Random

    News

    Home News

    Trump Ups The Ante On Imminent BBC Lawsuit

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    2
    Tyler Merbler, CC BY 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

    President Donald Trump is threatening to sue the BBC for at least $1 billion, accusing the British broadcaster of defamation after it aired a misleadingly edited clip in its pre-election documentary, “Trump: A Second Chance?”

    The film, which aired ahead of the November 2024 election, includes footage from Trump’s January 6, 2021 “Stop the Steal” rally, just before Congress certified Joe Biden’s 2020 victory. The BBC’s version of Trump’s remarks spliced together two separate parts of his speech to make it appear more inflammatory.

    The documentary quoted Trump as saying:

    “We’re going to walk down to the Capitol, and I’ll be there with you. And we fight. We fight like hell.”

    However, in reality, Trump’s words were more measured. He told supporters:

    “We’re going to walk down, and I’ll be there with you, we’re going to walk down, we’re going to walk down. Anyone you want, but I think right here, we’re going to walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women, and we’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them. Because you’ll never take back our country with weakness.”

    He continued:

    “You have to show strength, and you have to be strong. We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated, lawfully slated.”

    Trump also explicitly called for peaceful protest, adding:

    “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”

    It wasn’t until about an hour later in his remarks that Trump said the second part of the BBC’s edited clip:

    “And we fight. We fight like hell. And if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.”

    BBC Leaders Step Down Amid Backlash

    The controversy was first exposed by The Daily Telegraph, which published an internal BBC memo acknowledging the editing issue. Following the uproar, BBC Director-General Tim Davie and BBC News CEO Deborah Turness both resigned.

    In a message to staff, Turness admitted that “mistakes have been made” but denied claims that the BBC is “institutionally biased.”

    Trump’s Legal Response

    Trump’s attorney, Alejandro Britt, sent the BBC a legal letter demanding a full apology and retraction. The letter accuses the broadcaster of “defrauding the public” and misrepresenting Trump’s words to paint him in a negative light.

    “Well, I guess I have to,” Trump told Fox News’s Laura Ingraham on Tuesday, confirming his intent to sue. “Why not? Because they defrauded the public, and they’ve admitted it.”

    A Pattern of Media Accountability

    This is not the first time the President has successfully taken on major media outlets.

    Last year, ABC News settled with Trump for $15 million after anchor George Stephanopoulos falsely claimed on-air that Trump was found civilly liable for rape in the E. Jean Carroll case. The jury had, in fact, found him liable only for sexual abuse.

    In July 2024, Trump won another $16 million settlement from Paramount, following claims that a “60 Minutes” interview with Kamala Harris was heavily edited to favor her during the election season.

    Trump also has an ongoing $10 billion lawsuit against The Wall Street Journal, accusing it of defamation after it published a supposed birthday note he allegedly wrote to Jeffrey Epstein—a note Trump denies ever writing.

    They tried to destroy Trump with hoaxes, witch hunts, and lies — but he NEVER SURRENDERED. Show you won’t either: Donate $15 now to fuel MAGA’s comeback!

    Gaetz Sues House Ethics Committee In Final Bid To Block Report’s Release

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    1

    Former Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz (R) filed a lawsuit against the House Ethics Committee in a last-minute attempt to block the panel from releasing its report on the Florida Republican.

    Gaetz, who resigned from Congress last month, filed the lawsuit as several outlets reported on leaked drafts of the Ethics Committee’s report, which CNN and CBS say found “substantial evidence” that the ex-congressman violated House rules or Florida state laws

    The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Washington, D.C., asks a judge to issue an emergency order blocking the report’s release. 

    Gaetz claims the committee is acting beyond its authority because it has no jurisdiction over him now that he has resigned from Congress. Gaetz’s attorneys said the report contains “untruthful and defamatory information” that would “significantly damage” his reputation.

    “The Committee’s apparent intention to release its report after explicitly acknowledging it lacks jurisdiction over former members, its failure to follow constitutional notions of due process, and failure to adhere to its own procedural rules and precedent represents an unprecedented overreach that threatens fundamental constitutional rights and established procedural protections,” Gaetz’s attorneys wrote.

    The suit names the Ethics Committee and its chair, Rep. Michael Guest (R-Miss.), as defendants.

