Demand for Retraction

[brooklynite]

Last edited Thu Oct 13, 2016, 09:23 AM - Edit history (2)

Source: Trump for President



Read more: https://assets.donaldjtrump.com/DemandForRetraction.PDF

[tammywammy]

1. Yeah, good luck with that

Hope the lawyers got payment up front.

[petronius]

34. You are my new favorite DUer of all time

After C. Columbus of course, the founder of DU...

[left-of-center2012]

59. "After C. Columbus of course"

Chris hasn't posted in some time.

[Foggyhill]

2. Who, there are now 10 separate accusers

This is only there to make new accusers wary, the New York Times now will double down and open the gate wide


So, this is more for future accusers than for thenyt

[world wide wally]

15. it's only been 3 days !

Give it another week or two

[Pachamama]

33. I predict that for each woman that comes forward, there are a 100+ more out there...

And there are people who can corroborate their stories...

The New York Times knew this was coming and they checked their sources and witnesses carefully... Their lawyers are looking forward to responding.

Can anyone say "discovery"?

[Stonepounder]

38. As O'Donnell says

The New York Times has the best libel attorneys on the planet.

[former9thward]

45. Because they need them?

That is not a compliment. I remember when the Times was pushing Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq when it was pumping for war there.

[TheDebbieDee]

57. I had forgotten about that and the

The planted Cheney articles. Thanks for the reminder...

[uppityperson]

3. Is there a link for this? LBN requires a link. Thanks and wow

[MADem]

19. Here's one

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/trackers/2016-10-13/trump-campaign-sends-legal-letter-to-nyt-demanding-retraction

There is a link in that story to the docs, but it looks like those copies are straight from twitter. Says the same thing, though!

[uppityperson]

20. Thanks, I found a cnn one also. This is wild

http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/12/media/new-york-times-donald-trump-lawsuit-threat/

[squirecam]

4. LOL - no shot

Idiots.

It's called New York Times v Sullivan. Suit has Zero chance.

Not to mention People's first person account.

It's over.

[calimary]

10. Welcome to DU, squirecam!

Holy Cow! This just gets stranger and more lurid every day.

THIS is "presidential"???

[Bibliovore]

61. It's not only not presidential, it's self-contradictory

"...why these two individuals waited, in one case, 11 years, and, in another case, more than three decades, before deciding to come forward with these false and defamatory statements."

If Trump's reported actions didn't happen, how or why or after what would there be years of waiting before deciding to come forward?

[christx30]

21. "Never pick a fight with people who buy ink by the barrel." --- Mark Twain n/t

[47of74]

23. Yeah.

Some guy where I live learned that the hard way.

[CarrieLynne]

5. hope they kept the template

they are gonna have to send alot of those letters out next week lol

[jberryhill]

6. somebody needs a new email address and direct dial number

[mahatmakanejeeves]

63. That's what I was thinking.

Note to DJT:

In the future, run off a copy of any letters like this one on your office copier. Cover up the email address and phone number with Magic Marker. Scan that version into a .pdf file. Only then send it out.

HTH.

[Drunken Irishman]

7. Thou doth protest too much.

[MADem]

8. Lawyers on retainer on both sides.

This is just a reason for them to actually go to work and get a shoe shine.

I'm guessing this suit will go about as well as that Dildo Really suit against Al Franken where his complaint was, literally, laughed out of court.

http://www.democracynow.org/2003/11/10/lies_and_the_lying_liars_who


Especially since a bunch of women are on NIGHTLINE right now, saying he leered at them and behaved inappropriately...!

[tblue37]

36. Remember, Trump sued Bill Maher for $5 million and produced his birth certificate to prove his

father was not really an orangutan.

(Of course the suit was not allowed to go forward.)

[PJMcK]

55. Good point but there's an important difference

Remember, Bill Maher's comment that he was making a joke. The New York Times is not and they vetted their serious stories.

Donald Trump's lawyers know that they can't prevail. Mr. Trump probably demanded that they do something and this empty threat against the NYT got the publicity he wanted.

Donald Trump is an idiot.

[TygrBright]

9. Hope Kasowitz et al collected their fees up front... n/t

[uppityperson]

11. Here a twitter link

https://mobile.twitter.com/mckaycoppins/status/786422653988896768

[world wide wally]

12. Clinton and Obama should serve Trump one

[Chicago1980]

14. +1

[Midnight Writer]

24. Exactly. Trump flings his dung everywhere, but plays the victim when he catches some.

Is the NYT accusing Trump's father of murdering JFK?

