Now that the election is over, Donald Trump has returned to one of his most cherished pastimes: filing nuisance lawsuits. Abusing the legal system was a key precept of Trumps decades-long career as a celebrity business tycoon, and he kept it up, out of habit or perhaps enjoyment, during his first term as president.
The newest round of litigation is different. Trump has broadened his targets to include not just reporters and commentators but pollsters. On Monday, his lawyers filed an absurd lawsuit against the pollster J. Ann Selzer, accusing her of election interference and consumer fraud for a now-infamous poll released on the eve of the election that showed Trump losing to Kamala Harris in Iowa. (The lawsuit also names The Des Moines Register, which published the poll, and its parent company, Gannett, as defendants.) An even more important difference is the behavior of the targets of his threats. Unlike during his first term, when they mostly laughed off his ridiculous suits, much of the medias ownership class now seems inclined to submit.
Last Saturday, ABC News revealed that it had decided to settle a Trump lawsuit, donating $15 million to a future Trump presidential museum and paying $1 million in legal fees. The pretext for Trumps suit was an interview by George Stephanopoulos, a frequent Trump target, with Representative Nancy Mace, in which he said Donald Trump has been found liable for rape by a jury. Stephanopoulos was describing a lawsuit in which the jury found that Trump had forcibly penetrated the writer E. Jean Carroll with his hands, but not with his penisan act that is currently defined as rape under New York law, but that was not at the time the assault happened. This is an exceedingly narrow ground for a libel suit, not to mention an odd distinction upon which to stake a public defense. According to The New York Times, ABC decided to settle in part because Disney, its parent company, feared blowback.
ABC may not be alone in this. Since the prospect of a Trump restoration began to seem likely earlier this year, corporate titans have been transparently sucking up to him. Patrick Soon-Shiong, the billionaire owner of the Los Angeles Times, not only spiked that newspapers endorsement of Harris, but since the election has demanded that an editorial expressing concern over Trumps Cabinet choices be balanced with opinions expressing the opposite view, according to multiple reports. The Washington Posts owner, Jeff Bezos, notoriously overruled his papers planned endorsement of Harris as well. Bezos defended this decision as merely a poorly communicated and clumsily timed choice to halt presidential endorsements on journalistic principles that had nothing to do with Trump.
Paul Farhi: Why Trump wont stop suing the media and losing
This would have been a reasonable editorial decision in the absence of context. The context, however, is that Trump intervened to stop the Pentagon from awarding a $10 billion contract to Amazon during his first term, and is in a position to dish out additional punishments to Bezos, including to his space business, during his second. Bezos has showered Trump with praiseIm actually very optimistic this time around, he said at an event earlier this monthwhich seems to undermine the rationale for stopping endorsements. How is it that a newspapers editorial page endorsing a candidate exposes it to charges of bias, but public support by the owner for the presidents agenda does not?
Amazon has pledged $1 million to Trumps inauguration committee. So has Meta, whose founder and CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, recently stood respectfully, with his hand over his heart, at a gathering at Mar-a-Lago as a recording of The Star-Spangled Banner performed by imprisoned defendants accused of participating in the January 6 insurrection played over the speakers. (According to reports, the identity of the singers was not announced, if you happen to think that would have made any difference in his behavior.)
The leverage point Trump has recognized is that most major media properties are tied to some larger fortune: Amazon, Disney, NantWorks (the technology conglomerate owned by Soon-Shiong), and so on. All those business interests benefit from government cooperation and can be harmed by unfavorable policy choices. Trump can threaten these owners because he mostly does not care about policy for its own sake, is able to bring Republicans along with almost any stance he adopts, and has no public-spirited image to maintain. To the contrary, he has cultivated a reputation for venality and corruption (his allies euphemistically call him transactional), which makes his strongman threats exceedingly credible.
What about the billionaires who dont own a legacy-media property? The idea of Resistance has fallen deeply out of fashion at the moment. But if any wealthy donors still care about defending free speech and democracy, they might consider a civil-defense fund for the less well-resourced targets of Trumps litigation spreewith the potential to expand into criminal defense once Trump officially takes over the Justice Department. The Register is unlikely to be the last small publication targeted by Trump. During the campaign, his mainstream Republican supporters explained away his repeated threats of revenge against his perceived enemies by insisting that he didnt really mean them. The latest flurry of absurd lawsuits makes clear that he very much does.
