Trump boots Wall Street Journal reporter from Scotland trip after Epstein birthday letter story
Donald Trump
has blocked a
Wall Street Journal
reporter from joining the press pool for his visit to Scotland, following the paper's publication of a birthday message allegedly sent by him to convicted sex offender
Jeffrey Epstein
. The trip, from 25 to 29 July, includes stops at his golf properties in Turnberry and Aberdeen, according to
CBS News
.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt confirmed the decision on Monday: "Thirteen diverse outlets will participate in the press pool to cover the President's trip to Scotland. Due to The Wall Street Journal's fake and defamatory conduct, they will not be one of the 13 outlets on board," she said, as reported by The Washington Post.
Explore courses from Top Institutes in
Select a Course Category
Technology
Project Management
MBA
Cybersecurity
healthcare
Data Analytics
Others
Finance
Healthcare
others
Leadership
Data Science
Operations Management
Public Policy
Digital Marketing
Management
CXO
Degree
Design Thinking
Data Science
Product Management
Artificial Intelligence
PGDM
MCA
Skills you'll gain:
Duration:
12 Weeks
MIT xPRO
CERT-MIT XPRO Building AI Prod India
Starts on
undefined
Get Details
The reporter, Tarini Parti, had been scheduled to cover the trip. The Wall Street Journal declined to comment on the exclusion.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Treatment That Might Help You Against Knee Pain
Knee pain | search ads
Find Now
Undo
Defamation lawsuit follows Epstein note report
The ban comes just days after the Journal published an article featuring a 2003 note allegedly sent by Trump to Epstein. The note, detailed in The Washington Post, included a drawing of a nude woman and read: "Happy Birthday, and may every day be another wonderful secret." Trump's name was reportedly signed beneath the message.
The White House called the note and drawing fabricated and said it had pressured the Journal not to publish the piece. Following its publication, Trump filed a $10 billion defamation lawsuit against Dow Jones, News Corp, CEO Robert Thomson, Rupert Murdoch, and two Journal journalists.
Live Events
A spokesperson for Dow Jones said last week: "We have full confidence in the rigour and accuracy of our reporting, and will vigorously defend against any lawsuit," according to The Washington Post.
WHCA responds: Retaliation against the press
The
White House Correspondents' Association
(WHCA) quickly condemned the decision. In a statement, the organisation said: "This attempt by the White House to punish a media outlet whose coverage it does not like is deeply troubling, and it defies the First Amendment. Government retaliation against news outlets based on the content of their reporting should concern all who value free speech and an independent media."
WHCA president Weijia Jiang added: "We strongly object and find the move unacceptable." She confirmed that she had raised the matter directly with the White House. "As of this writing, that remains unclear. I will share updates as I receive them," she said, referring to whether the exclusion was a one-off or part of a broader policy shift.
Control over press pool tightens
Traditionally, press pool rotation was handled by the WHCA. But under Trump's administration, that responsibility has shifted to the White House itself. This isn't the first time an outlet has been sidelined. Previously, the Associated Press was blocked from pool coverage for refusing to adopt the administration's preferred name for the Gulf of Mexico. That case has since moved to court.
The presidential press pool, a select group of reporters who travel with and observe the president, acts as a stand-in for the broader White House press corps. Excluding a major publication raises concern about both transparency and fairness.
This lawsuit marks Trump's first known defamation case filed while in office. Legal observers say it's a significant step. Free speech attorney Floyd Abrams commented: "There's nothing inherently wrong with a president bringing a libel suit. But this claim certainly seems like nothing more or less than an effort to suppress speech that our president finds discomforting. That's not why we have libel law. It's why we have a First Amendment."
Trump has used litigation against media before. Past suits have targeted CBS News, ABC News, and Meta. In those cases, he won settlements worth millions. However, those companies had business interests beyond news. This time, News Corp and the Journal have news at their core, and they have said they will fight.
Some outlets have distanced themselves from the Epstein letter story altogether. Fox News, for instance, avoided it almost entirely, with host Howard Kurtz later saying on his programme Media Buzz: "The president has drawn extra attention to the Journal's reporting."
Others remain cautious. According to Jameel Jaffer, executive director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, lawsuits like this are often about sending a message. "These are lawsuits that have no hope of actually succeeding as lawsuits, but nevertheless have the potential to chill media organizations from doing what all of us need them to do," he said.
The Wall Street Journal, known for its conservative editorial stance, hasn't shied away from criticising Trump. Its independence sets it apart from other Murdoch-owned media like Fox News and the New York Post, which have remained more aligned with the president.
But Trump's shifting base and unresolved Epstein files have created new friction. Some of his supporters have turned critical, while others push for silence on the topic. Fox News reportedly held back coverage after Trump advised allies not to engage.
