logo
Trump sues Wall Street Journal and Rupert Murdoch over Epstein report

Trump sues Wall Street Journal and Rupert Murdoch over Epstein report

The Guardian19-07-2025
Donald Trump has sued Rupert Murdoch and two Wall Street Journal newspaper reporters for libel and slander over claims that he sent the sex offender Jeffrey Epstein a lewd letter and sketch of a naked woman.
Trump's lawsuit on Friday, which also targets Dow Jones and News Corp, was filed in the southern district of Florida federal court in Miami.
The lawsuit seeks at least $10bn in damages.
It came after the Journal reported on a 50th birthday greeting that Trump allegedly sent to Epstein in 2003 that included a sexually suggestive drawing and reference to secrets they shared.
It was reportedly a contribution to a birthday album compiled by Ghislaine Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year sentence in Florida after being found guilty of sex-trafficking and other charges in 2021.
'A pair of small arcs denotes the woman's breasts, and the future president's signature is a squiggly 'Donald' below her waist, mimicking pubic hair,' the Journal reported of the alleged drawing. The letter allegedly concluded: 'Happy Birthday – and may every day be another wonderful secret.'
Trump vehemently denied the Journal report and claimed the letter was fake. He said on Truth Social that he warned Murdoch, the founder of News Corp, the newspaper's parent company, that he planned to sue.
The president posted: 'Mr Murdoch stated that he would take care of it but obviously did not have the power to do so. Instead they are going with a false, malicious, defamatory story anyway. President Trump will be suing the Wall Street Journal, News Corp and Mr Murdoch shortly.'
Vice-President JD Vance poured scorn on the report, tweeting on Thursday: 'Forgive my language but this story is complete and utter bullshit. The WSJ should be ashamed for publishing it. Where is this letter? Would you be shocked to learn they never showed it to us before publishing it? Does anyone honestly believe this sounds like Donald Trump?'
The lawsuit is the first that Trump has filed against a media company while in office. But he launched numerous legal actions before returning to the White House, raising fears of a chilling effect on free speech. Most ended in defeat but over the past year he has won more than $30m in settlements from legal actions against ABC News and Paramount.
In a post on his Truth Social site, Trump cast the lawsuit as part of his effort to punish media outlets, including ABC and CBS, which both reached multimillion-dollar settlement deals with the president after he took them to court.
'This lawsuit is filed not only on behalf of your favorite President, ME, but also in order to continue standing up for ALL Americans who will no longer tolerate the abusive wrongdoings of the Fake News Media,' he wrote.
But advocates for press freedom cast doubt on the merits of the case.
Professor Roy Gutterman, director of the Tully Center for Free Speech at Syracuse University in Syracuse, New York, said: 'This defamation case was filed only a day after this explosive story was published, and this speed might actually reflect that. The complaint is heavy on arguments about the story's reach and how quickly it went viral and was reposted on social media.'
He added: 'Asking for $10bn for each count almost sounds comical, and is certainly not related to any plausible damages a plaintiff might have suffered if the story turns out to be false. But the plaintiff [Trump] is going to have to prove that the Wall Street Journal published this story knowing it was false, which does not seem plausible, either.
'We are talking about one of the most highly respected news outlets in the country, if not the world. The reporters and editors, and I'm sure their lawyers, had no reason to doubt the veracity of what they published.'
The case also marked another chapter in the chequered relationship between Trump and Murdoch, whose Fox News network champions the president and has supplied some of his staff. The pair have shared roots in New York's tabloid culture and recently realigned. In February Trump hosted Murdoch in the Oval Office, praising him as 'legendary' and 'an amazing guy'.
The president has faced an extraordinary backlash from his own supporters over his refusal to release files about Epstein. A Reuters/Ipsos poll this week found that 69% of respondents thought the federal government was hiding details about Epstein's clients, compared with 6% who disagreed and about one in four who said they unsure.
The best public interest journalism relies on first-hand accounts from people in the know.
If you have something to share on this subject you can contact us confidentially using the following methods.
Secure Messaging in the Guardian app
The Guardian app has a tool to send tips about stories. Messages are end to end encrypted and concealed within the routine activity that every Guardian mobile app performs. This prevents an observer from knowing that you are communicating with us at all, let alone what is being said.
If you don't already have the Guardian app, download it (iOS/Android) and go to the menu. Select 'Secure Messaging'.
SecureDrop, instant messengers, email, telephone and post
See our guide at theguardian.com/tips for alternative methods and the pros and cons of each.
On Friday, in another effort to dampen the outrage about an alleged government cover-up, Trump ordered his attorney general, Pam Bondi, to seek the unsealing of grand jury testimony from the prosecution against the disgraced financier.
In a filing in New York, Bondi cited 'extensive public interest' for the unusual request to release what is typically secret testimony.
Trump said earlier his Truth Social platform that he had authorised the justice department to seek the public release of the materials, which are under seal, citing 'the ridiculous amount of publicity given to Jeffrey Epstein'.
He did not say he had authorised the release of files on Epstein held by the justice department and the FBI.
Epstein, a longtime friend of Trump and multiple high-profile men, was found hanging dead in a New York prison cell while awaiting trial on charges that he sexually exploited dozens of underage girls at his homes in New York and Florida.
The case sparked conspiracy theories, especially among Trump's far-right voters, about an alleged international cabal of wealthy pedophiles. Epstein's death – declared a suicide – before he could face trial, accelerated the narrative.
When Trump returned to power for a second term this January, his supporters clamored for revelations about Epstein's supposed list of clients. But Bondi issued an official memo this month declaring there was no such list.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Asian shares are mixed after Wall Street sets more records for US stocks
Asian shares are mixed after Wall Street sets more records for US stocks