The reforms are being introduced following 16 recommendations from the Infected Blood Inquiry, which published an additional report earlier this month.
Confirming the changes, minister for the Cabinet Office Nick Thomas-Symonds said the government has “concentrated on removing barriers to quicker compensation”.
More on Infected Blood Inquiry
Related Topics:
He added: “Our focus as we move forward must be working together to not only deliver justice to all those impacted, but also to restore trust in the state to people who have been let down too many times.”
Between the 1970s and early 1990s, more than 30,000 people in the UK were infected with HIV and hepatitis C while receiving NHS care.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:21
Infected blood scandal explained
Some 3,000 people have died after they were given contaminated blood and blood products, while survivors live with lifelong implications.
In last October’s Budget, Chancellor Rachel Reeves committed £11.8bn to compensate victims of the infected blood scandal, with the scheme opening at the end of last year.
The changes will ensure that those who endured treatments with adverse side effects, such as interferon, will receive higher compensation to what is currently provided.
Extraordinary intervention forces govt to act
The government will now hope its response to Sir Brian Langstaff’s criticism will be enough to convince the Infected Blood chair – and more importantly those infected and affected by this scandal – is listening and acting with urgency.
The long-awaited report was published in May 2024. It was an afternoon charged with raw emotion. After decades of being lied to, ignored and gaslit, finally the infected blood community had found its champion. Someone who understood their pain and suffering.
Sir Brian called on the government to deliver compensation quickly, knowing that many were dying before seeing justice delivered.
But Sir Brian was not himself convinced. Even after the publication of the report he kept the Inquiry open.
This is unprecedented. It showed that he feared there would be more stalling and further delays to payments. He was, sadly, proved right.
It took an extraordinary intervention from Sir Brian last month to push the government to respond. It says it will implement all of the Inquiry’s latest recommendations, some immediately and the rest after further consultation with the community.
More people will now qualify for payment and others will get more compensation.
And importantly the claims of victims will not die with them but instead can now be passed on to surviving family members. All hugely important revisions.
The government says it understands the urgency. But it will also know it should not have taken an unprecedented intervention to force the issue.
Higher compensation will also be available for the impacts currently recognised by the Infected Blood Support Scheme ‘Special Category Mechanism’ (SCM), which is provided to chronic Hepatitis C individuals who have experienced a significant impact on their ability to carry out daily duties.
The government said the changes mean that over a thousand people will receive a higher amount than they would have under the existing scheme.
Scheme widened to estates of deceased affected people
The scheme will also be widened to some people who don’t currently qualify.
Under the current mechanism, if someone who was infected dies before receiving full compensation, then any final award can be passed on to their relatives through their estate.
However while compensation is also available to family members affected by the scandal – a partner, sibling or parent of someone who was infected, for example, this claim dies with them if they pass away.
The changes announced today mean that if the affected person has died after May 21st 2024, or dies in future before receiving compensation, their estate will be able to make a claim.
Memorial plans announced
The government also announced that Clive Smith, president of the Haemophilia Society, will be the chair of the new Infected Blood Memorial Committee.
The project will include plans for a UK memorial and support memorials in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
In line with the Infected Blood Inquiry’s recommendation, the committee will also develop plans for commemorative events and is planning to hold the first by the end of 2025.
Mr Smith said the memorial is “long overdue”.
He added: “It is a great privilege to be asked to lead this important work on behalf of the community.
“I am conscious that we are already behind in relation to implementing the Infected Blood Inquiry’s recommendation that community events be held on a six-month basis post the Inquiry reporting. We intend to correct that by the end of this year.
“I look forward to working with the whole community across the UK on building an appropriate memorial to those we have lost and to act as a lasting memorial to the nation of what can happen when patient safety is not prioritised.”
An aid worker in the central Gaza Strip has told Sky News the food situation in the enclave is “absolutely desperate” and “the worst it’s ever been”.
