Donald Trump Makes Legal Threat To CNN And The New York Times Over Their Reporting On Iran Intel Assessment
Donald Trump has again threatened news outlets over coverage he dislikes, this time The New York Times and CNN over their reporting on a preliminary intelligence assessment that raised doubts that the U.S. strikes on Iran destroyed their nuclear program.
The White House has been on the warpath against journalists over their reporting, even though the press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, has acknowledged the existence of the intelligence assessment. Trump and his allies have go so far as to accuse CNN and the Times of denigrating the members of the military who carried out the strikes, even though their reporting was not critical of how the mission was carried out.
More from Deadline
Bill Moyers Dies: Influential Public Media Journalist And Commentator And Former White House Press Secretary Was 91
Peter Bart: Barbara Walters Built A Career On Trust In A Bygone Era Far Removed From Today
Pete Hegseth Chides Former Fox News Colleague Jennifer Griffin As "About The Worst" During Defense Secretary's Press-Bashing Briefing
Trump has insisted that Iran's nuclear capabilities were 'obliterated.'
Per the Times, Trump demanded a retraction and an apology, as his attorney, Alejandro Brito, described the reporting as 'false,' 'defamatory' and 'unpatriotic.'
David McCraw, senior vice president and deputy general counsel for the Times, 'No retraction is needed. No apology will be forthcoming.'
McGraw wrote to Brito, 'While the Trump administration protests that the assessments were only preliminary — which, by the way, was the second word of our article — and that later assessments may come to different conclusions, no one in the administration disputes that the first assessments said exactly what the article said they did: the destruction caused by the raid was not as significant as the president's remarks suggested.'
He added that the 'American public has a right to know whether the attack on Iran — funded by the tax dollars and of enormous consequence to every citizen — was a success. We rely on our intelligence services to provide the kind of impartial assessment that we all need in a democracy to judge our country's foreign policy and the quality of our leaders' decisions. It would be irresponsible for a news organization to suppress that information and deny the public the right to hear it. And it would be even more irresponsible for a president to use the threat of libel litigation to try to silence a publication that dared to report that the trained, professional and patriotic intelligence experts employed by the U.S. government thought that the president may have gotten it wrong in his initial remarks to the country.'
CNN also received a legal threat. A spokesperson said 'we can confirm we received a letter and responded to it, rejecting the claims in the letter.'
Trump has called for reporters on the stories to be fired, but has singled out CNN's Natasha Bertrand. On Thursday, at the press briefing, Leavitt attacked Bertrand's past reporting. The network has said that they stand behind '100% behind' Bertrand and her work.
The president's legal threat is not unusual. He has previously sued the Times and CNN, but the various lawsuits were dismissed. He sued CBS over the way that a 60 Minutes interview with Kamala Harris was edited. The network has said that the lawsuit is meritless, as do a number of legal scholars, but its attorneys are in settlement talks with Trump's team. CBS parent Paramount Global is seeking administration approval for its merger with Skydance Media.
Earlier on Thursday, Trump's defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, held a press conference in which he also bashed media outlets for reporting on the intelligence report.
'You cheer against Trump so hard, in your DNA and in your blood, cheer against Trump because you want him not to be successful so bad, you have to cheer against the efficacy of these strikes,' Hegseth said to the journalists at the Pentagon.
He said that he was 'urging caution about premising an entire stories on biased leaks to biased publications to make something look bad. How about we take a beat, recognize first the success of our warriors, hold them up, tell their stories, celebrate that, wave an American flag, be proud of what we accomplished.'
Best of Deadline
'The Buccaneers' Season 2 Soundtrack: From Griff To Sabrina Carpenter
'The Buccaneers' Season 2 Release Schedule: When Do New Episodes Come Out?
'Nine Perfect Strangers' Season 2 Release Schedule: When Do New Episodes Come Out?