    “These claims would be destroyed in court — which is why they were never made in any court against me,” Gaetz told The Hill on Monday.

    The Ethics Committee continued investigating Gaetz after the DOJ declined to charge the Florida Republican, probing allegations of sexual misconduct, illicit drug use, accepting improper gifts, dispensing special privileges and favors to individuals with whom he had a personal relationship and seeking to obstruct government investigations of his conduct.

    In a lengthy statement posted on X last week, after news broke that the panel reversed course and voted to release its report into Gaetz, the ex-congressman defended his conduct, saying it was “embarrassing, though not criminal.”

    The panel is expected to publicly release the report as early as Monday.

    Read the full report:

    807818265-Committee-ReportDownload

    Trump Media Group Sues Brazilian Supreme Court Justice

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    2
    O ex-presidente Jair Bolsonaro (PL) concede entrevista e posa para fotografia ao sair do Senado Federal. O ex-presidente participou de uma reunião no gabinete do seu filho Flávio Bolsonaro (PL-RJ). Foto: Roque de Sá/Agência Senado

    President Trump’s media company sued a Brazilian Supreme Court justice for allegedly censoring conservative voices on social media.

    The unexpected lawsuit came hours after Brazilian Justice Moraes had received an indictment that would force him to decide whether to order the arrest of Jair Bolsonaro, the former Brazilian president and an ally of Trump. The justice is overseeing multiple criminal investigations into Bolsonaro.

    The Trump Media & Technology Group — which is majority owned by Mr. Trump and runs his Truth Social site — sued the Brazilian justice, Alexandre de Moraes, in U.S. federal court in Tampa, Fla., on Wednesday morning.

    The companies accused Justice Moraes of censoring political discourse in the United States and infringing upon the First Amendment by ordering Rumble to remove the accounts of prominent supporters of Bolsonaro.

    The New York Times reports:

    The companies argued that those orders could apply to how those accounts appeared in the United States, breaking American law. Mr. Trump’s company has not been subject to Justice Moraes’s orders, but it argued in the lawsuit that it relied on Rumble’s technology and therefore could be harmed if Rumble’s operations were affected.

    Justice Moraes has argued that his actions are necessary to protect Brazil from the anti-democratic acts of Mr. Bolsonaro and his supporters. His spokeswoman said that Justice Moraes did not have immediate comment.

    In 2023, a mob of Mr. Bolsonaro’s supporters raided Brazil’s Supreme Court.

    Late last year, a Bolsonaro supporter tried to bomb the Supreme Court but instead killed only himself.

    On Tuesday, new details emerged in the indictment of Mr. Bolsonaro showing that, according to Brazilian investigators, the former president and his allies had plotted to assassinate Justice Moraes as part of their bid to hold on to power.

    Bolsonaro has denied that he tried to stage a coup or had any knowledge of a plot to kill Justice Moraes.

    As part of investigations into attacks against Brazil’s democracy, Justice Moraes has ordered arrests of Mr. Bolsonaro’s allies and the confiscation of the former president’s passport, as well as the suspension of hundreds of social media accounts belonging to his supporters. Last year, Justice Moraes faced off against Elon Musk — and won — blocking Mr. Musk’s social network, X, in Brazil until the billionaire backed down in his refusal to comply with the judge’s orders to suspend accounts.

    Trump Says Paying Bond is a ‘Practical Impossibility’ in New Court Filing

    By
    admin
    -
    6
    Image via Pixabay free images

    Former President Donald Trump may be in trouble.

    Attorneys for the Republican nominee for president told a New York appeals court that they haven’t found an insurance company to underwrite his bond to cover the $464 million civil fraud judgment against him.

    According to his legal representatives, Trump asked 30 underwriters to put up his massive bond payment – but couldn’t find one.

    The 45th president’s legal team is seeking a stay of execution on the $464 million judgment, telling the court in writing that “Posting a Full Undertaking Is a Practical Impossibility.”

    This article originally appeared on American Liberty News. Republished with permission.

    Trump Finds Time to Make Fun of Stelter Amid FBI Probe

    By
    admin
    -
    3
    From the session "The War at Home: Trump and the Mainstream Media". [Photo Credit: nrkbeta, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons]

    Despite emotions running high over an FBI probe into documents President Trump has in his possession the former president found time to make fun of his biggest critic at CNN, Brian Stelter.