Her comments to Sky’s chief presenter Mark Austincome amid fresh international outcry over Israel’s restrictions on aid, as the UK has joined together with 24 other countries to say: “The war in Gaza must end now.”
Rachael Cummings, humanitarian director for Save The Children, is in Deir al Balah, a city in central Gaza where tens of thousands of people have sought refuge during repeated waves of mass displacement.
Image: Smoke rises during strikes amid the Israeli operation in Deir al Balah. Pic: Reuters
Ms Cummings’s comments came as the UK and 24 other nations issued a joint statement calling for a ceasefire.
The statement criticised aid distribution in Gaza, which is being managed by a US and Israel-backed organisation, Gaza Health Foundation.
“The Israeli government’s aid delivery model is dangerous, fuels instability and deprives Gazans of human dignity,” it said.
The 25 countries also called for the “immediate and unconditional release” of hostages captured by Hamas during the 7 October 2023 attacks.
Lammy promises £40m for Gaza aid
Foreign Secretary David Lammy later promised £40m for humanitarian assistance in Gaza.
He told MPs: “We are leading diplomatic efforts to show that there must be a viable pathway to a Palestinian state involving the Palestinian Authority, not Hamas, in the security and governance of the area.
“Hamas can have no role in the governance of Gaza, nor use it as a launchpad for terrorism.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:53
Lammy: ‘There must be a viable pathway to a Palestinian state’
Addressing the foreign secretaries’ joint written statement, charity worker Liz Allcock – who works for Medical Aid for Palestinians (MAP) in Gaza – told Sky News: “While we welcome this, there have been statements in the past 21 months and nothing has changed.
“In fact, things have only got worse. And every time we think it can’t get worse, it does.”
Follow The World
Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday
“Without a reversal of the siege, the lack of supplies, the constant bombardment, the forced displacement, the killing, the militarisation of aid, we are going to collapse as a humanitarian response,” she said.
“And this would do a grave injustice to the 2.2 million people we’re trying to serve.
“An immediate and permanent ceasefire, and avenues for accountability in line with international law, is the minimum people here deserve.”
The war in Gaza started in response to Hamas’s attack on Israel on 7 October 2023, which killed 1,200 people and saw about 250 taken hostage.
More than 59,000 Palestinians have since been killed, with more than half being women and children, according to Gaza’s health ministry, which does not distinguish between civilians and combatants in its count.
Google announced Monday the removal of nearly 11,000 YouTube channels and other accounts tied to state-linked propaganda campaigns from China, Russia and more in the second quarter.
The takedown included more than 7,700 YouTube channels linked to China.
These campaigns primarily shared content in Chinese and English that promoted the People’s Republic of China, supported President Xi Jinping and commented on U.S. foreign affairs.
Over 2,000 removed channels were linked to Russia. The content was in multiple languages that supported Russia and criticized Ukraine, NATO and the West.
Google, in May, removed 20 YouTube channels, 4 Ads accounts, and 1 Blogger blog linked to RT, the Russian state-controlled media outlet accused of paying prominent conservative influencers for social media content ahead of the 2024 election.
Tim Pool, Dave Rubin and Benny Johnson — all staunch supporters of President Donald Trump — made content for Tenent Media, the Tennessee company described in the indictment, according to NBC News.
Read more CNBC tech news
YouTube began blocking RT channels in March 2022, shortly after Russia invaded Ukraine.
The active removal of accounts is part of the Google Threat Analysis Group’s work to counter global disinformation campaigns and “coordinated influence” operations.
Google’s second quarter report also outlined the removal of influence campaigns linked to Azerbaijan, Iran, Turkey, Israel, Romania and Ghana that were found to be targeting political rivals.
Some campaigns centered on growing geopolitical conflicts, including narratives on both sides of the Israel-Palestine War.
CNBC has reached out to YouTube for further comment or information on the report.
Google took down more than 23,000 accounts in the first quarter.
Meta announced last week it removed about 10 million profiles for impersonating large content producers through the first half of 2025 as part of an effort by the company to combat “spammy content.”