LEGAL DRAMA LOOMING?
Attorneys representing GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump have sent a letter to The New York Times demanding a retraction of an article in which it is alleged he made inappropriate and unwanted sexual advances against two women.
The allegations are the latest to rock Trump’s campaign in the aftermath of last week’s release of a 2005 video/ audio tape that featured the billionaire real estate mogul speaking in vulgar, “Clinton-esque” terms about his efforts to sleep with a married woman.
Trump pushed back against the tape by invoking the many indiscretions of former U.S. president Bill Clinton – and the efforts undertaken by Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton to intimidate his accusers.
This time he’s pushing back legally.
“Your article is reckless, defamatory and constitutes libel per se,” the letter from Trump attorney Marc Kasowitz to Times’ executive editor Dean Baquet reads.
“It is apparent from, among other things, the timing of the article, that it is nothing more than a politically-motivate effort to defeat Mr. Trump’s candidacy,” Kasowitz’s letter continued. “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, 11 years, and, in another case, more than three decades, before deciding to come forward with these false and defamatory statements.”
Here a copy of the demand letter …
[tnc-pdf-viewer-iframe file=”https://www.fitsnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/DemandForRetraction.pdf” width=”400″ height=”600″ download=”true” print=”true” fullscreen=”true” share=”true” zoom=”true” open=”true” pagenav=”true” logo=”false” find=”true” language=”en-US” page=”” default_zoom=”auto” pagemode=””]
The Times stood by its reporting, with Baquet telling CNN “I think it is pretty evident this story falls clearly in the realm of public service journalism, and discussing issues that arose from the tape and his comments since it surfaced.”
Wait … “public service journalism?” Really?
More like “Clinton service journalism.”
Seriously. As damaging as this story is for Trump, it’s every bit as damaging for the corporate-owned mainstream media – which has gone “all in” to elect Clinton this November.
Either way, as transparent as the situation may be, Trump will have an exceedingly difficult time winning a libel judgment against the Times. For public figures to win such cases, they must not only prove the allegations to be false – but that the paper knew them to be false at the time they were published.
That’s an almost insurmountable standard … and we’ve actually criticized Trump in the past for seeking to weaken it.
He’s just going to have to hope undecided voters see the situation for what it is … or at the very least see the hypocrisy in the Clintons seeking to capitalize on it.
(Banner image via iStock)