The Independent

time13 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Asian shares are mixed after Wall Street sets more records for US stocks

Stock markets in Asia were mixed on Monday after U.S. stocks rose to more records as they closed out another winning week. U.S. futures and oil prices were higher ahead of trade talks in Stockholm between U.S. and Chinese officials. European futures rose after the European Union forged a deal with the Trump administration calling for 15% tariffs on most exports to the U.S. The agreement announced after President Donald Trump and European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen met briefly at Trump's Turnberry golf course in Scotland staves off far higher import duties on both sides that might have sent shock waves through economies around the globe. Tokyo's Nikkei 225 index lost 1% to 41,056.81 after doubts surfaced over what exactly the trade truce between Japan and U.S. President Donald Trump, especially the $550 billion pledge of investment in the U.S. by Japan, will entail. Terms of the deal are still being negotiated and nothing has been formalized in writing, said an official, who insisted on anonymity to detail the terms of the talks. The official suggested the goal was for a $550 billion fund to make investments at Trump's direction. Hong Kong's Hang Seng index gained 0.4% to 25,490.45 while the Shanghai Composite index lost 0.2% to 3,587.25. Taiwan's Taiex rose 0.3%. CK Hutchison, a Hong Kong conglomerate that's selling ports at the Panama Canal, said it may seek a Chinese investor to join a consortium of buyers in a move that might please Beijing but could also bring more U.S. scrutiny to a geopolitically fraught deal. CK Hutchison's shares fell 0.6% on Monday in Hong Kong. Elsewhere in Asia, South Korea's Kospi was little changed at 3,195.49, while Australia's S&P/ASX 200 rose 0.3% to 8,688.40. India's Sensex slipped 0.1%. Markets in Thailand were closed for a holiday. On Friday, the S&P 500 rose 0.4% to 6,388.64, setting an all-time for the fifth time in a week. The Dow Jones Industrial Average climbed 0.5% to 44,901.92, while the Nasdaq composite added 0.2%, closing at 21,108.32 to top its own record. Deckers, the company behind Ugg boots and Hoka shoes, jumped 11.3% after reporting stronger profit and revenue for the spring than analysts expected. Its growth was particularly strong outside the United States, where revenue soared nearly 50%. But Intell fell 8.5% after reporting a loss for the latest quarter, when analysts were looking for a profit. The struggling chipmaker also said it would cut thousands of jobs and eliminate other expenses as it tries to turn around its fortunes. Intel, which helped launch Silicon Valley as the U.S. technology hub, has fallen behind rivals like Nvidia and Advanced Micro Devices while demand for artificial intelligence chips soars. Companies are under pressure to deliver solid growth in profits to justify big gains for their stock prices, which have rallied to record after record in recent weeks. Wall Street has zoomed higher on hopes that President Donald Trump will reach trade deals with other countries that will lower his stiff proposed tariffs, along with the risk that they could cause a recession and drive up inflation. Trump has recently announced deals with Japan and the Philippines, and the next big deadline is looming on Friday, Aug. 1. Apart from trade talks, this week will also feature a meeting by the Federal Reserve on interest rates. Trump again on Thursday lobbied the Fed to cut rates, which he has implied could save the U.S. government money on its debt repayments. Fed Chair Jerome Powell has said he is waiting for more data about how Trump's tariffs affect the economy and inflation before making a move. The widespread expectation on Wall Street is that the Fed will wait until September to resume cutting interest rates. In other dealings early Monday, U.S. benchmark crude oil gained 24 cents to $65.40 per barrel. Brent crude, the international standard, also added 24 cents to $67.90 per barrel. The dollar rose to 147.72 Japanese yen from 147.71 yen. The euro slipped to $1.1755 from $1.1758.

