The bbc, again.

[silvertop]

Law suits are harder to prove in the US as untrue is not enough, you also have to prove malicious intent and damage. I assume in this case Trump couldn't. However these cases vary state by state, so people try and shop around if they can.

Throwing a case out is harder than you think. The court is tasked with denying a party their constitutional right to trial. The case has to have absolutely no chance of success, otherwise the court will give the party the benefit of the doubt even if it thinks the case is unlikely to win at trial. The case against the Wall Street Journal must have been fanciful at best.

There are, of course, technical reasons why a case will also be dismissed. Thus, in the case of Trump v BBC, Trump has been ordered to depose on discovery (ie to make sure he has disclosed all the relevant documents). If he fails to obey the order his case may be thrown out.

The media worm is turning. Claims were settled regardless of the feeble merits to avoid the cost and adverse PR. Trumps claims were always motivated by ego, politics, media control and extortion. He got away with it for years. The Fourth Estate is finally kicking back.

 

[georgenorman]

US court just threw out another 10 billion dollar extortion masked as defamation claim fabricated by Trump against the Wall Street Journal

The equally specious claim against the BBC will go the same way any time.

Of course, it was the BBC broadcast that was specious - hence the lawsuit.

 

[Spiderman]

Similar on Sky & TNT. The prelims for a Palace live game are often an interrupted hour or so about the sacred Man United. They might as well make Man U TV free for an hour.

And this is why they will never be allowed to be relegated

 

[Teddy Eagle]

And this is why they will never be allowed to be relegated

It'll be interesting to see if they're in danger of going down which club(s) get points docked for some financial impropriety.