News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person or their instance. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on. Keep on-topic
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
Or what? Yeah... it's totally going to happen, this time.
Have you tried reading the article?
No deposition, no more lawsuit.
He already wants out of the lawsuit so that he can evade discovery. When they close it he'll just scream to high heaven about how the entire system is rigged against him by activist judges.
It's not possible, but he should be held in contempt and locked up until he fully cooperates.
He dropped actual damages to avoid disclosing his financial details, the release of which would almost certainly expose him to prosecution. Now he's still suing only for reputational damage. So he hasn't dropped the case yet. But this ruling might convince him to. No lawyer in their right mind would let that rotten-brained liar give a deposition.
Didn't he actually try to drop the whole thing, but the BBC said no, let's keep going?
Eventually, but meanwhile the BBC is spending, at least indirectly, the British taxpayer's money just to maintain a shred of journalistic independence while reminding them that there is a price and his base that they're "fake news".
I assume that this was a very satisfactory "plan B" all along. Harassing via litigation is the one thing he's proven to be very good at over the years.
I'm not a lawyer, but as I understand it, if he doesn't stand and the case is dismissed, the BBC will be able to recover their costs from him.
So, it would be safe to assume it would eventually be the USA taxpayer footing the bill.
As is tradition
Don't worry, I'm sure Trump will pay their attorneys' fees just as well as he pays the people who do work for him. With summary judgement, a court order, and senile murmuring about a witch trial.
In an academic sense, yes, but more likely is that he stalls and appeals and leverages every excuse his job offers him and every weasel word in the Rules of Civil Procedure, and then drops the suit at the last possible moment before there's an order, and then appeals any claim for attorney's fees because it was dropped due to some fig-leaf explanation and not because it was without merit.
Eventually the BBC walks away vindicated in the eyes of anyone paying attention, and maybe with some settlement of their own, but almost certainly not made whole and their speech is at least somewhat chilled because they have to be good custodians of their budget, just as was always intended.
Maybe I'm jaded, but litigation with a ratfuck is ratfuck business. It can be a worthwhile investment if you have something other than money at stake, but it's inherently wasteful and awful.
President Orange fucks around and finds out
I suspect he will let that time run out and then try to frame it like they dropped the case even though it was his lawsuit.
The "or what?" was in the article. Appear for a deposition by Dec 11 or he loses the suit.
That's not a real threat to him...
It’s just political grand standing until someone grows some balls to do something. IYKYK
Hopeful, they throw up the lawsuit
Who ate the lawsuit?
Me
Thank you for your service.