It's hard to see new left party cutting through in Scotland
It's hard to see new left party cutting through in Scotland

The National

timean hour ago

  • The National

It's hard to see new left party cutting through in Scotland

The first thing to say is that if it is able to break out of the factions and abbreviations which abound in the terrain to the left of Labour – and with 300,000 claimed sign-ups and a poll rating of 10% it just might – then it marks a very big change in socialist thinking. For more than a century, socialists who wanted to change capitalism have rubbed along in the Labour Party with those who just wanted a bit more from it. Now large sections of the Labour left look set to give up the ghost. For me, that ship sailed long ago. It's more than two decades since I became convinced that using the powers that Scotland would get with political independence offered a much better prospect of changing the world than trying to reform a British state run by people still steeped in the mindset of empire. READ MORE: Man arrested for 'carrying a placard calling Donald Trump an offensive word' Nonetheless it's an important debate. The political character of England should matter greatly to Scotland and this new party might even play a role here. In one sense the Labour left has nowhere to go. Those now in control of the party have made it perfectly clear radical views are no longer welcome within it. They have been demonised and purged. Labour is manifesting every bit as much intolerance and authoritarianism in its internal structures as it does in government. But how did it come to this? A short time ago the Labour left had more power than at any point in the party's history. Corbyn was leader and commanded the considerable resources provided to the parliamentary opposition by the state. The left controlled the conference and the NEC. And the mobilisation of the grassroots through Momentum was impressive in its day. Yet within a few short years it had all evaporated. Corbyn and others left or were expelled, policy was abandoned wholesale, and the Labour conference would sing the national anthem with no visible dissent. It has been a remarkable transition both in speed and scale. In part this is because the Corbyn project failed abjectly (Image: Getty) in its own terms. Jeremy became leader by accident. And he wasn't very good at it. I watched for years in the House of Commons the breathtaking disloyalty of the right-wing Labour parliamentarians towards the Corbyn front bench. It was embarrassing. Never have I seen such hostility and hate between political parties, never mind within one. But no-one got suspended, or expelled or deselected. They were ignored, left alone to operate as a party within a party. Despite his strength in the wider party organisation, Corbyn never moved against his enemy within. Too naïve, or too nice. Either way, a fatal mistake. Corbyn also never got out of his silo, unwilling or incapable of moving beyond his natural support. He should have developed a narrative about Brexit or constitutional reform that would have galvanised a wider alliance which the left could lead. He didn't. Once defeated, his opponents lost no time in eradicating any possible legacy. These right-wing parliamentarians had been busy making plans. There were organised by a ruthless and clever Irishman called Morgan McSweeney under the banner Labour Together. McSweeney built a strategy for power inspired by Odysseus. Seeing the popularity of left policies in the party, and among the electorate, he argued for 'Corbynism without Corbyn'. But he needed someone to front it who couldn't immediately be outed as a right-wing hack. Step forward the hapless Keir Starmer. You'll cringe to look now at the ten-point platform McSweeney drew up for Starmer's leadership bid. Common ownership, higher income tax on top earners, improving welfare, and more. It worked at the time. Those Labour members who hadn't left after their leader fell lapped it up. Once in position, McSweeney and his acolytes didn't show any hesitation that might have come from wanting to be nice or fair. At breakneck speed and with ruthless efficiency they brushed aside anyone in their way, including many on the soft left, which they saw as a gateway for extremists. They won through deceit, but at the price of the party itself. Which is why we've got a new one. So, what does this mean for us? We've just got used to Scotland being a plurality in which six parties compete. Are we now to have seven? It's hard to see. Certainly, there's plenty of discontent within Labour ranks, but not nearly as much as in places like London. Besides, there's already plenty of options where the disenchanted could escape to. And across it all lies the independence question. Not really something you can avoid. Is it plausible, or possible, for a new party to say we're really radical and want a complete overhaul of the system, but we are agnostic on whether Scotland should be an independent country or remain in the UK? Especially when they would, by definition, be living proof of the failure of the latter option.