Trump's battles with the media extend beyond lawsuits and press pool exclusions. His administration has sought to strip federal support from public broadcasters such as NPR and PBS, citing bias against conservatives. Voice of America has also come under fire.
The broader concern, according to media advocates, is the cumulative impact. Stories might go unwritten. Editors might hesitate. Journalists might self-censor. And when major outlets face punishment for simply doing their job,
press freedom
takes a hit.
For now, the Journal remains defiant. But with the president's trip to Scotland days away, the message from the White House is clear: step out of line, and lose your seat on the plane.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
5 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Ready to pay price to protect farmers, says Modi as Trump increases tariff rate
India would make no compromise with the interests of its farmers and the country is ready to pay any price for it, Prime Minister Narendra Modi said on Thursday, remarks apparently made in response to President Donald Trump's decision to impose an effective tariff rate of 50% on exports to the US. Prime Minister Narendra Modi. (PTI) A day earlier, India fired back at Trump's move by calling it 'unfair, unjustified and unreasonable', vowing to protect national interests amid a growing fallout between the two countries that have long been strategic partners. 'The interests of our farmers are our topmost priority. India will never compromise the interests of its farmers, its cattle rearers and fisherfolk,' Modi said, addressing an event in New Delhi to commemorate the centenary birth anniversary of MS Swaminathan, the architect of the country's green revolution. 'I know I'll have to pay a big price for this personally, but I'm prepared. India today is prepared to protect its farming community at any cost.' The White House said on Wednesday that Trump signed an executive order imposing a 25% levy on Indian imports for the country's purchases of Russian oil, which comes on top of a 25% tariff he had announced last week. India and the US failed to hammer a bilateral trade pact after several rounds of negotiations, despite Trump's hint in the middle of the talks that a 'beautiful big deal' was imminent. India's refusal to open up its farm, fishery, and dairy sectors was one of the main sticking points. On Thursday, Modi made it clear that India would continue protecting the agriculture sector, which accounts for nearly 18% of the country's gross domestic product and employs millions of poor cultivators who mostly own tiny land parcels. 'The strength of our farmers and agriculture is the very basis for the development of our country. That's why our policies are not just aimed at helping our farmers, but to increase their confidence,' Modi said. Trump's taunt that India could buy oil from Pakistan did not sit well with New Delhi, and the country has also rejected repeated claims by Trump that he brokered a truce between India and Pakistan by using trade as a lever. The MS Swaminathan Foundation also conferred the first MS Swaminathan Prize for Food and Peace to Nigerian scientist Ademola A Adenle, the founder of Africa Sustainability Innovation-Academy. Modi released a commemorative ₹100 coin and a postage stamp in honour of Swaminathan, who collaborated with Norman Borlaug, a Nobel laureate, to customise for India a high-yielding wheat variety Borlaug developed for poverty-stricken Mexico in the 1950s. This wheat type paved the way for an Indian green revolution.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
7 minutes ago
- First Post
Free speech on trial: Stanford newspaper sues Trump administration over political targeting of students
Framing the policy as an 'ideological purge,' a Stanford lawsuit challenges Trump-era immigration powers that allegedly target noncitizens for engaging in protected political expression read more The Stanford Daily, Stanford University's student-run newspaper, has filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration, challenging its use of federal immigration law to target pro-Palestinian Arab activists. The newspaper argues that the government's actions unlawfully curtail students' First Amendment rights, according to a report in Israel National News. The Stanford Daily and two former noncitizen college students brought the case, fearing that their pro-Palestinian Arab views or activism could make them vulnerable to deportation. As such, the lawsuit challenges the Trump administration's use of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) to deport noncitizens based on their political views. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Attorneys for the plaintiffs, from the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), stated that international students on staff have been avoiding writing about the war in Gaza or have removed previously published articles out of fear. They noted that since March 2025, the administration began targeting lawfully present noncitizens for deportation based on protected speech, leading to self-censorship among students at The Stanford Daily due to fears of visa revocation, arrest, detention and deportation, according to CNN. The lawsuit focuses on two INA provisions. The first grants the Secretary of State the authority to remove a noncitizen whose views 'would compromise a compelling United States foreign policy interest.' The second provision allows the Secretary to revoke a visa at any time, at their discretion. The lawsuit seeks a federal judge's order to bar the administration from using these provisions to deport noncitizens, particularly staff members of The Stanford Daily, based on their protected speech. The Stanford Daily stated in its lawsuit that the administration has caused its foreign writers to self-censor to avoid being targeted. The student newspaper brought the suit because of two anonymous members of the newspaper, who have had to 'self-censor' their published and. The newspaper argued that the government's effort has impermissibly chilled students' First Amendment rights. Stanford, along with other campuses across the US, experienced an increase in anti-Israel protests following the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack and the subsequent war in Gaza. In June 2024, a committee analyzing antisemitism at Stanford found 'widespread and pernicious' antisemitism at the university. In April, 12 individuals were charged with felony vandalism related to a pro-Palestinian Arab demonstration at Stanford University, during which demonstrators occupied the university president's office and caused significant damage. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The lawsuit is a representation of a legal challenge to the Trump administration's so-called ideological deportation policy, which aims to deport noncitizens based on their political views.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
