Trump reps reportedly told Parler he’d become an active member of the right-wing platform if it banned his critics, but it refused

Donald Trump
Former President Donald Trump.

  • Trump was reportedly prepared to join Parler, the social-media site, if it banned his critics.
  • Trump reps told Parler he could become an active user on Parler, per an excerpt from an upcoming Michael Wolff book.
  • Parler, which is popular with the far-right, balked at the suggestion of banning Trump’s critics, Wolff wrote.
  • See more stories on Insider’s business page.

Former President Donald Trump was prepared to become an active user of social-media site Parler if it banned his critics – but it resisted doing so, according to an excerpt from an upcoming Michael Wolff book.

In an excerpt from “Donald Trump’s January 6: The view from inside the Oval Office,” published in New York Magazine on Monday, Wolff wrote that Trump’s representatives approached Parler when Trump was in office, proposing that he join the platform once he left the White House.

Parler is a right-wing website that was popular with pro-Trump extremists around the time of the Capitol riots on January 6.

“They had floated a proposition that Trump, after he left office, become an active member of Parler, moving much of his social-media activity there from Twitter,” Wolff wrote.

Under their proposal, Trump would receive 40% of Parler’s gross revenues, and Parler “would ban anyone who spoke negatively about him,” Wolff wrote.

“Parler was balking only at this last condition,” he wrote.

The 40% figure has been previously reported.

Trump never became an active member of Parler. Twitter and Facebook blocked Trump after the deadly insurrection at the Capitol, citing “the risk of further incitement of violence.”

Insider has reached out to Parler for comment.

Trump considered joining Parler under the pseudonym “Person X,” its former CEO, John Matze, said in a court filing in January. Matze, ousted as CEO earlier this year, said that Amazon Web Services (AWS) knew about these plans while it hosted Parler. It terminated its contract with Parler – essentially knocking the site offline – to prevent Trump from having any social media presence, Matze claimed.

At the time, Amazon said that “suspending Parler had nothing to do with politics.” It suspended the site because Parler was “unable to effectively identify and remove content that encourages or incites violence,” it said.

Parler came back online in February with a new web host and new CEO.

Parler became a platform for pro-Trump extremists to gather before and during the January 6 riots, in part because of its lack of content moderation. Following the riots, Apple and Google removed Parler from their app stores.

Read the original article on Business Insider

Fox News filed to dismiss a $1.6 billion defamation suit by vote-machine company Dominion. The suit claims Fox promoted baseless claims of election fraud from Giuliani and others.

Rudy   Photo by MANDEL NGAN : AFP) (Photo by MANDEL NGAN:AFP via Getty Images
Donald Trump’s former personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani.

  • Fox News Media filed a motion to dismiss a $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit brought by Dominion Voting Systems in March.
  • Fox said the lawsuit threatened freedom of speech.
  • Dominion said Fox’s coverage of its voting machines during the election had caused “enormous and irreparable economic harm.”
  • See more stories on Insider’s business page.

Fox News Media has filed a motion to dismiss the $1.6 billion lawsuit brought by Dominion Voting Systems.

Dominion filed a defamation lawsuit against Fox in March, accusing the cable network of promoting false claims that Dominion rigged its voting machines in the 2020 Presidential election so that they flipped votes to President Joe Biden over then President Donald Trump.

Dominion’s lawsuit claimed Fox gave prominence to claims of election fraud by its guests, including Trump’s former personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, because it was in the network’s business interests.

In Fox’s motion, filed in federal court in Delaware on Tuesday, Fox said that Dominion’s lawsuit threatened the freedom of speech of news organizations, and that “the American people deserved to know why President Trump refused to concede despite his apparent loss.”

Fox hosted lawyers who pushed the vote-rigging conspiracy theory, which has been thoroughly debunked. Dominion also filed a $1.3 billion defamation lawsuit against Giuliani in January.

