[HotAir] Are we about to finally exorcise the ghosts of New York Times v Sullivan? Or will Donald Trump cut another settlement notch in his media-war belt?
I know which way I'm betting.
Late yesterday, the BBC lost on a motion in federal court to dismiss a lawsuit from Trump over a news report aired just before the 2024 election. The BBC edited Trump's speech on January 6, 2021, without disclosing that manipulation, making it sound as though Trump had incited violence. Trump filed for damages on the basis of defamation, as well as under the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act.
Judge Jeffrey Kuntz dismissed the claim under the FDUTPA, but pointedly refused to do the same with defamation. Kuntz noted that Trump had lost some similar cases in the past on the basis that news media reported on actual stories, even if they added commentary. In this case, Kuntz noted, the BBC cooked up a story — and then went way out of its way to promote the defamatory hoax:
In CNN, Judge Singhal concluded that "the complained of statements are opinion, not factually false statements, and therefore are not actionable." Cable News Network, 684 F. Supp. 3d at 1274. In Dow Jones, Judge Gayles dismissed President Trump’s claims that the Wall Street Journal failed to adequately investigate claims it reported. Dow Jones & Co., Inc., 2026 WL 3270869, at *9.1
Those cases involved a news entity reporting on a story. Here, the news entity created the story. BBC admitted as much by confirming it had edited a video to make it appear as though President Trump made a statement he never made. And it acknowledged it chose to release the video in a documentary only a week before the 2024 Presidential Election, at the time it would have the most impact. To make sure it was seen in Florida, BBC even emailed U.S. and Florida based commenters with instructions to on how to view the documentary.
Whether President Trump can prove these claims and establish he sustained damages at summary judgment or trial is left for another day. For now, after careful review, and being otherwise fully advised, BBC’s Motion to Dismiss is granted in part and denied in part.
Kuntz went on to lay out how the BBC created its hoax, a story that will be familiar to Hot Air readers but not likely to the BBC's audience:
Update from Townhall at 2:00 pm ET — the Beeb has been creating all sorts of problems for itself!
Well, this isn't the first time the BBC has been in trouble for doing questionable things. They got busted selectively editing President Trump's January 6, 2021 speech to make it seem like he was inciting an insurrection, they've removed episodes of 'offensive' comedy sketches by Mitchell and Webb, and they came up with this abysmal headline about a peace-seeking Imam.
Now Oscar-winning producer Lucie Kon is saying the outlet is investigating Jewish employees for "Zionist beliefs."
The BBC itself reported on October 26 that Kon received a £400,000 payout from the BBC after raising antisemitism concerns.
Here's more:
Lucie Kon, who worked as a commissioning editor overseeing several documentaries, including Mr Nobody Against Putin, told The Telegraph that BBC colleagues said Zionists like her were "evil" following the 7 October attacks.
Kon's post was made redundant as part of a BBC restructure. She said the payment she received was for redundancy back pay and settlement for personal injury caused by the process.
The BBC says it did not uphold any of the allegations of antisemitism but accepted there were "shortcomings" in how it treated Kon, which had a "personal impact" on her.
The corporation did not specify what the shortcomings were.
Kon says she raised a number of concerns about how she was treated following the Hamas-led 7 October attacks.
"I became a problem," she told BBC News.
Posted by: Frank G ||
11/11/2026 12:41 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[36 views]
Top|| File under: Commies
#1
The comments at the link question, correctly I believe, the comparison of gross income to disposable income. I find myself in one of the higher income colors but my cost of living here in southern California is very high so the amount of cash that I'm able to carry around in my pocket isn't really all that much. Suffice it to say I do not drive a brand new Lexus, or Tesla. Maybe that's why I keep telling Mrs. Uluque that we need to move to Mississippi.
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
11/11/2026 12:40 Comments ||
Top||
#2
^
agree
not only are the two metrics way different but there are major problems accounting for layers of taxation, pricing differences and distortions because of tax havens (e.g. Luxembourg, Liechtenstein). I note that the first chart leaves some of the countries with a blank status (e.g. the UK)
Posted by: Lord Garth ||
11/11/2026 19:09 Comments ||
Top||
[RedState] Texas Democrats rode last week's blue wave to a majority in the state House and the governor's mansion, and they've wasted no time showing gun owners what comes next.
It ain't pretty.
When bill prefiling opened on November 9, Democrats flooded the docket with gun-control proposals. The Texan counted 23 gun bills, all but one in the House, and NRA-ILA tallied roughly 35 firearm-related bills on day one alone.
That's a lot of gun control bills for a group that duped voters into thinking their primary concern was gas and grocery prices.
The wish list reads like it was copied straight from New York, not the Lone Star State.
State Rep. Ann Johnson's HB 218 would create "extreme risk protective orders," better known as red flag laws, and would repeal the 2025 law Gov. Greg Abbott signed banning them. Such laws are a blatant violation of due process, allowing the government to seize a person's firearms before they have been convicted of a crime or given a full opportunity to defend themselves in court.
There is little evidence that they actually work.
State Sen. Judith Zaffirini's SB 80 would make it a state felony for anyone under 21 to buy a so-called "assault weapon." That definition is broad enough to cover a centerfire rifle with a pistol grip or a folding stock.
State Rep. Suleman Lalani's HB 606 goes further still and bans anyone under 21 from buying any firearm at all. Old enough to enlist, not old enough to buy a deer rifle.
Then there's Rep. Joe Moody's HB 659. It would require dealers to report anyone who buys two or more guns, or four or more magazines, in a short window. The report would go to the Texas Department of Public Safety and the buyer's local sheriff.
Texas Gun Rights President Chris McNutt wasn't impressed.
"Democrats campaigned on affordability. On day one, they filed gun confiscation instead: red flag orders without a hearing, universal background checks, gun bans for adults under 21, and a registry," he told The Texan. "Twenty-three anti-gun bills hit the docket on day one, and Texas Gun Rights will fight every one of them. No confiscation, no registration, no compromise."
On HB 659, he added: "Call it whatever you want. It's a gun registry, and registration is the first step to confiscation."
Governor-elect Gina Hinojosa, meanwhile, has gone quiet. The Texan reports she "has not spoken specifically on any of the proposed gun bills so far," though she has supported similar legislation in the past. In an October interview with The New Yorker, she said she opposes constitutional carry and that "people should have a background check to carry a gun."
Fortunately, one firewall remains. Republicans still control the Texas Senate, and they've made clear they won't roll over and show their belly when it comes to Second Amendment protections.
"Texas stands as long as the Texas Senate Republican caucus holds the line," state Sen. Charles Schwertner wrote on election night. "We will."
The session opens Jan. 12. Texas gun owners had better hope the line holds.
Posted by: Frank G ||
11/11/2026 08:51 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[92 views]
Top|| File under: Tin Hat Dictators, Presidents for Life, & Kleptocrats
Posted by: Frank G ||
11/11/2026 9:04 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Illiterates.
10 U.S. Code § 246 - Militia: composition and classes
(a)The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b)The classes of the militia are—
(1)the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2)the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.
2nd Amendment
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
That represents the majority of the Tik-Tok electorate my friend! They don't need to understand anything complicated like the Constitution or government powers, if they have a question they just click their phone and it tells them the right answer. Easy-peasy, so they can deal with important things in life like what everyone is saying about them online...
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
[RedState] Texas Democrats rode last week's blue wave to a majority in the state House and the governor's mansion, and they've wasted no time showing gun owners what comes next. 
