Legal experts considered that the complaints have little probability of succeeding / Photo: New York Post
The campaign of former president and Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump said this Friday that it denounced The Washington Post newspaper for alleged support for his rival, Kamala Harris, a day after suing the CBS channel for similar reasons.
In a brief note, the Trump campaign indicates that it reported the Post’s “illegal in-kind contributions” to the Federal Election Commission, because it allegedly provides critical coverage of Trump in a social media ad campaign, while its coverage of Harris is presumably neutral.
The complaint cites a report published Thursday in the Semafor media, which argues that the Post has paid for this campaign to promote negative news about Trump amid the exodus of subscribers that has followed his announcement that he will not endorse any electoral candidate.
That complaint is in addition to a civil lawsuit that Trump’s lawyers filed against CBS on Thursday in a Texas court for the alleged editing of an interview by Harris on the program ’60 Minutes’ to favor the candidate. In the lawsuit they ask for 10,000 million dollars.
Specifically, they denounce that CBS issued different answers to the same question in the interview on ’60 Minutes’ and in a previous excerpt for the program ‘Face the Nation’ in a manipulative way to confuse the public, to which the media responded that the Legal action has no basis.
This lawsuit has been filed in a court in Amarillo, in northern Texas, which has only one judge, Matthew Kacsmaryk, a conservative and nominated by Trump, according to CNBC.
Different legal experts cited by the American media considered that the complaints have little probability of succeeding due to the weakness of their arguments.
Trump has previously criticized other media outlets, including the conservative Fox television channel, for their coverage; In this case, he even said in the middle of last month that he was going to ask tycoon Rupert Murdoch, his chief executive, to censor negative publicity about him.
Washington / EFE
#Trump #denounces #Washington #Post #CBS #channel #illegal #support #Harris
**Interview with Legal Analyst Jane Smith on Trump’s FEC Complaint Against The Washington Post**
**Host:** Welcome, Jane. Thank you for joining us today to discuss the recent developments involving Donald Trump’s complaint against The Washington Post. To start, can you summarize what led to this complaint?
**Jane Smith:** Absolutely. The Trump campaign filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission, alleging that The Washington Post is providing unauthorized support to Kamala Harris through biased coverage. This came shortly after Trump’s campaign also sued CBS for similar reasons. Essentially, the campaign argues that the newspaper’s coverage constitutes illegal in-kind contributions to Harris’s campaign.
**Host:** That’s certainly a bold claim. What are the potential implications of making such a complaint against a major news outlet?
**Jane Smith:** Well, it’s significant in a few ways. First, it highlights the ongoing tensions in the political landscape, especially regarding media coverage. If this complaint were to gain traction, it could set a precedent for how political candidates interact with the media and challenge stories they disagree with. However, legal experts suggest that these complaints have little chance of succeeding, largely because media outlets have a First Amendment right to report news and opinion, even if it is unfavorable to a candidate.
**Host:** So, it’s more about political strategy than legal viability?
**Jane Smith:** Exactly. The Trump campaign likely understands that the chances of winning this complaint are slim, but it serves several purposes: mobilizing his base by portraying himself as a victim of media bias, keeping the narrative on his terms, and distracting from other issues. It’s a classic strategy in modern politics.
**Host:** How have media organizations responded to these kinds of complaints in the past?
**Jane Smith:** Media organizations typically defend themselves by citing journalistic standards and the importance of independent reporting. They argue that editorial choices are not influenced by political campaigns. In the case of Trump’s previous complaints, news outlets have often pushed back, emphasizing their editorial independence and commitment to unbiased reporting.
**Host:** Given the legal backdrop and the political narrative at play, what should we watch for in the coming days regarding this complaint?
**Jane Smith:** It will be interesting to see how the FEC responds to Trump’s filing. They may issue a statement or decide not to pursue the complaint at all. Additionally, I expect both Trump’s team and The Washington Post will continue to use this situation to bolster their messaging in the lead-up to the election. Furthermore, any further actions by the campaign against other media entities could signal a renewed aggressive approach to perceived media bias.
**Host:** Thank you, Jane, for your insights on this evolving story. We appreciate your expertise.
**Jane Smith:** Thank you for having me!