    Stelter was recently fired from the network amid declining ratings and a realization that he is no longer relevant.

    The network is also attempting to make a move to become more neutral and Stelter, who was the media critic, chose to consistently criticize conservative media.

    Mediaite reports:

    “Brian Stelter of Fake News CNN got fired because he lied, and lied, and lied – ABOUT ME. May he REST IN PEACE!” Trump wrote, ironically misstating the circumstances of Stelter’s departure from the network.

    “CNN will end its Reliable Sources program on Sunday, August 21st. As a result Brian Stelter will leave the company. We appreciate his contributions to the network and wish him well as he embarks on new endeavors,” a CNN spokesperson told Mediaite in a statement this week.

    Next, Stelter earned a place of honor beside January 6 Committee Vice-Chair Rep. Liz Cheney, because they have roughly equivalent roles in Trump’s life.

    “Trivia question: Who’s got less charisma, Brian Stelter or Liz Cheney. I say Liz Cheney, because Stelter could have gotten more votes than she did the other night in Wyoming – She lost by 40!” Trump wrote.

    Despite Trump being in a battle with the FBI and other legal battles, the classic Trump always shines through.

    We’ expect nothing less from one of the best verbal sparers ever to do it.

    [READ NEXT: DOJ ADMITS Trump was Right]

    AOC Says She Would ‘Stomp’ JD Vance In A Presidential Election

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    6

    Tensions are already high…

    Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has claimed she would “stomp” JD Vance in a presidential election.

    Ocasio-Cortez, the Left-wing congresswoman, made the claim hours after sharing a poll — conducted by The Argument and Verasight and released Tuesday — found Ocasio-Cortez leading Vance 51% to 49%, a difference within the survey’s 2.7-percentage-point margin of error, making the two candidates statistically tied. Respondents were asked how they would vote if the election were held between the New York Democrat and the Republican vice president.

    When asked about the poll as she left the US Capitol on Wednesday evening, she initially downplayed its significance.

    “These polls like three years out… they are what they are,” she told a reporter, who filmed the encounter.

    “But let the record show I would stomp him – I would stomp him!” she added, laughing as she walked off and entered a waiting car.

    Ocasio-Cortez, often known by her initials “AOC”, is seen as one of the frontrunners in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2028.

    The poll — conducted by The Argument and Verasight and released Tuesday — found Ocasio-Cortez leading Vance 51% to 49%, a difference within the survey’s 2.7-percentage-point margin of error, making the two candidates statistically tied. Respondents were asked how they would vote if the election were held between the New York Democrat and the Republican vice president.

    Neither Ocasio-Cortez nor Vance has formally announced a 2028 campaign, but both are widely viewed as potential contenders to lead their respective parties. Ocasio-Cortez, first elected to Congress in 2018, has become one of the most prominent progressive voices in national politics. Vance, a former U.S. senator from Ohio and bestselling author, joined the GOP ticket in 2024 and became vice president after Donald Trump returned to the White House.

    Demographic Splits Highlight Each Candidate’s Base

    The poll found that Vance maintains a substantial advantage with white voters, leading Ocasio-Cortez 57% to 43% in that demographic. Ocasio-Cortez, however, holds wide leads among voters of color, including 79% support among Black voters and 64% among Hispanic voters. (RELATED: Democrats Win Miami Mayor’s Office After Nearly 30 Years Out Of Power)

    Those patterns reflect longstanding partisan alignments: Republicans have consistently performed strongly with white voters in recent presidential contests, while Democrats have relied heavily on support from Black and Hispanic voters, though margins among the latter group have narrowed in recent years.

    Standings Within Their Parties

    Although Ocasio-Cortez polls competitively in a general election hypothetical, recent Democratic primary surveys show her trailing more established national figures, including former Vice President Kamala Harris and former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg. This suggests she would face a difficult path in a crowded primary field.

    Another recent survey testing a three-way hypothetical between California Gov. Gavin Newsom, Vance, and Ocasio-Cortez found Newsom leading with 36%, with Ocasio-Cortez and Vance tied at 34% each.

