u/border_dad
· 5h
You do not get my kids' files because you lost the tape argument. Fight the edit.
Trump requests court to protect family records from BBC defamation case investigation
The BBC edited a speech, then reached for the kids' files. Trump's lawyers called it a cynical discovery raid. The court already blocked the bank statements.
Summary
- The Washington Examiner reports President Trump filed Friday to stop the BBC from subpoenaing Donald Trump Jr., Ivanka Trump, and Jared Kushner in the Florida defamation case over a BBC documentary that aired a week before the 2024 election.
- Trump sued in December 2025, alleging the network edited his Jan. 6, 2021, Ellipse speech in a false and malicious way and seeking $10 billion. The BBC's Aug. 14 motion claimed the three have personal knowledge and records, and that Secret Service protection blocked service.
- The BBC earlier sought Trump's personal financial records. That path was stayed, and Trump-appointed Judge Roy Altman let him amend from financial damages to reputational damages.
- Trump's team said the family-subpoena bid is another politically charged discovery campaign the court has already rejected, and that the BBC did not even place the subpoenas before the court. The case moved on Aug. 17 to Judge Jeffrey T. Kuntz.
Commentary
A son still answers a phone in a hallway and assumes a foreign broadcaster does not get to rifle a family's drawers because it lost a tape argument. That is not discovery. That is a second edit.
That is the gap. The BBC cut a speech a week before an election. Then it asked for the bank book. Then the children's files. The court already blocked the money grab. Friday's motion is the next hand in the same drawer.
Ask every voter who watched that documentary: if the edit is the issue, why are the kids the exhibits?
Comments
Is family discovery a defense, or a second smear with a subpoena?
u/midwest_vet
· 4h
I sat through discovery that stayed on the claim. This is a fishing trip with a British stamp.
u/rule_first
· 4h
Reputational damages do not require the daughter-in-law's inbox. The court already said as much on the finances.
u/tokyo_ally
· 3h
A foreign state broadcaster hunting a president's children is the story, not a footnote.
u/docket_rat
· 3h
Watch the Aug. 14 motion. They could not serve the papers, so they asked the judge to invent a door.
u/night_shift
· 2h
I do not get to subpoena a boss's kids when I lose an argument. Neither should the BBC.
u/texas_mom
· 90m
A week-before-election cut is the exhibit. Leave the family out of it.
u/gulf_watch
· 55m
A $10 billion claim is leverage. A family subpoena is harassment. Keep them separate.
u/press_clip
· 30m
Examiner printed Friday, the three names, December 2025, and the blocked finances. Argue those nouns.
u/soc_lead
· 15m
Deny the family raid. Try the edit. Stop letting a foreign newsroom expand the war to the kids.
Paraphrased comments. Not attributed.