7 minutes ago
- First Post
From deterrence to danger: How Trump policy is fuelling global nuclear risks
With a slew of decisions over many years, US President Donald Trump has raised the risk of a nuclear catastrophe to the highest level in years, undoing decades of nuclear arms reduction and non-proliferation efforts. read more A Dongfeng-41 intercontinental strategic nuclear missiles group formation marches to celebrate the 70th anniversary of the founding of the People's Republic of China in Beijing, on October 1, 2019 (Photo: Shen Shi/Imagine China/Reuters) In the latest episode of dangerous nuclear sabre-rattling, Russia on Monday ended the moratorium on the deployment of nuclear-capable intermediate range missiles. The development came days after US President Donald Trump deployed nuclear submarines near Russian waters in response to threats of war from Dmitry Medvedev, a top ally of Russian leader Vladimir Putin. With such back and forth actions over the past years, often triggered by impulsive decision-making of Trump, decades of nuclear arms reduction and nuclear non-proliferation efforts are being undone and the world is now closest that it has been to a nuclear catastrophe in decades. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD It's not just that nuclear powers like the United States, Russia, and China, that are building more nuclear weapons and modernising delivery platforms. But more countries, such as those traditionally under the US security umbrella in Europe and East Asia, are considering developing own nuclear weapons as well. While every country, whether Poland in Europe or South Korea in Asia, has its own rationale, the reason underpinning all such pursuits is Trump's disruption of the international world order that he began in his first term. As a result, the likes of Poland, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, and even Japan, conversations around the development of a nuclear weapon are no longer taboo. His mistaken strategy of 'maximum pressure' had already put Iran on the brink of developing a nuclear weapon, necessitating the three-war earlier this year. Trump & Putin flex nuclear muscles Over the past two weeks, the war of words between the United States and Russia finally led to real-world consequences. Since the launch of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Putin and his top allies like Medvedev had frequently invoked nuclear weapons. Medvedev frequently threatened Western capitals with nuclear strikes over their support of Ukraine. Last month, Medvedev finally overstepped with his personal feud with Putin on X. After he threatened the United States with a direct war, Trump ordered the deployment of two nuclear submarines near Russia. Days later, Russia responded by withdrawing from the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty. Trump had already withdrawn the United States from the INF in his first term in 2019. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Under the treaty, which was originally signed in 1987 between the United States and Soviet Union, the two countries had agreed to ban and gradually dismantle intermediate- and short-range nuclear missiles between the range of 500 to 5,500 kilometres. Trump kills arms control treaties The INF is not the only arms control treaty that Trump has quit. In 2020, Trump withdrew the United States from the Open Skies Treaty with Russia, which allowed the two countries to fly over each other's territories with sensor equipment to assure that none of them were preparing for conflict. In his usual hubris, Trump had said that he would make new treaties with Russia for INF and Open Skies. Those deals, of course, never happened. Instead, in 2023, Russia quit the New START treaty, which was the last remaining arms control agreement with the United States. Under the New START treaty signed in 2010, which succeeded the Moscow Treaty of 2002, the two countries agreed to 1,550 strategic nuclear warheads and up to 800 delivery platforms of various types. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Trump nudges friends & foes alike towards nukes With his actions, Trump has consistently nudged allies and adversaries alike towards nuclear weapons since his first term. In the first term, Trump withdrew the United Stats from the Iran nuclear deal of 2015 and applied the 'maximum pressure' strategy. While his idea was to pressure Iran into negotiating a new deal that purportedly favoured the United States, it turned out to be a spectacular failure and pushed Iran towards the brink of developing a nuclear weapon. Israel used Iran's near-nuclear weapons status as a pretext for war earlier this year that eventually dragged the United States into the conflict as well. As Trump has virtually withdrawn the longstanding security commitment to Europe under Nato's collective defence principle out of his friendship with Putin and has threatened to abandon Asian allies like Japan and South Korea as well, there is anxiety in these countries that their adversaries —Russia in Europe and China and North Korea in Asia— could use the US abandonment as an encouragement for a more muscular policy or even pursue outright attacks and invasions. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Such concerns have led to real conversations in countries like Poland, South Korea, and Japan about developing nuclear weapons as ultimate deterrence. In West Asia, Saudi Arabia is believed to have similar discussions as well.