    On the Republican side, speculation around the 2028 field remains fluid. Asked in October which Republicans might consider a future presidential run, President Donald Trump told reporters, “We have great people… We have JD, obviously, the vice president is great. I think [Secretary of State] Marco’s [Rubio] great. I think I’m not sure if anybody would run against those. I think if they ever formed a group, it would be unstoppable. I really do. I believe that. I would love to do it. I have my best numbers ever.”

    Trump, who returned to the presidency in 2025 after previously serving from 2017 to 2021, remains subject to the constitutional limits of the 22nd Amendment, which states that “no person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice.” The provision clearly bars any individual from winning a third term, but its application to Trump’s unique electoral history has become a matter of legal dispute.

    Constitutional scholars and legal analysts differ on how the amendment should be interpreted in Trump’s case, particularly whether his two election victories — in 2016 and 2024 — preclude him from pursuing future campaigns. Several lawsuits filed in 2025 seek judicial rulings enforcing the 22nd Amendment against Trump’s eligibility to appear on future ballots. Those cases are pending in federal courts and are expected to draw appeals, potentially reaching the Supreme Court. (RELATED: President Trump’s Legal Battle With The Pulitzer Prize Board Escalates)

    Vance Addresses Speculation About His Future

    Vice President Vance has attempted to downplay discussions about his potential 2028 ambitions.

    In an interview earlier this month with Fox News host Sean Hannity, Vance said, “I would say that I’ve thought about what that moment might look like after the midterm elections. But I also, whenever I think about that, I try to put it out of my head and remind myself the American people elected me to do a job right now, and my job is to do it.”

    President Trump wants to honor true patriots like yourself who fuel the MAGA movement! Will you please take a moment to accept the 2025 Patriot of the Year MAGA Gold Medal? [Click HERE]

    Illinois Judge Removes Trump from Ballot

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    2
    Gavel via Wikimedia Commons Image

    Donald Trump has been removed from a third state’s ballot…

    On Wednesday, Cook County Circuit Judge Tracie Porter barred Trump from the Illinois ballot one month after the anti-Trump challenge was dismissed by the Illinois State Board of Elections. 

    According to court documents obtained by Fox News, the order urged the board to remove Trump or “cause any votes cast for him to be suppressed,” for violating section three of the 14th Amendment, or the “disqualification clause,” for engaging in insurrection.

    Porter’s ruling reverses last month’s decision by the Illinois Board of Elections to keep Trump’s name on the primary ballot after a group of Illinois voters accused the former president of engaging in insurrection. 

    However, the order is put on hold until Friday, in case of an appeal from Trump’s attorneys to the Illinois Appellate Court, First District or the Illinois Supreme Court. 

    A campaign spokesperson for Trump issued a statement to Reuters saying it “is an unconstitutional ruling that we will quickly appeal.”

    For the first time, the Supreme Court is considering the meaning and reach of Section 3 of the Constitution’s 14th Amendment, which bars former officeholders who “engaged in insurrection” from holding public office again.

    The 14th Amendment, Section 3 of the Constitution states, “No person shall… hold any office… under the United States… who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States… to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.”

    Report: Smartmatic Subpoenas Fox Board Members In Defamation Lawsuit

    By
    admin
    -
    1
    Looking east towards 6th Avenue along north (48th Street) side of Fox News building on a snowy afternoon. [Photo Credit: Jim.henderson, CC0, via Wikimedia Commons]

    Voting systems company Smartmatic is going after Fox board members.

    Smartmatic subpoenaed four members of Fox Corp.’s board of directors in connection with its ongoing lawsuit against Fox News over the network’s coverage of the 2020 election.

    In motions filed with the Supreme Court of New York, Smartmatic requested relevant documents from four members of Fox’s board of directors: Anne Dias, Charles Carey, Roland Hernandez and Jacques Nasser.

    “Accountability and responsibility do not stop with Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch,” J. Erik Connolly, Smartmatic’s attorney on its case, said in a statement to The Washington Post, which first reported on the subpoenas. “Smartmatic plans to pursue Fox’s board members as well to determine why they allowed the company’s most valuable asset, Fox News, to spread disinformation about the 2020 election.”

    Smartmatic sued Fox for $2.7 billion after the 2020 election, arguing the network maliciously aired false information about its software being promoted by allies of former President Trump after the election.

