Trump’s campaign SUES NYT for ‘libel’ over columnist’s claim of a ‘real Trump-Russia quid pro quo’

Donald Trump‘s reelection campaign filed a lawsuit against The New York Times Wednesday alleging it falsely spread a conspiracy theory tying the president to Russia.

The campaign claims the newspaper intentionally committed libel when it reported the Trump team made a deal with Russian President Vladimir Putin and his regime to help him win the 2016 election.

‘Today the President’s re-election campaign filed suit against the New York Times for falsely stating the campaign had an ‘overarching deal’ with ‘Vladimir Putin’s oligarchy’ to ‘help the campaign against Hillary Clinton‘ in exchange for ‘a new pro-Russian foreign policy, starting with relief from … economic sanctions,’ the campaign’s Senior Legal Advisor Jenna Ellis said in a statement.

She also claimed the reports from the Times ‘are 100 percent false and defamatory.’

Donald Trump's reelection campaign filed a lawsuit against The New York Times alleging it engaged in 'libel' against the president

Donald Trump's reelection campaign filed a lawsuit against The New York Times alleging it engaged in 'libel' against the president

Donald Trump’s reelection campaign filed a lawsuit against The New York Times alleging it engaged in ‘libel’ against the president 

The lawsuit stems from a March 2019 op-ed that claimed Trump had a deal with Russian President Vladimir Putin to help him win in the 2016 election in exchange for relief to Russia once he was in office

The lawsuit stems from a March 2019 op-ed that claimed Trump had a deal with Russian President Vladimir Putin to help him win in the 2016 election in exchange for relief to Russia once he was in office

The lawsuit stems from a March 2019 op-ed that claimed Trump had a deal with Russian President Vladimir Putin to help him win in the 2016 election in exchange for relief to Russia once he was in office

‘The complaint alleges The Times was aware of the falsity at the time it published them, but did so for the intentional purpose of hurting the campaign, while misleading its own readers in the process,’ she continued.

The case stems from a March 2019 op-ed article by columnist Max Frankel, who also served as the Times’ executive editor from 1986-1994.

He argues in the piece that there was an understood agreement between the Kremlin and Trump campaign to assist him in getting elected in exchange for relief toward Russia once he was in office.

‘There was no need for detailed electoral collusion between the Trump campaign and Vladimir Putin’s oligarchy because they had an overarching deal: the quid of help in the campaign against Hillary Clinton for the quo of a new pro-Russian foreign policy, starting with relief from the Obama administration’s burdensome economic sanctions,’ Frankel wrote at the time.

‘The Trumpites knew about the quid and held out the prospect of the quo,’ he continued.

This was published before the term quid pro quo earned national attention when it became the center of the impeachment proceedings after Trump’s infamous phone call with his Ukrainian counterpart.

During the call, Democrat allege, Trump said he would release frozen military aid to the nation if it announced it was investigating his political rival Joe Biden. 

Max Frankel claimed in the Times op-ed that 'there was no need for detailed electoral collusion between the Trump campaign and Vladimir Putin's oligarchy because they had an overarching deal'

Max Frankel claimed in the Times op-ed that 'there was no need for detailed electoral collusion between the Trump campaign and Vladimir Putin's oligarchy because they had an overarching deal'

Max Frankel claimed in the Times op-ed that ‘there was no need for detailed electoral collusion between the Trump campaign and Vladimir Putin’s oligarchy because they had an overarching deal’

In the lawsuit filed this week, the campaign says the Times was aware at the time of publication that the statements made by Frankel were false.

It claims the op-ed was only allowed to be published because the paper has a bias against the Trump administration.

‘The Times was well aware when it published these statements that they were not true. The Times’ own previous reporting had confirmed the falsity of these statements,’ the campaign alleges.

‘But The Times published these statements anyway, knowing them to be false,’ the filing continued, ‘and knowing it would misinform and mislead its own readers, because of The Times’ extreme bias against and animosity toward the Campaign, and The Times’ exuberance to improperly influence the presidential election in November 2020.’

link

(Visited 5 times, 1 visits today)

Leave a Reply