On Wednesday, President Donald Trump’s 2020 campaign filed a libel lawsuit against The New York Times, accusing the newspaper of defamation stemming from an article that claimed that Trump’s 2016 campaign arranged an “overarching deal” with Russia.

“Today the President’s re-election campaign filed suit against the New York Times for falsely stating the Campaign had an ‘overarching deal’ with ‘Vladimir Putin’s oligarchy’ to ‘help the campaign against Hillary Clinton’ in exchange for ‘a new pro-Russian foreign policy, starting with relief from … economic sanctions,'” said senior legal aid to the Trump campaign, Jenna Ellis, in a statement.

RELATED: Rep. Mark Meadows Interrupts MSNBC Fake News About GOP Defending Trump

‘100 percent false and defamatory’

“The statements were and are 100 percent false and defamatory,” the statement continued. “The complaint alleges The Times was aware of the falsity at the time it published them, but did so for the intentional purpose of hurting the campaign, while misleading its own readers in the process.”

In 2019, Special Counsel Robert Mueller found no evidence of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign.

The NYT article “The Real Trump-Russia Quid Pro Quo,” was an op-ed by former executive editor of the newspaper, Max Frankel. In his piece, Frankel asserted that there was a clear deal between Trump and the former Soviet Union.

It Appears a Former NYT’s Executive Editor Just Straight Up Lied

“There was no need for detailed electoral collusion between the Trump campaign and Vladimir Putin’s oligarchy because they had an overarching deal: the quid of help in the campaign against Hillary Clinton for the quo of a new pro-Russian foreign policy, starting with relief from the Obama administration’s burdensome economic sanctions,” Frankel wrote. “The Trumpites knew about the quid and held out the prospect of the quo.”

The Trump campaign’s lawsuit explains how Frankel’s article is completely false.

“The Defamatory Article does not allege or refer to any proof of its claims of a ‘quid pro quo’ or ‘deal’ between the Campaign and Russia,” the lawsuit reads. “Rather, the Defamatory Article selectively refers to previously-reported contacts between a Russian lawyer and persons connected with the Campaign. The Defamatory Article, however, insinuates that these contacts must have resulted in a quid pro quo or a deal, and the Defamatory Article does not acknowledge that, in fact, there had been extensive reporting, including in The Times, that the meetings and contacts that the Defamatory Article refers to did not result in any quid pro quo or deal between the Campaign and Russia, or anyone connected with either of them.”

RELATED: Senate Intelligence Committee: No Evidence of Collusion Between Trump Campaign and Russia

Lawsuit Claims NYT Bias Against Trump and Republicans

“The Times’ story is false,” the lawsuit continues. “The falsity of the story has been confirmed by Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Report on the Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election released on or about April 18, 2019 (the “Mueller Report”), and many other published sources, that there was no conspiracy between the Campaign and Russia in connection with the 2016 United States Presidential Election, or otherwise.”

“There is extensive evidence that The Times is extremely biased against the Campaign, and against Republicans in general,” the lawsuit also stated, while listing some examples.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *