Trump lawyers try to halt book's release as White House fights to contain firestorm
Source: The Guardian
Lawyers for Donald Trump moved on Thursday to try to shut down the explosive new book which has exposed the chaos behind the scenes at the White House.
Michael Wolffs book Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House is due to be released next Tuesday, but after extracts from the book were first made public by the Guardian, the Trump White House has been thrown into a frenzy.
First, Trump issued a remarkable personal statement denouncing Steve Bannon, his one-time confidant, who he castigated as self-aggrandizing and not a critical figure in his presidency.
Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jan/04/trump-lawyers-book-steve-bannon-white-house
Botany
(70,516 posts)n/t
PJMcK
(22,037 posts)Good luck shutting that down, Trump.
Botany
(70,516 posts)Scruffy1
(3,256 posts)He did it to show all of the sycophants that he was a mere mortal and didn't have power over everything.
keithbvadu2
(36,827 posts)Thanks. I had to look it up. Sometimes we selectively interpret old legends and stories the way we want them to be rather than the reality.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,005 posts)iluvtennis
(19,862 posts)The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,732 posts)- that is, the action by government to prevent something from being published or communicated - and it's ever so unconstitutional. You learn that in your first year of law school. Where does Trump find these lawyers? In the basement of a nail salon in a strip mall in Albuquerque?
Even though these "lawyers" are acting as Trump's personal attorneys it's still government action because they are trying to prevent the publication of a book about Trump's actions as president, and for a president to try to do that, even if he doesn't employ the White House counsel or DoJ to do it, it's still un-fucking-constitutional.
PJMcK
(22,037 posts)Trump has trouble finding lawyers because of his abysmal payment history and his constant and consistent lying. That's why he ends up with such inferior representation.
To be fair, Trump's lawyers very well may know that their actions are meaningless and they are simply trying to appease their client.
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)to have witnesses to what he said that he would later lie about.
Lawyer said " I wouln't believe him even if his tongue were notarized".
RKP5637
(67,111 posts)Irish_Dem
(47,131 posts)The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,732 posts)He can sue him for defamation, as threatened, but Trump is a public figure and would have to prove actual malice (as to the author and publisher), which means that the statements were made intentionally with the knowledge they were false. A lawsuit would be a disaster for Trump because he'd have the burden of proving not only that the statements were false but that Bannon, the author and the publisher knew they were false. Trump often threatens to sue people and doesn't follow through.
He can't gag Bannon either because Bannon was a federal employee and NDAs don't apply to them. The "work product" of federal employees belongs to the public and can't be restricted except in cases involving national security.
Irish_Dem
(47,131 posts)I didn't realize NDAs did not apply to federal employees.
Trump must have shit a brick when he found out that fact.
And yes I thought the same thing, if Trump files the defamation lawsuit
it could well backfire on him. Even if the book does contain some falsehoods.
But most of what I have read so far is consistent with Trump's known pathology.
The pathology we see every day in his interviews and tweets.
Yes I wondered if the cease and desist letter is just a threat designed to
make the recipient fold like a lawn chair.
Raster
(20,998 posts)PJMcK
(22,037 posts)Aviation Pro
(12,172 posts)Jimmy Magill.
SoCalNative
(4,613 posts)bucolic_frolic
(43,180 posts)Sgent
(5,857 posts)don't like a book and the Zionists pull their advertising doesn't mean the book is banned. All of the first three editions were published, and some (if not all) are still in print / e-distribution.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Lack of sales, critical reviews, and advertisers abandoning an author, all contributing to a book's failure, is not suppression, it's a business decision.
All these fine young authors may as yet, still self-publish; and should you wish, you may find any book listed in the editorial you linked to and purchase it.
Codeine
(25,586 posts)or suppressed by the government. Utter hogwash.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)Looks like a place a jackpine "radical" would love LOL
bucolic_frolic
(43,180 posts)"before being republished as an e-book, original copies sold for thousands of dollars on Amazon."
Hey, I didn't author the website, I just provided the link
BumRushDaShow
(129,090 posts)This is not "U.S." (government) suppressing/banning of books like Russia might do. It may be a few inconsequential schools that question certain content for classroom use but there is no mass "banning" in modern U.S. society.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)BumRushDaShow
(129,090 posts)But then the issues it raised weren't much different from Maya Angelou's "I Know Why a Caged Bird Sings" (outside of one being fiction and the other autobiographical).
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)popular, theres no claims the first amendment is in danger. Just that things go out of print and they wish they wouldnt.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Ferrets are Cool
(21,107 posts)waste of money, right?
The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,732 posts)he'll figure out a way to get someone else to pay their fees (if they get paid at all).
Brother Buzz
(36,444 posts)So, the Yahoos that are contributing to his sham campaign are paying
Ferrets are Cool
(21,107 posts)ProudMNDemocrat
(16,786 posts)The truth behind the scenes of the Trump White House is out and Trumplethinskin is irate. Too fucking bad, Donnie. Deal!
mahatmakanejeeves
(57,489 posts)Prior restraint (also referred to as prior censorship or pre-publication censorship) is censorship imposed, usually by a government, on expression that prohibits particular instances of expression. It is in contrast to censorship which establishes general subject matter restrictions and reviews a particular instance of expression only after the expression has taken place.
In some countries (e.g., United States, Argentina) prior restraint by the government is forbidden, subject to certain exceptions, by a constitution.
....
Prior restraint in the United States
Which recently appointed justice will be the first to stab America in the back?
The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,732 posts)He's a constitutional literalist, and they tend also to be First Amendment absolutists. His role model, Scalia, consistently upheld First Amendment claims.
mahatmakanejeeves
(57,489 posts)I certainly hope so.
