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

melm00se

(5,177 posts)
6. The original dismissal
Thu May 28, 2026, 10:58 AM
Thursday

allowed for a refiling of the case and they have done that.

Their obligation in refiling the case is that they assert and can back up the claim that the WSJ acted with "actual malice."

Having read the refiling, Trump's team is claiming that their assertion that the document is false and Maxwell's assertion that she did not recall Trump submitting a letter as they are the only remaining witnesses still alive at the time of the publication is sufficient to show that the WSJ acted with "actual malice."

That may meet the requirement that the court established to refile the case.

I do not think that their assertions/claims will be sufficient to overcome the fact that birthday book did include said letter and that letter has a signature that appears to be consistent with Trump's signature.


Recommendations

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

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Trump Refiles $10 Billion...»Reply #6