    Last spring Fox paid Dominion Voting Systems $787 million to settle a separate defamation lawsuit. (RELATED: Report: Fox News Reaches Last-Minute Settlement With Dominion Voting Systems)

    Smartmatic’s case against the network is not expected to go to trial until 2025.

    In April, Smartmatic and One America News (OAN) reached a settlement in the company’s defamation lawsuit against the conservative outlet.

    “Smartmatic has resolved its litigation against OANN through a confidential settlement,” its lead attorney, Erik Connolly, confirmed to Mediaite:

    The company also sued Fox News and Newsmax for airing false claims about its role in the 2020 election. Those suits are ongoing.

    Despite the ongoing lawsuit against Fox News, in January a judge ruled Fox News Channel can proceed with its counterclaim. In part, because the network has yet to be found liable for defamation.

    Article Published With The Permission of American Liberty News.

    Trump Appeals Hush Money Criminal Conviction 

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    0
    Donald Trump via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    President Trump appealed his New York hush money criminal conviction and has brought on a new team of attorneys to represent him. 

    The five-attorney team from elite law firm Sullivan & Cromwell, which will be led by Robert Giuffra, submitted a notice of appeal dated Tuesday, formally beginning the appeals process in Trump’s 34-count felony conviction. 

    “President Donald J. Trump’s appeal is important for the rule of law, New York’s reputation as a global business, financial and legal center, as well as for the presidency and all public officials,” Guiffra said in a statement.  

    “The misuse of the criminal law by the Manhattan DA to target President Trump sets a dangerous precedent, and we look forward to the case being dismissed on appeal,” he continued. 

    The team will be rounded ou by attorneys Matthew Schwartz, James McDonald, Jeffrey Wall and Morgan Ratner. All of whom are former Supreme Court clerks. 

    The team will replace Todd Blanche and Emil Bove, Trump’s mainstay trial attorneys who are now set to serve in the No. 2 and No. 3 top posts at the Justice Department, respectively, if confirmed by the Senate. Bove is serving as acting deputy attorney general in the meantime. 

    A New York jury found Trump guilty on all 34 felony counts of falsifying business records for covering up a $130,000 hush money payment made to adult film star Stormy Daniels in 2016 as part of an intended conspiracy to unlawfully influence that year’s presidential election. 

    Trump’s felonies remain on his record, and his legal team has sought to dismiss the case entirely. 

    According to The Hill, the top-notch legal team will next bring their efforts to the Appellate Division, First Department. The court previously rejected Trump’s various pre-trial appeals, but his sentencing now enables the appeals bench to confront the historic case in normal course. 

    It remains unclear if the appeal will proceed while Trump is in the White House. Legal experts largely agree a sitting president is protected from criminal prosecution. 

    Federal prosecutors in Florida moved to dismiss the appeal in the Mar-a-Lago prosecution, pushing to bring an end to the Trump classified documents case.

    The motion, which comes after the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the state assigned a new prosecutor to the case, still needs to be approved by the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

    But doing so signals an end to an appeal ignited by former special counsel Jack Smith, as he fought a lower court ruling from Judge Aileen Cannon finding he was unlawfully appointed.

    The move is more broadly set to unwind charges against President Trump’s two co-defendants in the case, who the Biden administration still wished to prosecute if Cannon’s order was reversed.

    The motion noted that valet Walt Nauta and property manager Carlos de Oliveira, who were accused of aiding Trump in concealing boxes of documents from prosecutors and his own attorney, did not oppose the move.

    By moving to dismiss the appeal with prejudice, prosecutors would be barred from relaunching any similar efforts in the future.

    Report: Rudy Giuliani Disbarred In New York

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    2
    Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani has officially been disbarred in the Empire State.

    On Tuesday, a state appeals court disbarred Giuliani “effective immediately” for his efforts to subvert the 2020 presidential election.

    The Hill reports:

    A panel of judges in New York’s Appellate Division, First Department wrote that Giuliani “flagrantly misused” his position as an attorney for former President Trump and his campaign to make “intentionally” false statements to courts, lawmakers and the public.  

    “In so doing, respondent not only deliberately violated some of the most fundamental tenets of the legal profession, but he also actively contributed to the national strife that has followed the 2020 Presidential election, for which he is entirely unrepentant,” it says. 

    This is a breaking news story. Please check back for updates.

    123...119Page 1 of 119
    © Great America News Desk 2022