Current Affairs

Epstein

Trump’s $10 billion law suit is all over the news. The Wall Street Journal, the bastion of business and one of Rupert Murdoch’s most prized possessions seems very certain that the birthday card Trump sent to Epstein is legitimate. The $10 billion legal case brought by Trump is a SLAPP,(strategic Lawsuit against public participation) and anybody who knows anything about a SLAPP, knows full well that they are there to intimidate, shut you up and tie the case in the courts for as many years possible.

It is not a case of – ‘if you did this’ -, but more an argument to shut up the journalists and it acts as a warning to anybody crazy enough to challenge the president. Trump has gone to the law once again and this time against the owner of Fox News, the Trump supporting media outlet that was fined $700 million for arguing that ballot machines were faulty; it is always unwise to challenge Rupert Murdoch, but it is also unwise to challenge Trump because he is crazy enough to lose a case and tie the case in litigation for as many years that he possibly can..

Trump may believe that he will win his argument once the Court of Justice hears his objections to the case, but it will be little footsteps which will determine this case. Both Trump and Murdoch have huge fortunes to launder in the courts, but the idea that this case will go anywhere is really up for grabs. The actions of Trump are aimed to deter the journalist and proprietor of a news organisation from printing any material that challenges the president, an action that worked when ABC folded on legal action taken by Trump against the corporation, but it is also a case of looking over the shoulder of the president and wondering whether the Chief Justices would uphold a case against the president.

It is not so much the obvious argument that costs mount in litigation, but what Trump has done is challenge anybody to write an article that challenges him, (even with evidence). Trump has something that most don’t and that is the service of the legal system that protects the president however much evidence is against him, but he is going to tie the case up for the length of his presidency, which is bad news for Murdoch who is paying for legal representation, unless of course he has Pam Bondi’s Epstein file in his possession.  

But it is a question that haunts journalists and that is whether the journalist has the backing of an organisation to withstand a legal battle. As much as it is a battle of wits, it is also a battle between powerful figures and though the journalist has crossed the t’s and dotted the i’s, it is unusual for the owner to take a stand. This is the second friend of Trump to challenge him on Epstein, but it is his refusal to release the information in the Epstein file that Pam Bondi is holding.

Britain had a similar case in the 1960s, John Profumo a politician and a minister of defence in the government was very much an establishment figure. He was caught having an affair with a prostitute, but of course that doesn’t sound that bad until you factor in that one of her clients (boyfriend) was a known KGB operative. The end of Profumo was also a challenge to the establishment and though Murdoch was not involved this time, he was involved in the hacking scandal that nearly ripped his media empire apart in the United Kingdom.

It is not so much that Trump was one of Epstein clients, it is more that the American voter doesn’t seem to care whether he was or not. An opinion poll for the Hill in Washington, found that 63% of voters were upset by the way that Trump was handling the Epstein file, put into perspective only 43% of the US electorate approved of Trump when this poll was taken.

The key to this case is Ghislane Maxwell, the card had to come from somewhere and whoever is pulling the strings, the argument of whether Trump commutes her sentence from twenty years to ten is a question that is on the lips of every journalist. The actual argument may be about the sentence and whether Trump will do anything about it. However, the argument maybe a little to early in her sentence for it to make any difference, but there is a lot of compromising material out there that may lead to her being released early.

Epstein had a lot of power, how he managed that power is coming to the fore, even though he is dead. The confusion of the Epstein file is that it has been held at the highest office and when new in office Pam Bondi said that she had the file on her desk. Trump is arguing that there is no file and like anything with this case, there are a lot of people who do not believe that the file is being kept under lock and key, unless of course it was destroyed on presidential orders.

But does the file carry the same weight as Nixon’s which is a question that must haunt Pam Bondi and Trump and if it is being passed to some intrepid journalist or even a blogger, they will release the information to either mainstream media or a platform. The support base that Trump has – believes the file exists, and the movement from this vociferous base of support is demanding the files release. But whether Trump releases the file into the public domain or not, is enough for a conspiracy to build among MAGA and other interested parties

The SLAPP argument was demonstrated in 2021 when a libel action was taken against Harper Collins and the author of Putin’s People, the Journalist Catherine Belton. Despite winning the legal case brought by Russian oligarchs, Belton was left facing legal costs of $1.8 million and though the book was a success, she has struggled to pay the legal costs involved.

There have been other cases in the UK courts, one of the most ridiculous was an argument by London solicitors Discreet Law to defend Yevgeny Prigozhin who brought a libel claim against the investigative journalist Elliot Higgins. The libel case was aimed at his organisation Bellingcat, which investigated intelligence agencies inside Russia. They identified those responsible for the downing of the Malaysia Airlines and found those responsible for the poisoning of the Skripals. The joke is that the SRA (solicitors regulatory authority) in a letter to Baroness Beason argued that “While there was public speculation surrounding Prigozhin’s connection to Wagner, the SRA found no evidence to suggest the firm was aware, or should have been aware, that the instructions received were false.” Whether Prigozhin would have won the case or not, it was enough to tie up Elliot Higgins and Bellingcat in a legal system where the costs are prohibitive for Elliot Higgins and Bellingcat.

Time will tell whether Trumps case has legs or whether it is a bluff that will quietly be put to one side. Trump with his usual bluster defended his arguments for the Epstein case to go away, but the Wall Street Journal has made it a point to argue their case and defend it in court if necessary. For Trump it is using the legal system as a SLAPP to quieten press outlets, but because Murdoch said he will defend the journalist, it is more a question whether Trump will just hope it all goes away….