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
16 minutes ago
- Yahoo
US Allies Wary of Buying American as They Plan Defense Buildup
(Bloomberg) — For European countries that just approved the biggest increase in military spending in decades, 'Buy American' is looking a lot less appealing than it once was. They may have no choice. As the allies rush to rebuild their fighting forces, leaders are confronting the reality that they'll have to rely on the US for many of the new weapons they're planning to buy, a sales pitch driven home by President Donald Trump on his visit to Europe this week. They fret that they may be put at greater risk if they deepen their dependence on a US whose president has embraced their main enemy - Russia - and rattled some with threats to annex their territory. Those deeper ties have become an increasingly hard sell at home, with electorates cautious about a closer embrace with the US. Allied leaders like French President Emmanuel Macron have pushed for relying on European companies to provide the weapons and the EU fast-tracked a €150 billion facility for just that purpose after Trump was elected. Canada is considering pulling out of the US-led F-35 fighter program and buying Swedish planes instead. 'We should no longer send three-quarters of our defense capital spending to America,' Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said earlier this month. When a group of US legislators went to Copenhagen this spring to encourage Danish officials to buy more US weapons, the message they got was clear: we like your arms, but Trump's very public threats to take over Greenland, a Danish territory, were making buying them politically difficult, according to a person familiar with the meeting. Some Danish politicians have gone further. 'Buying American weapons is a security risk that we cannot run,' Rasmus Jarlov, a conservative lawmaker who heads the defense committee in parliament, said in a post on social media platform X in March. Trump's abrupt decision to briefly suspend intelligence sharing with Ukraine earlier this year alarmed allies, according to officials, fueling fears that the US might hobble American-made weapons in a crisis. The worries got so bad that the Pentagon had to issue a public reassurance that the F-35 fighter didn't have a 'kill switch.' But the planned buildup - worth as much as €14 trillion ($16 trillion) over the next decade if related infrastructure is included, according to Carlyle - is far beyond the current capabilities of a fragmented European defense sector that's been hollowed out by decades of cuts since the end of the Cold War. And the US lead in key areas, especially missiles and other high-tech weapons, means there's often no real alternative to buying American. 'Europe and the defense industry is not, at the moment, ready to take the load by itself,' said Tuure Lehtoranta, a senior executive at Finnish defense-tech firm Insta Group Oy. 'There's not enough production, there's not enough design in some areas.' German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, whose government is planning to nearly double spending on core defense items this year, said the European industry needs an overhaul to meet the demand. 'We have far too many systems in Europe, we have far too few units, and what we produce is often far too complicated, and therefore too expensive as a result,' he said this week. At the Paris Air Show last week, executives from Airbus SE and Dassault Aviation SA sparred openly over who should take charge of their next-generation fighter jet project. European allies will have no alternative but to buy American weapons to meet alliance targets, especially with stocks depleted by supplies given to Ukraine, a senior NATO official said, asking not to be identified discussing a sensitive issue. Allies also lack key technologies. 'Who is the European Palantir? Who is the European Planet?' asked Pierre Vandier, a top NATO commander, referring to the US technology and satellite companies that the alliance recently signed contracts with. 'It's a huge stimulus for Europeans to do all they can. If they don't get started now they can't cry if there are violent power struggles later.' Europe has no rivals as advanced as Lockheed Martin Corp's F-35 fighter or RTX Corp's Patriot anti-missile, which has been critical to protecting Ukraine from Russian attacks. Allies have no competitors for key capabilities like ballistic-missile defense and air-to-air refueling. While simpler weapons like howitzers are easier for allies to produce, they still require US satellite systems for precision targeting. The UK said this week it would buy at least a dozen new F-35As, which Prime Minister Keir Starmer hopes will help curry favor with Trump. European defense companies are hopeful. They've seen share-price increases of 50% or more this year, ahead even of the big gains of their US competitors, as investors anticipate the huge boost in business. 'More urgency is there now,' Micael Johansson, chief executive officer of Saab AB, which makes Gripen fighters, said in an interview. 'I wouldn't say we have seen a dramatic shift now to buy more European, but I think that's the trend.' US defense contractors are lining up cooperation deals with European counterparts to hedge against any shift away from American weapons. 'As these European defense budgets increase, that's where we're spending our time,' Stephen O'Bryan, president of Northrop Grumman Corp's international business, said in an interview, referring to partnerships in Norway, Germany and Denmark. Lehtoranta of Insta said his company already partners with big US manufacturers like Lockheed Martin, including by providing avionics maintenance and other support for F-35 jets. But they see American companies are even hungrier to join forces now. 