Bangladesh‘s interim leader, Nobel Peace Prize laureate Muhammad Yunus.

Read more:
Ex-Bangladesh PM Sheikh Hasina sentenced to death
UK MP Tulip Siddiq sentenced by Bangladeshi court

Although calm had returned to much of the ⁠country on Friday morning, protesters carrying national flags and placards
continued demonstrating at Shahbagh Square in Dhaka, chanting slogans and vowing not to return until justice was served.

👉 Tap here to follow The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim wherever you get your podcasts 👈

Last year’s mass uprising erupted from student protests against a quota system that awarded 30% of government jobs to relatives of veterans.

The July 2024 protest, which resulted in as many as 1,400 deaths according to the United Nations, was dubbed the first “Gen Z” revolution.

Bangladesh’s former prime minister Sheikh Hasina Wazed was forced to resign in August 2024 and fled to India. She was later sentenced to death in absentia.

Sheikh Hasina was sentenced to death in absentia. Pic: AP
Image:
Sheikh Hasina was sentenced to death in absentia. Pic: AP

Dr Yunus was then sworn in as interim leader.

The country’s Islamists and other opponents of Ms Hasida have accused her government for being subservient to India.

Mr Hadi was a fierce critic of Ms Hasina and neighbouring India.

He had planned to run as an independent candidate in a constituency in Dhaka at the next national elections due to be held in February.

Authorities said they had identified the suspects in Mr Hadi’s shooting, and the assassin was also likely to have fled to India. Two men on a motorbike followed Hadi and one opened fire before they fled the scene.

Continue Reading

World

TikTok faces legal action over moderator cuts

Published

on

By

TikTok faces legal action over moderator cuts

TikTok is being threatened with legal action over cuts to its UK online safety teams.

In August, the social media company announced more than 400 workers would lose their jobs, with AI replacing some of the workers and other jobs being rehired abroad.

TikTok is being accused of threatening those safety workers with redundancy days before they were due to vote on forming a union.

Read more: TikTok moderators warn users may be at risk

Now, two moderators have sent a legal letter to TikTok laying out the terms of a potential legal case on grounds of unlawful detriment and automatic unfair dismissal.

Unlawful detriment is when an employer treats a worker unfairly because they used a protected employment right, for example, being a union representative, asking for flexible working or whistleblowing about the company.

“In June, TikTok said it was going to hire hundreds more content moderators, then two months later, they fired everyone,” said Stella Caram, head of legal at Foxglove, a non-profit supporting the moderators.

More on Internet Safety

“What changed? Workers exercised their legal right to try to form a trade union. This is obvious, blatant and unlawful union-busting,” she said.

Moderators gathered to protest the redundancies in London
Image:
Moderators gathered to protest the redundancies in London

TikTok has been given one month to respond to the legal claim.

A TikTok spokesperson said: “We once again strongly reject this baseless claim.

“These changes were part of a wider global reorganisation, as we evolve our global operating model for Trust and Safety with the benefit of technological advancements to continue maximising safety for our users.”

As well as Foxglove, the two moderators launching the case are working with the United Tech & Allied Workers (UTAW), part of the Communication Workers’ Union, and law firm Leigh Day.


TikTok safety fears as hundreds of moderators leave company

In exclusive interviews last month, three whistleblowers told Sky News the cuts would put UK users at risk, a claim repeated by Julio Miguel Franco, one of the moderators behind the legal action.

“TikTok needs to tell the truth,” he said.

“When it says AI can do our job of keeping people safe on TikTok, it knows that’s rubbish.

“Instead, they want to steal our jobs and send them to other countries where they can pay people less and treat them worse. The end result is TikTok becomes less safe for everyone.”

Read more on social media:
Online sleuths and fake news: The world of missing people
Parents of sextortion victim who took his own life sue Meta

Internal documents seen by Sky News show that TikTok planned to keep its human moderators in London for at least the rest of 2025.

The documents lay out the increasing need for dedicated moderators because of the growing volume and complexity of moderation.

TikTok’s head of governance, Ali Law, also told MPs in February that “human moderators … have to use their nuance, skills and training” to be able to moderate hateful behaviour, misinformation and misleading information.

