Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Ocelot II

(127,493 posts)
3. What did I tell ya?
Fri Sep 19, 2025, 12:23 PM
Sep 19
https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=20647485

If anyone wants to read this Truth Social post disguised as a lawsuit, here's the complaint in all its absurd glory: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flmd.447437/gov.uscourts.flmd.447437.1.0.pdf I feel like I lost a few IQ points just reading that mess. It's basically a blowjob on paper, extolling the brilliance and perfection and sheer genius of Dear Leader for about 75 pages. But I also flashed back to my federal civil procedure class, and made mental notes as to the many violations of the rules of pleading in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to be found in this verbal dungheap. Let's start with Rule 8, which says that a complaint is to include "a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." There's nothing short or plain about this statement. And: "Each allegation must be simple, concise, and direct. No technical form is required." I didn't see anything simple, concise or direct; the whole thing, complete with photographs, is just a big fat whine about how unfair NYT's reporting was. They claim actual malice, a requirement for a defamation claim against a public figure (this isn't NYT's first rodeo; the actual malice principle came from the landmark case of New York Times v. Sullivan). But Trump's crack team of lawyers doesn't seem to understand what actual malice means in this context - not personal malice or hatred, but the publication of a statement while knowing it was false or with reckless disregard for its truth or falsity. Nothing Trump complains about is factual - it's all opinion, which is protected speech. He just complains that NYT and its reporters hate him and it's so unfair that they don't recognize his genius.

He's trying to extort money from NYT the way he did from CBS. This is SO bad, though, that NYT's lawyers, once they've stopped laughing, should file a Rule 11 motion - sanctions for filing a court document without a reasonable basis in law or fact. But read the thing if you didn't just have lunch.

Recommendations

9 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

A federal judge just sumamrily struck Trump's complaint against the New York Times, calling it, essentially, garbage LetMyPeopleVote Sep 19 #1
🤔 dweller Sep 19 #2
What did I tell ya? Ocelot II Sep 19 #3
I share your opinion on this crap lawsuit LetMyPeopleVote Sep 19 #5
I'm not a lawyer but I agree. tinymontgomery Sep 19 #22
NYT didn't even file a motion to strike the complaint. The judge acted sua sponte. rsdsharp Sep 19 #27
Again, as a non-lawyer, can NYT now go after him? tinymontgomery Sep 19 #35
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 requires that a pleading, rsdsharp Sep 19 #42
Thank you. Much easier to understand now. n/t tinymontgomery Sep 21 #47
What is your prediction, does trump replead or appeal to the 11th Circuit and then to SCOTUS? LetMyPeopleVote Sep 19 #23
It's not an appealable order. They will have to refile their complaint in compliance with Rule 8 Ocelot II Sep 19 #25
Judge strikes down Trump's $15bn lawsuit against the New York Times LetMyPeopleVote Sep 19 #4
Read the whole order; it's glorious. Ocelot II Sep 19 #6
I love this opinion LetMyPeopleVote Sep 19 #7
Yes, it is Marthe48 Sep 19 #9
spank! Kali Sep 19 #12
Uh oh Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Sep 19 #8
He should charge them with contempt of court. Wonder Why Sep 19 #10
If the revised complaint isn't cleaned up, the lawyers are subject to sanctions - Ocelot II Sep 19 #33
Judge Merryday for U.S. Supreme Court, just as soon as possible. (nt) Paladin Sep 19 #11
He'll be 75 in about six weeks, and already on senior status. rsdsharp Sep 19 #39
Aww, poor Donny ain't getting his $15 Billion. ProudMNDemocrat Sep 19 #13
He will re-file consistent with the court's decision. I still think he'll lose on the merits. onenote Sep 19 #18
Will Trump let his lawyers file a new complaint that doesn't also include Ocelot II Sep 19 #28
Yes. And a lot of the bullshit that will be pulled from the complaint onenote Sep 19 #30
As long as the attachments are more stupid photos Ocelot II Sep 19 #31
Yes. But the judge would've ignored most of that shit anyway. It was only included to stroke Trump's ego onenote Sep 19 #38
Oh noes! Diaper Donny has a sad!... Aristus Sep 19 #14
Was just listening to George Conway's podcast this morning about this ... ificandream Sep 19 #15
The case hasn't been thrown out - yet - but the judge told Trump Ocelot II Sep 19 #32
I had only seen the headline when I wrote that ificandream Sep 19 #43
What a great name - Merryday! PatSeg Sep 19 #16
I started to read it.... reACTIONary Sep 19 #36
In that case, PatSeg Sep 19 #44
"decidedly improper and impermissible" elleng Sep 19 #17
I wouldn't get too excited about this ruling. onenote Sep 19 #19
It is not easy to violate Rule 8 LetMyPeopleVote Sep 19 #21
The question is whether the revised complaint will comply with Rule 8. Ocelot II Sep 19 #26
The new page limit doesn't include attachments. onenote Sep 19 #29
As long as Rule 8's "short and plain statement of the case" is complied with, Ocelot II Sep 19 #34
Exactly. But getting the judge to pay attention to it was never the point of the crap onenote Sep 19 #37
No doubt. I just wonder whether Himself will be satisfied Ocelot II Sep 19 #40
Why wouldn't he? He'll just publicly say that all that crap was part of his lawsuit. onenote Sep 19 #41
I hope that the next filing at least state a real cause of action LetMyPeopleVote Sep 20 #45
Already? Oeditpus Rex Sep 19 #20
MaddowBlog-Judge rejects Trump's case against The New York Times, tells lawyers to rewrite it LetMyPeopleVote Sep 19 #24
Here is trump's reaction to this ruling by the trial court LetMyPeopleVote Sep 20 #46
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Judge strikes down Trump'...»Reply #3