All Content from Business Insider 51分钟前
Donald Trump is suing Rupert Murdoch. That doesn't mean the case will make it to court.
index_new5.html
../../../zaker_core/zaker_tpl_static/wap/tpl_guoji1.html

 

美国前总统特朗普因《华尔街日报》一篇关于其与杰弗里·爱泼斯坦相关笔记的报道,向媒体大亨鲁珀特·默多克及其旗下报纸提起100亿美元的诽谤诉讼。尽管特朗普常威胁起诉媒体,但此次诉讼尤为引人关注,因为它将特朗普置于与其长期盟友默多克(通过福克斯新闻)的直接冲突之中。然而,考虑到美国诽谤法对公众人物的举证要求极高,以及默多克过往处理类似案件的倾向,双方均有庭外和解的动机。特朗普可能借此获得关注并转移公众对其与爱泼斯坦关系的注意力,而默多克则可能为避免94岁高龄接受冗长复杂的法律程序,并支付一笔相对较小的费用来解决争议。双方的盟友关系和交易性质也为和解提供了可能性。

🏛️ 特朗普起诉默多克及其《华尔街日报》诽谤,索赔100亿美元,起因是该报一篇关于特朗普与杰弗里·爱泼斯坦笔记的报道。这是前总统首次起诉媒体,且对象是其重要盟友默多克,显示了两人之间非同寻常的利益冲突。

⚖️ 从法律角度看,特朗普胜诉难度较大。美国诽谤法要求原告承担证明不实陈述的举证责任,对于公众人物而言,这一门槛更高。《华尔街日报》也以不屈服于强大压力而闻名,其法律团队可能会积极应对。

🤝 尽管面临法律挑战,特朗普和默多克都有庭外和解的动机。特朗普可能通过诉讼获得媒体关注,并转移公众对其与爱泼斯坦关系的注意力;而默多克作为年事已高的公众人物,可能不愿经历复杂的法律程序,倾向于支付和解金(如此前支付给Dominion的7.875亿美元)来解决争议。

🔄 双方的长期盟友关系和交易性是促成和解的关键因素。福克斯新闻曾为特朗普提供大量支持,而特朗普政府也曾为默多克的商业利益提供便利。这种相互依存的关系可能促使双方在不损害自身核心利益的前提下,寻求更便捷的解决方案,例如通过向特朗普的总统图书馆捐款来平息事端。

⚖️ 双方都可能因进入“发现程序”(discovery)而面临压力。特朗普不愿详细披露其与爱泼斯坦的关系细节;而默多克在处理媒体公司(如CBS、Paramount、Disney)的出售或监管事宜时,可能不希望出现任何不利于其声誉或商业交易的公开法律纠纷。

Donald Trump and Rupert Murdoch have been allies for years. Now Trump is suing Murdoch for libel — but will he take the case all the way to a courtroom?

Donald Trump threatens to sue media companies all the time. Sometimes he actually does it.

But the libel suit Trump filed against Rupert Murdoch, Murdoch's Wall Street Journal, and two Journal reporters last week — over a story the Journal published about a note Trump allegedly sent to Jeffrey Epstein — is extraordinary.

Not only is it seemingly the first time a sitting president has sued a media organization, it puts Trump in direct conflict with Murdoch — perhaps Trump's most important backer over the years, via his Fox News operation.

But just because Trump has sued Murdoch doesn't mean we'll see a verdict in the case. Multiple media and tech companies have settled similar cases with Trump since he was elected last fall.

On the face of it, Trump should have a hard time prevailing: US libel laws place the burden on a plaintiff to prove that someone has said something untrue about them, and that burden gets much steeper when that person is a public figure. Murdoch's Journal also has a long tradition of not bending when powerful people threaten it. (On Wednesday, the Journal published another Trump-Epstein story, reporting that Attorney General Pam Bondi had told Trump his name appeared multiple times in unreleased documents about the case.)

Still, we are in a different environment than we were before last November's election, and all kinds of institutions have tried to accommodate Trump. Just as important: Murdoch has backed out of fights in the past.

