Lett said she lacked the power to drop the allegations of business damages from the complaint.
The hearing could serve as a reminder to Trump that the headline-grabbing lawsuits he’s fond of filing against media outlets are a two-way street, giving the press added leverage to pry into his business dealings and controversial episodes he might prefer to consign to history.
During the first hearing on the BBC suit since Trump filed it last December, it was evident that the BBC is trying to make it more painful for the president to continue with the litigation. Tobin revealed that the BBC is pressing for Trump to answer the network’s questions under oath.
“They have ignored our request to schedule the president’s deposition,” the attorney said. “They’re dragging their feet on giving me a date for the president’s deposition.”
If the suit continues, Trump is virtually certain to be required to sit for a deposition. However, the BBC has moved to dismiss the suit on the grounds that the UK-based broadcaster lacks enough of a presence in south Florida to give the court here jurisdiction over the network. Altman has yet to rule or schedule a hearing on that motion.
Lett delivered a split decision Tuesday on other issues in dispute in the case: whether and to what extent the BBC can demand information and testimony about what Trump intended on Jan. 6 and how people interpreted it.
Brito said Trump’s intent and how others described the impact of his words were irrelevant because the suit focuses solely on the words Trump used. “What matters is what he said relative to what was broadcast that he said. That’s it. There’s nothing more that needs to be examined,” the attorney argued.
Brito also repeatedly seized on the written apology BBC Chairman Samir Shah issued to Trump last November, acknowledging that the program “gave the mistaken impression that you had made a direct call for violent action.”
Source:
www.politico.com