'I can see in the US that it might be a little bit of a fear in the air. US companies think that they might lose opportunities if they don't find the right partners,' he said. 'There will be change, there will be probably more European investments in European factories and European acquisitions, but still we cannot survive without the US industries.' —With assistance from Wojciech Moskwa, Thomas Seal, Matthew Boesler, Michael Nienaber, Sanne Wass and Alex Wickham. America's Top Consumer-Sentiment Economist Is Worried How to Steal a House Inside Gap's Last-Ditch, Tariff-Addled Turnaround Push Apple Test-Drives Big-Screen Movie Strategy With F1 Luxury Counterfeiters Keep Outsmarting the Makers of $10,000 Handbags ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
CNN
18 minutes ago
- CNN
Migrant family sues over US detention in what may be first challenge to courthouse arrests involving kids
ImmigrationFacebookTweetLink Follow A mother and her two young kids are fighting for their release from a Texas immigration detention center in what is believed to be the first lawsuit involving children challenging the Trump administration's policy on immigrant arrests at courthouses. The lawsuit filed Tuesday argues that the family's arrests after fleeing Honduras and entering the US legally using a Biden-era appointment app violate their Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizure and their Fifth Amendment right to due process. 'The big picture is that the executive branch cannot seize people, arrest people, detain people indefinitely when they are complying with exactly what our government has required of them,' said Columbia Law School professor Elora Mukherjee, one of the lawyers representing the family. The Department of Homeland Security did not immediately respond to an email requesting comment. Starting in May, the country has seen large-scale arrests in which asylum-seekers appearing at routine court hearings have been arrested outside courtrooms as part of the White House's mass deportation effort. In many cases, a judge will grant a government lawyer's request to dismiss deportation proceedings and then US Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers will arrest the person and place them on 'expedited removal,' a fast track to deportation. Mukherjee said this is the first lawsuit filed on behalf of children to challenge the ICE courthouse arrest policy. The government has until July 1 to respond. There have been other similar lawsuits, including in New York, where a federal judge ruled earlier this month that federal immigration authorities can't make civil arrests at the state's courthouses or arrest anyone going there for a proceeding. The Texas lawsuit was filed using initials for the children and 'Ms. Z' for the mother. Their identities have not been released because of concerns for their safety. For weeks in the Dilley Immigration Processing Center, the mother has watched her 6-year-old son's health decline, Mukherjee said. He recently underwent chemotherapy treatment for leukemia and because of his arrest missed his check-in doctor's appointment, Mukherjee said. 'He's easily bruising. He has bone pain. He looks pale,' Mukherjee said, adding that he has also lost his appetite. 'His mom is terrified that these are symptoms that his leukemia situation might be deteriorating.' The mother, son and 9-year-old daughter fled Honduras in October 2024 due to death threats, according to the lawsuit. They entered the US using the CBP One app and were paroled into the country by the Department of Homeland Security, which determined they didn't pose a danger to the community, Mukherjee said. They were told to appear at a Los Angeles immigration court May 29. President Donald Trump ended CBP One for new entrants on his first day in office after more than 900,000 people had been allowed in the country using the app since it was expanded to include migrants in January 2023. During the family's hearing, the mother tried to tell the judge that they wished to continue their cases for asylum, Mukherjee said. Homeland Security moved to dismiss their cases, and the judge immediately granted that motion. When they stepped out of the courtroom, they found men in civilian clothing believed to be ICE agents who arrested the family, Mukherjee said. They spent about 11 hours at an immigrant processing center in Los Angeles and were each only given an apple, a small packet of cookies, a juice box and water. At one point, an officer near the boy lifted his shirt, revealing his gun. The boy urinated on himself and was left in wet clothing until the next morning, Mukherjee said. They were later taken to the processing center, where they have been held ever since. 'The family is suffering in this immigration detention center,' she said. 'The kids are crying every night. They're praying to God for their release from this detention center.' Their lawyers have filed an appeal of the immigration judge's May decision, but they're at risk of being deported within days because the government says they are subjected to expedited removal, Mukherjee said. The arrests of the family were illegal and unjustified, said Kate Gibson Kumar, an attorney for the Texas Civil Rights project who is also representing the family. 'The essential question in our case is, when you have these families who are doing everything right, especially with young children, should there be some protection there?' Gibson Kumar said. 'We say 'yes.''
