1 comment

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 3 points 11 months ago

If you sue you can be counter sued. The discovery should be fun.

  • source
  • 11 comments in c/politics@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 47 points 11 months ago

    It was filed at the US district court for the southern district of Florida – even though BBC iPlayer, the main streaming platform that carries Panorama, and BBC One, the main TV channel that broadcasts it, are not available in the US. The episode never aired in the US.

  • source
  • [–] 32 points 11 months ago

    $1B to $10B already? Hell why not add another zero, go for $100B...

    Or maybe just don't be a dog whistling arse who would have let his VP swing from the gallows your klansmen built if he thought it'd keep him in office?

  • source
  • [–] 25 points 11 months ago

    Did the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES really receive any material damage from reporting that occurred about him while he was PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES?

  • source
  • [+] 34 points 11 months ago (6 children)
  • [–] 10 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    Seriously. This seems performative. And how did they edit it exactly? Did they have him say things he didn’t fucking say?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    The documentary cut two sentences together that in reality were 50min apart, and made it seem like he explicitly ordered the assault on the Capitol. It was a bad misjudgment and it raises questions about how it made it to the air.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 11 months ago

    Awww, did the wittle baby get his feewings hurt? Awwwwww….

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago

    Does any (sane) person think the edit is that egregious? To me it just looked like standard speech editing, trimming out filler and fluff and putting the two important talking points next to each other. Didn't change the spirit of what he was saying one bit.

  • source