Good morning.
Will this start at a lower level than SCOTUS, some court in DC?
I'm linking to this not for you, but for other interested parties:
In the Pentagon Papers case (New York Times Co. v. United States, 403 U.S. 713 (1971)), the Nixon administration sought to enjoin The New York Times and The Washington Post newspapers from publishing excerpts from a top-secret United States Department of Defense history of the United States involvement in the Vietnam War from 1945 to 1971. The government tried to use the "national security" exception that had been suggested in the Near decision. The Supreme Court struck down the injunctions. However, the decision was fragmented, with nine separate opinions being filed in the case. It was not clear at the time what the effect would be on future prior restraint cases.
Full disclosure: IANAL.
ffr
(22,670 posts)mahatmakanejeeves
(57,489 posts)Yes, The Trump Cease & Desist Letter Over The Bannon Book Is Stupid
Just like every other legal document prepared by this administration.
By ELIE MYSTAL
at 11:08 AM
Its a snow day in the Northeast. If youre reading this, its because you went into work to try to be a hero, found that nobody else is there, and are just killing time until you feel its okay to go home. ... Since were just among friends, let me bring you behind the curtain and show you a little of how the sausage gets made around here.
....
Reporting on the Trump administration is like a game of Clue. Today, its Charles J. Harder with the cease and desist over the Michael Wolff book that includes tell-alls from Steve Bannon. Tomorrow, it could be Don McGahn filing a lawsuit against snow for false imprisonment of the President in D.C. The details of each successive eruption of legal fallacy hardly even matter. The man employs hundreds of lawyers and none of them seem to be able to make a cogent legal argument.
Trump filings are just like this blizzard. Its a flurry of white stuff that stings and freezes, but if you try to really wrestle with any individual piece, it just kinds of melts away, like there was nothing there to begin with.
Were all gonna die.
Elie Mystal is the Executive Editor of Above the Law and the Legal Editor for More Perfect. He can be reached @ElieNYC on Twitter, or at elie@abovethelaw.com. He will resist.
lark
(23,105 posts)Can't wait to read it.
NastyRiffraff
(12,448 posts)Kindle is fine and I love mine, but sometimes I want to hold a book and turn pages. This is one of those.
Amazon promised delivery on the release date: January 9.
Mine comes on Tuesday from Amazon.
Gothmog
(145,313 posts)riversedge
(70,242 posts)wonder what he meant by these words-heavily made up?? make up???
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jan/04/trump-lawyers-book-steve-bannon-white-house
.....................On Thursday, in a column for the Hollywood Reporter titled My Year Inside Trumps Insane White House, Wolff gave more insight into what he discovered as he sat day after day on a West Wing couch for a year.
Administration officials, he suggested, do not believe Donald Trump is capable of fulfilling his role as president.
Everybody was painfully aware of the increasing pace of his repetitions, Wolff wrote. It used to be inside of 30 minutes hed repeat, word-for-word and expression-for-expression, the same three stories now it was within 10 minutes. Indeed, many of his tweets were the product of his repetitions he just couldnt stop saying something.
He added: Hoping for the best, with their personal futures as well as the countrys future depending on it, my indelible impression of talking to them and observing them through much of the first year of his presidency, is that they all 100% came to believe he was incapable of functioning in his job.
In a final anecdote, Wolff wrote: At Mar-a-Lago, just before the new year, a heavily made-up Trump failed to recognize a succession of old friends..............
SunSeeker
(51,571 posts)Irish_Dem
(47,131 posts)That is human nature.
Bengus81
(6,931 posts)That woman bitched to Coke and had then actually pull their advertising. Ratings went through the ROOF.
Irish_Dem
(47,131 posts)Trump would have been better off to ignore Bannnon.
C_U_L8R
(45,003 posts)Last edited Thu Jan 4, 2018, 11:56 PM - Edit history (1)
With these planned pre-releases, Wolff got more free marketing than he could ever hope for.
It's brilliant.
Irish_Dem
(47,131 posts)Push a button and he was going to give Wolfe a free huge PR, money could not have bought it.
0rganism
(23,957 posts)good luck guys...
jgmiller
(395 posts)out that if they actually file a suit to stop it they have to prove libel which means Trump will be deposed.
The publisher is not going to back out of this money now, the book is in people's hands the best his lawyers could get would be a temporary injunction but that the puts it off. The only way to keep it out of bookstores it to go full bore and go through with the suit and then comes the deposition.
If he actually had a good lawyer he would listen to the best advice would be to let it be published and ignore it. 70% of the country thinks he's an idiot anyway by doing this he's just feeding the fire.
Sam McGee
(347 posts)As I recall, no sooner did Clinton take office than Regnery Press started cranking out bullshit exposes on Bill, Hillary, everyone in their administration even on Socks the Cat. Rightwingers danced in the streets, citing the Regnery publications as Holy Writ.
Ditto for Obama's eight years.
Sucks when the shoe is on the other foot.
Piss on em.
Towlie
(5,324 posts)Add to that the fact that in this case the claim is clearly true, and what you have is a book that can't possibly be successfully suppressed.
SunSeeker
(51,571 posts)As the ACLU said in the article:
Bengus81
(6,931 posts)It should never be published and the author em...."disappeared"
catbyte
(34,402 posts)[IMG][/IMG]
enid602
(8,620 posts)I wouldn't be surprised if the majority of the royalties go to tRump. And the rights for the movie, its sequel and the Reality TV Show. Maybe he'll dump Melania and hook up with one of the Kardashians. One of the younger ones.
Cattledog
(5,915 posts)spiderpig
(10,419 posts)from January 9 to tomorrow.