Trump Threatens To Sue NYT Over Story With Groping Allegations

[DonViejo]

Donald Trump on Wednesday threatened to sue the New York Times over a story the paper published with accusations from two women that Trump had groped them.

"We hereby demand that you immediate cease any further publication of this article, remove it from your website and issue a full and immediate retraction and apology. Failure to do so will leave my client with no option but to pursue all available actions and remedies," Marc Kazowitz, a lawyer for Trump, wrote in a Wednesday letter to New York Times executive editor Dean Baquet.

Kazowitz accused the New York Times of libel, claiming that the allegations in the Times piece were false and politically motivated.

"Your article is reckless, defamatory and constitutes libel per se. It is apparent from, among other things, the timing of the article, that it is nothing more than a politically-motivated effort to defeat Mr. Trump’s candidacy," he wrote in the letter. "That is why you apparently performed an entirely inadequate investigation to test the veracity of these false and malicious allegations, including why these two individuals waited, in one case, more than three decades, before deciding to come forward with these false and defamatory statements."

-snip-

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/trump-letter-nty-retraction-groping

[BSdetect]

1. Typical bully boy tactic

We know all about you now drumph.

[liberal N proud]

2. Who knows what would come out during the discovery phase

He is living dangerously if he goes that route.

[helpisontheway]

3. All he does is sue...nt

[Mme. Defarge]

4. Damn those trial lawyers!

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

5. This isn't the NYT's first rodeo.

In fact, it was a party in the landmark Supreme Court case, New York Times v. Sullivan, that established, way back in 1964, that for a public figure to win a defamation case, he has to prove that the publication was made with actual malice. It's a very difficult burden of proof.

Please proceed, Donald.

[treestar]

6. IMO he is a public figure and would have to prove malice

which is generally that they knew it was not true.

If they are reported as "allegations" that's an impossible bar to get over.

[BSdetect]

7. Did drumph have two lawyers present when he ordered tham to sue the NYT?

Remember the lawyers said they always send two when dealing with him?

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/10/trump-files-how-donalds-lawyers-dealt-his-constant-lying

[MineralMan]

8. The NTY has its own attorneys. Yes, it does.

It has tons of precedent on its side, too.

The First Amendment is also on its side, along with reams of case law about how hard it is to make a libel case stick with publications and public figures who are politicians.

The NYT can safely scoff at this C&D letter, and will.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

9. Yup. New York Times v. Sullivan.

They know more about public figures and actual malice than anybody else. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Times_Co._v._Sullivan

[MineralMan]

10. Exactly.

Trump may think he has excellent legal advice, but it's business and tax advice. His attorneys are way over their heads when it comes to First Amendment issues having to to with the Press. Not so for the NYT legal team.

And then there's Trump, who thinks the law is there for him to use in intimidation tactics. Surprise, surprise, Donald!