CNN
20 minutes ago
- CNN
Migrant family sues over US detention in what may be first challenge to courthouse arrests involving kids
A mother and her two young kids are fighting for their release from a Texas immigration detention center in what is believed to be the first lawsuit involving children challenging the Trump administration's policy on immigrant arrests at courthouses. The lawsuit filed Tuesday argues that the family's arrests after fleeing Honduras and entering the US legally using a Biden-era appointment app violate their Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizure and their Fifth Amendment right to due process. 'The big picture is that the executive branch cannot seize people, arrest people, detain people indefinitely when they are complying with exactly what our government has required of them,' said Columbia Law School professor Elora Mukherjee, one of the lawyers representing the family. The Department of Homeland Security did not immediately respond to an email requesting comment. Starting in May, the country has seen large-scale arrests in which asylum-seekers appearing at routine court hearings have been arrested outside courtrooms as part of the White House's mass deportation effort. In many cases, a judge will grant a government lawyer's request to dismiss deportation proceedings and then US Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers will arrest the person and place them on 'expedited removal,' a fast track to deportation. Mukherjee said this is the first lawsuit filed on behalf of children to challenge the ICE courthouse arrest policy. The government has until July 1 to respond. There have been other similar lawsuits, including in New York, where a federal judge ruled earlier this month that federal immigration authorities can't make civil arrests at the state's courthouses or arrest anyone going there for a proceeding. The Texas lawsuit was filed using initials for the children and 'Ms. Z' for the mother. Their identities have not been released because of concerns for their safety. For weeks in the Dilley Immigration Processing Center, the mother has watched her 6-year-old son's health decline, Mukherjee said. He recently underwent chemotherapy treatment for leukemia and because of his arrest missed his check-in doctor's appointment, Mukherjee said. 'He's easily bruising. He has bone pain. He looks pale,' Mukherjee said, adding that he has also lost his appetite. 'His mom is terrified that these are symptoms that his leukemia situation might be deteriorating.' The mother, son and 9-year-old daughter fled Honduras in October 2024 due to death threats, according to the lawsuit. They entered the US using the CBP One app and were paroled into the country by the Department of Homeland Security, which determined they didn't pose a danger to the community, Mukherjee said. They were told to appear at a Los Angeles immigration court May 29. President Donald Trump ended CBP One for new entrants on his first day in office after more than 900,000 people had been allowed in the country using the app since it was expanded to include migrants in January 2023. During the family's hearing, the mother tried to tell the judge that they wished to continue their cases for asylum, Mukherjee said. Homeland Security moved to dismiss their cases, and the judge immediately granted that motion. When they stepped out of the courtroom, they found men in civilian clothing believed to be ICE agents who arrested the family, Mukherjee said. They spent about 11 hours at an immigrant processing center in Los Angeles and were each only given an apple, a small packet of cookies, a juice box and water. At one point, an officer near the boy lifted his shirt, revealing his gun. The boy urinated on himself and was left in wet clothing until the next morning, Mukherjee said. They were later taken to the processing center, where they have been held ever since. 'The family is suffering in this immigration detention center,' she said. 'The kids are crying every night. They're praying to God for their release from this detention center.' Their lawyers have filed an appeal of the immigration judge's May decision, but they're at risk of being deported within days because the government says they are subjected to expedited removal, Mukherjee said. The arrests of the family were illegal and unjustified, said Kate Gibson Kumar, an attorney for the Texas Civil Rights project who is also representing the family. 'The essential question in our case is, when you have these families who are doing everything right, especially with young children, should there be some protection there?' Gibson Kumar said. 'We say 'yes.''