Is the NYT accusing Trump of being an undocumented alien who is a secret Muslim?

Is the NYT accusing Trump of being the founder of ISIS?

Is the NYT threatening to throw Trump into prison?

[William769]

13. Just another front he has to fight now.

Good!

[BainsBane]

16. Are they going to sue all the newspapers and media outlets

Reporting stories of the dozens of women coming forward?

Reince Preibus is actively involved in deciding to sue. He will take the GOP down with his pervert candidate.

[OldRedneck]

17. Dear Mr. Kasowitz:

Kindly go fuck yourself.

[cynzke]

49. Sincerely, EAT SHIT!

[uppityperson]

18. Please add this CNN, or another, link to your op. Thanks

http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/12/media/new-york-times-donald-trump-lawsuit-threat/

[geek tragedy]

22. Surprised KBTE would jump into the abyss like this nt

[Divine Discontent]

26. I s'pose that hundreds of thousands in fees does wonders with their Christmas plans? lol

Maybe they figure they can be the $ole firm he uses when he challenges the election and fights it for years! Just speculation on my part, but yeah, I gotta wonder, why would they want to jump into this...

[geek tragedy]

29. Few hundred thousand is 1-2 weeks pay for Marc Kasovitz

This kind of stain can be bad for business

[LiberalFighter]

58. Apparently there have been defections to McKool Smith earlier in the year.

[jberryhill]

67. If they don't back it up NYT should file a DJ

[geek tragedy]

69. or skip the motion to dismiss and DJ and head straight to discovery nt

[jberryhill]

71. Although, if Trump is serious, he'd file for a TRO

And that would be a fun hearing on probability of success, public interest, and the rest.

[geek tragedy]

75. Marc Kasowitz is no doubt acquainted with Rule 11(c) so I'm guessing not serious nt

[jberryhill]

77. I don't see a problem

The NYT published an article saying he did these things. His client denies he did these things, and I'll bet his client is willing to certify that. What's the rule violation?

[geek tragedy]

78. no basis for claiming actual malice. nt

[jberryhill]

79. Maybe not a basis for proving it....

But "claiming" it? Sure. They'd claim the NYT has endorsed Clinton, has run numerous editorials railing against him, did not provide sufficient opportunity to comment, etc. etc., then they might dig around in emails of everyone involved and find something that could be positioned as an expression of animus.

But, "claiming", sure, they can claim it.

[geek tragedy]

80. actual malice doesn't mean hostile agenda, it means knowledge of falsity

or reckless disregard for the possibility of falsity.

they gave him an opportunity to comment, he called the reporter a 'disgusting human being' and threatened to sue.

Zero, absolutely zero factual basis for claim of actual malice. Even if the women are lying (which they aren't), he doesn't have a cause of action against the paper for reporting their claims.

Filing of suit would be ripe for Rule 11(c) motion.

[SunSeeker]

25. Marc Kasowitz will apparently do anything for a buck.

[Raster]

27. Bring on DISCOVERY!

[Pachamama]

28. Bring it on Bitch...

Pass the popcorn...

Time for me to renew my subscription to the New York Times...

[truthisfreedom]

31. We could all easily get very fat from eating all of the popcorn necessary to sit back and enjoy

watching the coming events unfold over the next month.

Do they make diet popcorn?

[Divine Discontent]

41. yeah, it's plain... just add a little herb/spice & youre good! :)

[tblue37]

32. Woot! Discovery! nt

[Lint Head]

35. Actions and remedies? Actions and remedies?

Are you f...ing kidding me. Are they too cowardly to say lawsuit or are they just covering thier perverbial asses because they don't have a leg to stand on. Weasel lawyers use weasel words.

[PunksMom]

54. They have a weasel client!

[mahina]

37. Truth is a perfect defense against libel

This just in.

[PSPS]

39. How will he square this with his base? It is ((Kasowitz)) after all.

[Divine Discontent]

40. And a lawyer. But, as you know, if it's on their side, they will defend all people who are

brought out to push their agenda. Like the occasional black person who does things like points at and says my African American...

[stopbush]

42. Er, you don't use a hyphen after a word that ends in "ly."

S/b "politically motivated."

His lawyers' writing skills are just as crappy as his doctor's.

[Divine Discontent]

43. how I picture a certain few people upon hearing about this...

