Donald Trump has threatened to sue the BBC for $1bn over edits the organisation made last year to one of his speeches.

The organisation has been engulfed in a crisis, forced to apologise on Monday after two of its most senior figures, including the director-general, resigned on Sunday night.

The defamation claim centres around a BBC Panorama documentary, which aired October 2024 and showed an edited speech made by Mr Trump before the attack on the US Capitol on 6 January 2021, in which he appeared to tell his supporters he was going to walk with them to the US Capitol and “fight like hell”.

In a letter dated 9 November, Florida-based lawyer Alejandro Brito set the BBC a deadline of 10pm UK time on Friday to respond, outlining three demands:

• Issue a “full and fair retraction” of the documentary
• Apologise immediately
• “Appropriately compensate” the US president

He told the BBC it needed to “comply” or face being sued for $1bn.

A BBC spokesperson said: “We will review the letter and respond directly in due course.”

‘Error of judgement’

On Monday, BBC chairman Samir Shah, one of the most senior figures still standing, apologised for the “error of judgement” in editing the video.

In a letter to the Culture, Media and Sport Committee of MPs, Mr Shah said Mr Trump’s speech was edited in a way that gave “the impression of a direct call for violent action”.

“The BBC would like to apologise for that error of judgement,” he added.

Director-general and head of BBC News resign

Concerns about the edited speech first came to light in a leaked memo from Michael Prescott, a former journalist and independent adviser to the BBC’s Editorial Guidelines and Standards Board.

As a result, BBC director-general Tim Davie and BBC News chief Deborah Turness announced their resignations on Sunday evening, saying in emails to staff that mistakes had been made.

Mr Davie will address an all-staff meeting on Tuesday. While on her way into the Broadcasting House on Monday morning, Ms Turness defended the corporation, rejecting accusations of institutional bias.

Downing St stands by BBC – but chancellor says ‘lessons to be learned’

A spokesperson for the prime minister told reporters on Monday that the BBC wasn’t corrupt or institutionally biased.

Instead, they said it had a “vital role” to play in the modern age, but needed to ensure it acted “to maintain trust and correct mistakes quickly when they occur”.

Chancellor Rachel Reeves also stood by the corporation, but said that “lessons do need to be learned”.

‘Nothing but an apology’

Veteran broadcaster and former BBC presenter Jonathan Dimbleby told Sky News, however, that the organisation owed the US president nothing more than an apology.

But former legal correspondent for the BBC Joshua Rozenberg also told Sky News that he believed the corporation would “very likely” consider settling with Trump.

Read more:
Read $1bn Trump legal threat in full
Who is the man at the centre of the leaked BBC memo?
‘Teflon Tim’ rode out several BBC controversies – but now he’s come unstuck

Mr Trump’s attack on the BBC is the latest in a long string of multibillion-dollar battles he’s engaged with various media institutions.

Former al Qaeda commander and now Syrian leader Ahmed al Sharaa has been welcomed by Donald Trump to the White House.

It was the first visit to the Oval Office by a Syrian head of state since the country gained independence in 1946.

Mr Sharaa, 43, who once had a $10m US bounty on his head, led rebel forces that overthrew dictator Bashar al-Assad last December, and was named interim leader in January.

The US president called Mr al Sharaa a “very strong leader” after their meeting and suggested the US would work to help the country succeed.

“He comes from a very tough place,” Mr Trump said, adding Mr al Sharaa is a “tough guy” and “I like him”.

Mr Sharra has “had a rough past”, but added, “we’ve all had a rough past”, he added.

Mr Trump has become one of the Syrian president’s more enthusiastic backers, considering the nation of strategic importance.

He didn’t provide any policy details about the meeting, but said “we’ll do everything we can to make Syria successful because that’s part of the Middle East”.

Read more: Why this meeting is a big deal

‘What the hell are we doing?’

Mr al Sharaa was greeted by a cheering crowd of supporters, some waving Syrian flags, upon his arrival on Monday.

But not everyone was overjoyed at the historic meeting.

Far-right activist Laura Loomer, a self-proclaimed “Islamophobe” who wields influence in Mr Trump’s MAGA movement, posted on X that Mr al Sharaa was “the ISIS ‘President’ of Syria”.

“What the hell are we doing?” she wrote of his White House visit.

Days before the meeting, Mr Trump told reporters “a lot of progress has been made” on Syria and Mr al Sharaa was “doing a very good job”.

Read more from Sky News
At least eight people killed in car explosion in New Delhi
Ex-French president Nicolas Sarkozy released from prison

Last week, the US voted to lift a series of sanctions on the Syrian president and members of his government.

Mr al Sharaa is hoping for a permanent repeal of sanctions placed on Syria for allegations of human rights abuses by Assad’s government and security forces – but congressional action would be needed for a permanent repeal.

Mr Trump and Mr al Sharaa first met in May in Saudi Arabia. At the time, the US president described Mr al Sharaa as a “young, attractive guy. Tough guy. Strong past, very strong past. Fighter”.

Monday’s meeting came after Syria launched raids against Islamic State cells.

It was the first official encounter between the US and Syria since 2000, when then president Bill Clinton met Hafez Assad.

An agreement has been reached to advance a deal aimed at ending the longest US government shutdown ever recorded.

A procedural vote held on Sunday night saw senators advance a House-approved bill, which will be amended to fund the government until 30 January.

Millions of American lives have been disrupted since the shutdown took effect on 1 October, when all non-essential parts of government were frozen as it ran out of money.

The shutdown, which was the first in almost seven years, was triggered by politicians failing to pass new funding bills amid a stand-off between the Democrats and Republicans over healthcare spending.

Read more:
US government shutdown: What does it mean?

If the Senate passes the amended measure, it still needs to be approved by the House of Representatives and sent to US President Donald Trump for sign off.

The vote to advance the bill passed by a 60-40 margin, the minimum needed to overcome a Senate filibuster – a procedural tool that empowers the minority party to delay or block a piece of legislation they oppose.

“It looks like we’re getting very close to the shutdown ending,” Mr Trump told reporters at the White House prior to the vote.

A handful of Democrats who rebuffed their party’s leadership teamed up with Republicans to strike the agreement, which included plans for a vote in December on extending subsidies under the Affordable Care Act.

The bill would prohibit federal agencies from firing employees until 30 January, a win for federal worker unions and their allies.

It comes as at least 300,000 employees are expected to leave the government by the end of this year due to Mr Trump’s downsizing effort.

What is a government shutdown?

A shutdown of the federal government means that all non-essential functions of government are frozen.

This will affect everything from social security to air travel to national park access.

Federal agencies are dependent on funding being approved by Congress to allow the president to sign budget legislation for the fiscal year ahead.

If they can’t approve funding (because of political differences – and America is of course bitterly divided) then those agencies are forced to shut down.

This means that workers cannot go to work and are not paid.