Explain the argument Trump’s lawyer is making here
| Electric University | 07/20/25 | | Copper odious crackhouse | 07/20/25 | | Hairraiser address | 07/20/25 | | diverse newt | 07/20/25 | | WWMD (what would Malkmus do) | 07/21/25 | | diverse newt | 07/20/25 | | sticky trip masturbator | 07/20/25 | | Passionate School Cafeteria Giraffe | 07/20/25 | | Glittery tanning salon | 07/20/25 | | diverse newt | 07/20/25 | | Glittery tanning salon | 07/20/25 | | diverse newt | 07/20/25 | | Emotionally + Physically Abusive Ex-Husband | 07/20/25 | | Malicious Pedophile Crew (MPC) | 07/20/25 | | Electric University | 07/20/25 | | diverse newt | 07/20/25 | | Slate Hyperventilating House Halford | 07/20/25 | | Orange self-centered sound barrier forum | 07/20/25 | | diverse newt | 07/20/25 | | Slate Hyperventilating House Halford | 07/20/25 | | Electric University | 07/20/25 | | aphrodisiac corn cake | 07/20/25 | | Electric University | 07/20/25 | | Emotionally + Physically Abusive Ex-Husband | 07/20/25 | | Soul-stirring headpube mother | 07/20/25 | | Electric University | 07/20/25 | | Malicious Pedophile Crew (MPC) | 07/20/25 | | OldHLSDude | 07/21/25 | | ,.,.,.,.,.,.,..,:,,:,,.,:::,.,,.,:.,,.:.,:.,:.::,. | 07/21/25 | | OldHLSDude | 07/21/25 | | ,.,.,.,.,.,.,..,:,,:,,.,:::,.,,.,:.,,.:.,:.,:.::,. | 07/21/25 | | https://imgur.com/a/o2g8xYK | 07/20/25 | | OldHLSDude | 07/21/25 | | https://imgur.com/a/o2g8xYK | 07/20/25 | | ,.,.,.,.,.,.,..,:,,:,,.,:::,.,,.,:.,,.:.,:.,:.::,. | 07/21/25 | | Malicious Pedophile Crew (MPC) | 07/21/25 | | https://imgur.com/a/o2g8xYK | 07/21/25 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: July 20th, 2025 1:00 PM Author: aphrodisiac corn cake
This is a dumb Tweet and a dumb thread.
They're trying to show that the libel was spread not just among the WSJ subscribers, but to hundreds of millions of people.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752584&forum_id=2...id#49116437) |
 |
Date: July 21st, 2025 11:26 AM
Author: ,.,.,.,.,.,.,..,:,,:,,.,:::,.,,.,:.,,.:.,:.,:.::,.
sit this one out boomer
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752584&forum_id=2...id#49118659) |
 |
Date: July 21st, 2025 11:33 AM
Author: ,.,.,.,.,.,.,..,:,,:,,.,:::,.,,.,:.,,.:.,:.,:.::,.
Just take out “explain”
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752584&forum_id=2...id#49118674) |
 |
Date: July 20th, 2025 4:47 PM
Author: https://imgur.com/a/o2g8xYK
If you interpret "exclusive" to mean subscribers-only, then the fact that it was widely disseminated might reflect to intent to make it more broadly known. However I've always interpreted it to mean "only we have this info," which a media org often does with articles it runs paywall-free. They serve as advertising for the publication sometimes.
I also think a lot of stuff gets published paywall-free when it's just really important. Like when the NY times was reporting about Trump bombing Iran, I believe all of it was paywall-free. The WSJ would presumably do that if it had something exclusive and with that level of significance. They made a lot of shit paywall-free when Flynn went down in 2017. Their ukraineshit is sometimes paywall-free
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752584&forum_id=2...id#49116932) |
 |
Date: July 21st, 2025 11:24 AM Author: OldHLSDude
My understanding is that in journalism "exclusive" means that you're the only news outlet who has access to the information and the right to publish it. I don't know if they paywalled this or not. I have WSJ and NYT subscriptions, so everything just opens up automatically.
Exclusivity is possibly a piece of the argument establishing actual malice. If no other news sources carried the information it erases the possibility of an "everybody is saying it" defense and any potential reliance the fact checking by other entities. I just skimmed the complaint.
I am forced to admire Trump's pugilistic spirit. I had an alpha dog like that once. He never took shit from any other dog and was a great inspiration.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752584&forum_id=2...id#49118653) |
 |
Date: July 21st, 2025 11:30 AM
Author: ,.,.,.,.,.,.,..,:,,:,,.,:::,.,,.,:.,,.:.,:.,:.::,.
It doesn’t matter if it’s authentic (i.e., whether Trump actually wrote it). What matters is that it purports to be from Trump and was included in a binder Maxwell prepared for Epstein which was then seized by the FBI when they executed the search warrant at Epstein’s property. That fact alone makes it newsworthy, and that’s all WSJ ever said it was. They never said “we hereby declare that Donald Trump authored this letter.” We all know he did, but the point is that part doesn’t even have to be true for WSJ to prevail in this lawsuit.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752584&forum_id=2...id#49118669) |
|
|