Fox said in the motion filed Tuesday that “a free press must be able to report both sides of a story involving claims striking at the core of our democracy.”

“Especially when those claims prompt numerous lawsuits, government investigations and election recounts,” it added.

Fox’s legal team said in the motion that the security of Dominion’s technology had come under scrutiny in the past, and that the cable network “had a free-speech right to interview the president’s lawyers and surrogates even if their claims eventually turned out to be unsubstantiated.”

At the time Dominion filed the lawsuit, Fox News said in a statement: “Fox News Media is proud of our 2020 election coverage, which stands in the highest tradition of American journalism, and will vigorously defend against this baseless lawsuit in court.”

Dominion’s lawyers have projected that the company will lose more than $600 million in profit over the next eight years as a result of media disinformation about its voting equipment.

Smartmatic, another election-technology firm, brought a $2.7 billion defamation lawsuit against Fox in February, which Fox has also filed to dismiss.

Insider contacted Dominion for comment, but did not immediately receive a response.

Read the original article on Business Insider

Trump leaves town for Christmas at Mar-a-Lago as Democrats plan to vote on $2,000 stimulus checks

GettyImages 1230281676
President Donald Trump and First Lady Melania Trump walk towards Marine One as they depart the White House en route to Mar-a-Lago, the president’s private club, on December 23, 2020.

  • President Donald Trump left Washington on Wednesday to spend the holidays at his private Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida.
  • House Democrats, meanwhile, will be attempting to pass a measure on Thursday providing $2,000 stimulus checks as part of the COVID-19 relief package.
  • Earlier in the week, Trump called on Congress to increase the size of stimulus payments from the $600 included in the package he was expected to sign.
  • If Trump doesn’t sign that stimulus package in the next five days, he will have effectively vetoed it, throwing the measure back to Congress.
  • Visit Business Insider’s homepage for more stories.

President Donald Trump left DC on Wednesday to spend the holidays at his private Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida, a day before Congress is set to consider $2,000 stimulus checks as part of the COVID-19 relief package.

On Tuesday night, Trump sent Washington into a frenzy when he bashed the bipartisan stimulus measure that Congress had just passed. On Wednesday afternoon, the lame duck president vetoed the defense spending bill that had passed both chambers with overwhelming support.

It is unclear when Trump will return to Washington. As USA Today noted, an alert from the Federal Aviation Administration indicates he is expected to leave Palm Beach by 6:45 p.m. on January 1. If  he stays that long, the already-passed $900 billion stimulus package could be automatically vetoed as a result of his not signing it.

A White House spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment on whether the president intends to veto the current stimulus package.

The White House press office insisted, however, that the president will keep busy, saying in a statement that his schedule “includes many meetings and calls.”

In the meantime, Democrats are prepared to bring Trump’s stated desire for larger stimulus checks to the House floor on Thursday. According to The Washington Post’s Jeff Stein, Democrats will seek to approve $2,000 payments – up from $600 in the existing stimulus package – by unanimous consent, meaning it would pass barring objection from any single member of Congress.

If that effort fails, Democrats will hold a vote on standalone legislation Monday, December 28, the Post reported.

The effort comes after Trump in particular said the package, which he had been expected to sign, did not provide big enough stimulus checks.

Democrats were the ones who first proposed $2,000 direct payments. Vice President-elect Kamala Harris cosponsored legislation in the Senate that would provide the checks each month until the pandemic is over. In the House, centrist and liberal Democrats alike backed a companion measure, but the stimulus packaged that chamber passed in May included only one-time, $1,200 checks.

Republicans, led by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, have sought to limit the size of direct payments to Americans, and now have to decide whether they want to oppose Trump or cave and save face politically.

Most Americans say the $600 checks weren’t enough. According to recent polling from Insider and SurveyMonkey, 76% of respondents said the payment should be $1,000 or more, and 43% said it should be $2,000 or more.

Have a news tip? Email this reporter:

Read the original article on Business Insider