I ran that theory by NPR's David Folkenflik — a longtime Murdoch watcher — this week on the newest episode of my Channels podcast. (Though we spent most of our time chatting about Trump's move to pull $1 billion in funding from NPR and PBS.) Here's an edited excerpt of our conversation.

Peter Kafka: What do you think happens with this suit? Do you think it actually goes to trial? Do you think they settle?

David Folkenflik: Look. Trump — actually, his ostensible future presidential library — has received a lot of money in recent months from settlements. ABC, CBS — which had a truly flimsy case presented against it, essentially legally nonexistent — plus Meta, plus Twitter/X. But a lot of Trump's previous lawsuits have been dismissed.

It wouldn't totally surprise me if it were dismissed here, if Trump would be ultimately OK with that. Because he's gotten the huge headline out of trying to discredit The Wall Street Journal's excellent reporting teams.

It puts Rupert on notice. As well as other elements of the conservative ecosystem — that they don't get a pass, just because they're notionally seen as on his side.

Nobody has done more than Rupert Murdoch to help Trump over the past decade. Murdoch is his own power source. These are two titans.

Two titans who don't necessarily like each other. But they're transactional and they both see the value in getting something from the other one. And Rupert Murdoch does settle lawsuits — like the $787.5 million check he wrote to Dominion Voting Systems, right before that defamation case was supposed to go to trial.

Just before he was supposed to testify.

So if the current price for settling a Donald Trump lawsuit is a $16 million donation to his library, that's a nothingburger for Murdoch, right?

This is something I've been thinking about and talking about with some of Murdoch's people. We've spoken in recent days. I can't predict the future. But Murdoch seems to me like the kind of guy who fights things like this — until he doesn't. Until it's more useful for him not to.

Like if he has to go on the stand or go into depositions at the age of 94 and prepare for those things — he's probably like, "Forget it. Sixteen million? I could care less."

That said, he likes a good story. He didn't kill the Theranos story, which was an exposé by one of his reporters about a blood diagnosis company built on lies, in which he was the largest private investor. And that's to his great credit that he didn't do that.

So I would guess that the excellent legal team of the Journal and Dow Jones fights this right until the point at which it's going to be inconvenient.

Both sides have a pressure point. Trump doesn't want to go to discovery, and have to talk at great length in front of lawyers for Murdoch about his actual relationship with Epstein.

That's a pressure point.

On the other hand, if Murdoch has anything that he may think in the future is going to be in front of federal officials or regulators — like CBS and Paramount, which has its sale about to go through; like the Walt Disney Company, which perennially does — then Murdoch may say $16 million is cheap.

Let's not forget that these alliances work in both directions. Fox News has run interference for Trump pretty much since 2015.

Murdoch won benefits for that, right? The Justice Department under Trump tried to block AT&T's acquisition of Time Warner because Murdoch had kind of wanted to take over Time Warner.

And when Murdoch wanted to sell to Disney, Trump said 'Go right ahead.' He called it a "great thing."

Trump's only question the morning when he learned about the Disney acquisition of most of Fox's Hollywood assets was calling Murdoch and asking, "Are you gonna hold on to Fox News?" Murdoch says yes. Trump says congratulations.

So would you bet this settles before trial?

Although there's a part of me that believes Murdoch's gonna fight it, these guys are totally transactional. If it didn't happen to have the word "lawsuit" around it, somebody might pay something or send an email to somebody else to resolve this.

These are two billionaires colliding here. But their alliance is probably more useful to them than their fighting.

Unless Trump thinks that he needs this to feed the increasingly radicalized parts of his base that somehow has to be distracted from the idea that Trump knew Jeffrey Epstein. Which he obviously did.

Read the original article on Business Insider

Fish AI Reader

Fish AI Reader

AI辅助创作,多种专业模板,深度分析,高质量内容生成。从观点提取到深度思考,FishAI为您提供全方位的创作支持。新版本引入自定义参数,让您的创作更加个性化和精准。

FishAI

FishAI

鱼阅,AI 时代的下一个智能信息助手,助你摆脱信息焦虑

联系邮箱 441953276@qq.com

相关标签

特朗普 默多克 诽谤诉讼 媒体 和解
相关文章