Dame Chi Onwurah speaks at the House of Commons. File pic: Reuters
Image:
Dame Chi Onwurah speaks at the House of Commons. File pic: Reuters

After a series of letters between TikTok and MPs, Dame Chi Onwurah, chair of the science and technology select committee, said she was “deeply” concerned about the cuts.

“There is a real risk to the lives of TikTok users,” she said.


Is TikTok improving safety with AI?

Last month, in an exclusive sitdown with Sky News, however, Mr Law said user safety would not be compromised.

“We set a high benchmark when it comes to rolling out new moderation technology.

“In particular, we make sure that we satisfy ourselves that the output of existing moderation processes is either matched or exceeded by anything that we’re doing on a new basis.

“We also make sure the changes are introduced on a gradual basis with human oversight so that if there isn’t a level of delivery in line with what we expect, we can address that.”

Continue Reading

World

Australia plans gun buyback scheme in response to Bondi Beach killings

Published

on

By

Australia plans gun buyback scheme in response to Bondi Beach killings

Australia is set to launch a national gun buyback scheme in response to the Bondi Beach terrorist shootings.

Fifteen people were killed and dozens wounded on Sunday at the Sydney beach after two gunmen opened fire at people celebrating Hanukkah, the Jewish festival of lights.

In the aftermath of the shooting, which authorities say appears to have been inspired by the Islamic State, patrols and policing across the country have been ramped up in an effort to prevent further violence.

Both the federal government and the state government of New South Wales, where Sydney is located, have pledged reforms, including tightening gun control laws, to prevent the threat of further violence in a nation with an estimated four million firearms.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has said the government would also strengthen hate laws. Announcing the gun buyback scheme, he cited the response to a previous Australian mass shooting – when a lone gunman killed 35 people in Tasmania’s Port Arthur in 1996.

“Australia’s gun laws were last substantially reformed in the wake of the Port Arthur tragedy,” Mr Albanese said on Friday. “The terrible events at Bondi show we need to get more guns off our streets.”

Surfers and swimmers hold a tribute at Bondi Beach on 19 December. Pic: AP
Image:
Surfers and swimmers hold a tribute at Bondi Beach on 19 December. Pic: AP

On Friday, Australia’s Jewish community gathered at Bondi Beach for prayers, while hundreds of swimmers and surfers made a huge circle in the sea to honour the victims.

“Over the past two years, there’s been a lot of people who have been questioning whether we’re still welcome here in Australia because we saw people calling for our death on the streets on a weekly basis,” Rabbi Yosef Eichenblatt from Sydney’s Central Synagogue told ABC News, after attending the paddle-out tribute.

Funerals for the victims also continued today, with Boris and Sofia Gurman, a couple killed after attempting to stop one of the gunmen, being laid to rest.


‘All Jewish hearts are broken’

Meanwhile, Ahmed al Ahmed, the hero who wrestled a gun from one of the alleged gunmen, was handed a cheque for more than A$2.5m (£1.23m) from an online fundraiser.

Read more from Sky News:
Democrats release more Epstein photos

‘All Jewish hearts are broken’ says UK Chief Rabbi on Bondi visit

Floral tribute at Bondi Beach on 19 December. Pic: AP
Image:
Floral tribute at Bondi Beach on 19 December. Pic: AP

One of the Bondi terrorists – Sajid Akram, 50, who was killed at the scene – held a firearm licence and had six guns registered.

If a man in Sydney’s suburbs needs “six high-powered rifles and is able to get them under existing licensing schemes, then there’s something wrong,” Mr Albanese said.

He said the government would work with states to target surplus, newly banned and illegal firearms, adding that the costs would be shared between the federal and state governments.

New South Wales Premier Chris Minns announced on Friday the state government would be recalled next week to enact the “toughest gun law reforms in the country”.


Gunmen ‘must never have had love’

Changes would include limiting firearms to four per person, tightening licensing requirements and restricting access to high-risk weapons and components.

Following the 1996 Port Arthur massacre, Australia secured the surrender of about 640,000 prohibited firearms nationwide. The total cost of compensation to owners was about A$304m (£150m).

Mr Albanese has faced pressure from critics who say his centre-left government has not done enough to deal with a surge in antisemitism since the start of the war in Gaza.

The government said it had consistently called out antisemitism over the last two years and passed legislation to criminalise hate speech.

Continue Reading

Trending