?1461214223

[Feeling the Bern]

44. Dear Mr. Kasowitz:

Eat shit, get sick, and die. If that doesn't work, Fuck off and die.

With all due respect.

Sincerely,

Everyone in the world not named Donald Trump

[underpants]

53. Very deftly stated

[PJMcK]

56. Please explain your post

There's a subtlety in there that I cannot discern. (wink)

[muriel_volestrangler]

46. "We refer you to the reply given in the case of Arkell v. Pressdram."

http://www.lettersofnote.com/2013/08/arkell-v-pressdram.html

[saltpoint]

47. Trump's lawyers are just more bullies

Last edited Thu Oct 13, 2016, 06:58 AM - Edit history (1)

with money.

Or bullies with Trump's money, whatever.

The NYTimes is not likely to be intimidated by this. They have a lawyer or two of their own should push come to shove.

[Gothmog]

48. Trump will be an idiot if he files these lawsuits

[jcgoldie]

62. correction

Trump is already an idiot.

[Mc Mike]

65. I hope him paying half of his lawyer fees bankrupts him, and him not paying half of his lawyer's

Last edited Thu Oct 13, 2016, 10:08 PM - Edit history (1)

fees bankrupts them.

That way, it's win-win.

[Maeve]

50. Dear Mr Kasowitz--This is America

And your client is a public figure with admitted proclivities to the behavior reported. Your 'available actions and remedies' are limited to that letter.
Sincerely

[Quantess]

51. I'm sure it was many more women than that!

Donald Trump is much more believable as a creepy can't-keep-his-hands-to-himself perv than Bill Cosby as a date rapist. I'm actually surprised that hundreds more women haven't come forward.

[Freddie]

52. In the world of celebrity gossip magazines

People is the gold standard. They don't publish anything that is not verified or approved by the subject.

[PJMcK]

60. Some legal questions

Here are a few legal questions for any DU attorneys:

1. Does the emailed message from Mr. Kasowitz to Mr. Bacquet represent a legal service of notice? For proper service, doesn't the recipient (or their designated representative) have to sign acknowledgment of service? Or is this just a semi-formal letter that doesn't carry much more than the threat of possible future actions?

2. As several posters up-thread have noted, if there's a libel lawsuit, there will be a discovery phase. Would this include sworn testimony? What would be the limitations of the discovery process?

3. How long would such a proceeding be likely to take? In what jurisdiction would this take place? Would a court case be heard before a judge alone or would a jury be impaneled?

4. How likely are Mr. Trump's lawyers to actually follow through with their threatened litigation? How likely is it that Mr. Trump could prevail?

Thanks, in advance, for your insights.

[Massacure]

68. One more question that I have:

Obviously it will vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but what kind of odds are there that any potential lawsuit would fall under an anti-SLAPP statute (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation)? If the lawsuit does get ruled as a SLAPP, what implications does that have?

[PJMcK]

70. Please check GD as I posted my questions as a separate thread

I included your inquiry with the post, Massacure.

[treestar]

73. 1 it is just a letter with a threat to sue

to actually sue they would have to draft a pleading with allegations, file it in the court with a case number and have it formally served however NY laws say on the defendant the NYT.

2. Discovery happens in most civil suits, so yes it would have some limits on it as leading to evidence relevant to such a case. So I suppose depose the women to find out if they actually made the allegations. Since that is all NYT reported, that makes it a win for NYT. They don't have to prove he groped anyone only that it was alleged.

3. Who knows how long NY courts take, usually courts take way longer than anyone thinks they will when they go into a case. Probably you have a right to a jury trial if you want one in a civil case, depending on NY law. Unlikely Don the Con would sue for any amount low enough that there is no jury trial.

4. Loser for Don the Con as he is a public figure and would have to prove malice, meaning no one actually made such allegations and the NY times made it up. IMO no lawyer with any sense would file this suit - it's no better than the birther suits. Well there was an idiot who filed those. IMO this lawyer is just trying to protest on Don the Con's behalf and probably does not even expect the NYT to listen and back off. Just trying to show how strongly Don the Con denies.

[bigbrother05]

64. That might work as a private citizen, but he's a politician now

The bar is very high for a politician to sue for libel/defamation. A private citizen (even a tv personality) has a much stronger presumption of privacy protection.

Also, the Times legal folks are as good as any and won't lack for resources to fight the case.

[christx30]

81. They have replied to the extortion... retraction request letter:

This letter should have come with a list of burn centers in the New York area.