Sign of a bright energy future – but for whom?
Sign of a bright energy future – but for whom?

The National

timean hour ago

  • The National

Sign of a bright energy future – but for whom?

I saw John Swinney visiting Eyemouth last week and singing the praises of the Neart na Gaoithe wind farm in the Firth of Forth. For sure, the First Minister was right, it is a wonder of engineering and a sign of a bright energy future. But for whom? Almost all the benefits are passing Scotland by, just as they did in the first great energy bounty, when oil was discovered in the North Sea. Oil's still there and still being drilled for, though not as much as it should be, and it's only weeks since the Grangemouth oil refinery closed. Of course, there's a nice shiny new office block on Eyemouth pier for NnG, as it is referred to. The jobs there are few but welcome all the same. But where's the real work going – and, more importantly, who owns and profits? READ MORE: Man arrested for 'carrying a placard calling Donald Trump an offensive word' NnG might lie between Lothians and Fife but ownership lies abroad and a clue's in the name. Neart na Gaoithe is Gaelic but the Irish version, the reason being that the wind farm is owned not just by EDF, the state energy company of France but also ESB, the Republic of Ireland's state electricity company. The Irish consul general told me it is the single biggest investment ESB has ever made outwith the island of Ireland. All this means that profits from the wonder Swinney saw are going to Paris and Dublin and not to Edinburgh. But it's far worse than that: not one turbine for it is being manufactured in Scotland, despite Methil being visible from it, never mind other ports and yards in Scotland being available which are crying out for work. Even if the excuse is a lack of capacity here in turbine manufacturing – which itself is lamentable and indicative of a shameful lack of an industrial strategy – what about other works such as subsea cabling, the laying of pipeline and the assembly of the units, along with the ship contracts? As with ownership, they've gone abroad, with firms from Italy, Belgium and far beyond winning out and Scotland languishing without. Even the jobs that are coming to Scotland are limited. Beyond the smaller vessels at Eyemouth, there was hope for work for maritime crews providing for the major construction and cabling work from Montrose. So thought a former constituent of mine who left the deep-sea tankers for a job closer to home. Within a few days he and the rest of the UK crew had been laid off and replaced by South Asian labour. When you're working beyond territorial waters – and that's where NnG lies – UK employment law doesn't apply. What a rip-off. And the NnG tragedy won't be alone as it's not the only Scottish offshore wind farm owned by foreign state companies; China, Norway, Sweden and the UAE also have sites. There's a double whammy here, and not just in the work and contracts being frittered away. When the ScotWind auction took place – under the auspices and control of the Scottish not UK Government – offshore sites were sold off for a song. The £800 million raised was trumpeted as a triumph by the then first minister Nicola Sturgeon. Yet within a matter of weeks that was shown to be a paltry sum. Less than 25% of what had been auctioned off in Scotland was sold in the US by New York State for a site off Long Island and for somewhere in the region of $4.3 billion. And believe me, the European energy market, of which Scotland is a critical part, is larger than the US's. But we were told all's well as we'd be getting the supply jobs. Well, where are they? A few jobs at Eyemouth and a few ribs going out of that port aren't what we were led to believe we'd get, and are probably less that Ireland will have from just NnG alone. What a waste and what a letdown. The Scottish tragedy is being repeated but when it was oil and gas we had no Parliament. Now we have Holyrood and, shamefully, it is being complicit as well as supine. Yes, energy is largely reserved but the ScotWind sell-off was wholly down to [[Holyrood]]. This is our great opportunity, as the First Minister said, but it has to actually happen, not just be empty rhetoric. While Swinney was at Eyemouth harbour, I was at the funeral of an independence stalwart and was reminded by the eulogy of his role in the anti-poll tax campaign. Back then, he and his compadre, who sat next to me in the chapel, painted 'Pay No Poll Tax' on the bridges along the M8. No easy task but much appreciated by many. Things should be better and easier for us now, but as well as failures there's been a dampening of the spirit. Radicalism, let alone political actions, have been decried, as shown over the genocide in Palestine. We need some competency in our Government, but we also require some fire back in our movement.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store