Good morning. Err it’s now late afternoon. Lets get this blog rolling this morning and get back into a routine of doing this. DJ how about some music. It seems like a good morning for some Metallica.

Trump vs. Wall Street Journal: Defamation Lawsuit Over Alleged Epstein Letter

The Core Dispute

President Donald Trump filed a $10 billion defamation lawsuit against the Wall Street Journal, its parent company Dow Jones, owner Rupert Murdoch, and two reporters on Friday, July 18, 2025. The lawsuit stems from a WSJ article published Thursday that reported Trump allegedly sent a provocative birthday letter to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein in 2003.

According to the Journal’s reporting, the letter included a crude drawing of a naked woman and sexually suggestive content written as a fictional dialogue between Trump and Epstein. Trump has categorically denied authoring the letter, calling it “FAKE” and stating on Truth Social that “These are not my words, not the way I talk. Also, I don’t draw pictures”.

Why Proving Defamation Will Be Extremely Difficult

The “Actual Malice” Standard

Trump faces a nearly insurmountable legal hurdle due to First Amendment protections. As a public figure, he must prove “actual malice” – that the WSJ either knew the information was false or acted with reckless disregard for the truth. This is an exceptionally high bar that courts rarely find has been met.

WSJ’s Apparent Due Diligence

The Journal’s legal position appears strong for several reasons:

• Source verification: WSJ reporters claim they saw the letter among documents in an album compiled by Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s associate who is currently in federal prison
• Contradictory evidence: Trump’s claim that he “doesn’t draw pictures” is undermined by the public existence of other drawings he has created
• Professional standards: Legal experts suggest the Journal’s lawyers likely vetted the story extensively before publication

Discovery Process Risks

Trump’s history with depositions presents additional challenges. During his 2023 E. Jean Carroll case deposition, he mistakenly identified his accuser as his ex-wife Marla Maples, which damaged his credibility. The discovery process in this case would force Trump to answer potentially embarrassing questions under oath about his relationship with Epstein.

The Disturbing Content of the Alleged Letter

If authentic, the letter’s content is deeply unsettling. The typewritten message was structured as a fictional dialogue between Trump and Epstein, written in third person:

“Voice Over: There must be more to life than having everything,” the note began.

The exchange continued with references to shared secrets:

• Donald: “Yes, there is, but I won’t tell you what it is.”
• Jeffrey: “Nor will I, since I also know what it is.”
• Donald: “We have certain things in common, Jeffrey.”
• Jeffrey: “Yes, we do, come to think of it.”

The letter concluded with Trump allegedly writing: “A friend is a wonderful thing. Happy Birthday — may each day bring another delightful secret”.

Social media users have described the content as “fucking creepy,” “absolutely revolting,” and “incredibly unsettling”. The cryptic references to shared secrets between Trump and a convicted sex offender have particularly alarmed observers, with many noting the sinister implications of phrases like “enigmas never age” and the emphasis on keeping secrets.

Strategic Backfire

Legal experts suggest Trump’s lawsuit may be “the stupidest thing he could have done”. Rather than making the story disappear, the lawsuit guarantees months of continued coverage and potentially damaging discovery proceedings. As one analysis noted, the suit ensures “new news and developments in the story for the public to discuss for months to come”.

The irony is palpable: Trump’s attempt to silence unfavorable coverage has instead amplified it, with many social media users expressing excitement about the lawsuit precisely because they believe the truth will emerge through the legal process.

The group at Breaking Points had a great breakdown of it all – but also highlighting how deeply creepy the letter actually is.

Lastly….

James Gunn revealed in an interview that he had to inform Henry Cavill he would no longer portray Superman, as the script he was developing focused on a younger version of the character during the early stages of his journey in the Superman mythology.