[csziggy]

72. When will Trump sue, People, the West Palm Beach paper and the Washington Post?

Or how about USA Today?

Trump, companies accused of mistreating women in at least 20 lawsuits
A USA TODAY investigation shows he has been accused for years of mistreating women
John Kelly, Nick Penzenstadler and Steve Reilly , USA TODAY

<SNIP>

The cases involving women are among about 130 employment cases involving Trump’s companies dating back to the 1980s, although many of them involve the individual companies' employees and managers rather than Trump personally. A definitive accounting of women claiming mistreatment by Trump or his companies isn’t possible because many such complaints are resolved internally and never escalate to a lawsuit. And, researchers consistently have found, many women don’t report such workplace behavior at all.

Two such examples are at the heart of two of last week’s explosive stories about Trump. Monday, The Associated Press reported that Trump systematically demeaned women during filming of NBC’s The Apprentice television show, discussing in front of them which ones he’d like to have sex with and asking other men in the room which ones they’d like to have sex with, among other vulgar behavior. Friday, The Washington Post published video of Trump’s bragging, in lewd terms, with Billy Bush about his aggressive sexual advances on Nancy O’Dell, a married television host. None of those women have sued, and it’s unknown whether any of them complained to bosses at NBC or the shows’ producers.

<SNIP>

In at least three lawsuits reviewed by USA TODAY, women working for Trump companies allege that’s exactly what they did: they reported sexual discrimination or harassment and they lost their jobs. In several other cases, women described retaliation for making such complaints.

Just this summer, a woman who supervised the Trump Kids Club at the billionaire’s golf resort in Jupiter, Fla., sued Trump saying she endured “persistent, unwelcome sexual advances” by a manager. Erin Breen said she alerted human resources and her supervisor. In court, and in separate complaints to the Florida Commission on Human Relations and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Breen said Trump managers fired her two weeks after she complained.

MUCH more: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/10/09/trumps-lawsuits-include-20-involving-allegations-mistreating-women-president-republican/91832012/

[Mc Mike]

74. I'm glad the Times went with the story, despite the threats. They're not all bad.

Last edited Wed Oct 19, 2016, 08:02 AM - Edit history (3)

Speaking of the Times, we also have this from one of their employees:

" NYT columnist Frank Bruni: ‘Hillary Clinton should watch her language very carefully’
Yahoo News NowOctober 12, 2016

New York Times columnist Frank Bruni said Wednesday that should Hillary Clinton win the presidency — which he predicted — she should focus on being a leader for the whole country so that the next segment of American politics doesn’t feel like another war being fought.

Bruni told Yahoo Global News Anchor Katie Couric, “Hillary Clinton should watch her language very carefully, because it’s that sort of thing that tells people, ‘I’m not looking at someone that’s leading me, I’m looking at someone who is a victor in a battle, the next chapter of which we are about to begin.'”

“So many politicians, Democrats, Republicans, everything is a fight, us versus them. So much of the language is the language of contest. It’s almost like being in a courtroom where two sides are arguing with each other for the favor of the jury. We are all in this together, this project is all of us.” "


So, the other party has been running, failingly, on statements that they'd jail Hillary, with several second amendment mentions against her, calling her the devil, crooked, lyin, crazy, a murderer, statements that they might just prefer to start a civil war, she already stole the election, we're going to go physically stop her and her voters, and a long stream of violent and foul language including incitements to physical assault and sexual assault, and the worst potty mouthed language ever heard by any major party candidate ever, (outside of li'l bush, raygun, and Nixon cutting room floor tapes).

But some NY Times editor thought that we should hear from Frank Bruni about how Prez Clinton should watch her mouth. What, did they bring back Clark Hoyt to man the editor's desk over there? We don't need this kind of false equivalency supporting the repugs' viewpoint from the Times, when dRumpf and his repug buddies get sent packing.

If this election is won, it's won fair and square. It isn't reasonable of the Times to start out the winning candidates' administration by chiding the winner on language, considering the language the loser and his party has constantly, failingly been using, and getting away with.

The language is failing to aid their attempt to claw and gouge for power, but they're successfully using it without the drastic legal and social consequences they deserve.

And the Times is trying to start out this way at -.25 years into the next Admin.

The Times should be forced to acknowledge this fact. They also should understand that you can't pretend to be the voice of reason while engaged in saying something so eye-crossingly unreasonable.

[tonyt53]

76. Send back the same reply given to the Germans when they demanded US troops surrender

"NUTS"