How authoritarians like Trump take down the free press

Donald Trump took the first step to extinguishing the free and independent press in America yesterday, when federal judge and Bush-appointee Cecilia Altonaga ruled that his defamation lawsuit against George Stephanopoulos and ABC News could go forward.

She ruled that “a reasonable jury could conclude Plaintiff was defamed and, as a result, dismissal is inappropriate.” (emphasis hers)

Stephanopoulos had asked Republican Representative Nancy Mace how she could continue to support Trump when he had been “found liable for rape.” Trump is claiming that question libeled him and asking for damages that could run into the tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars.

You’d think he doesn’t have a case. When a jury of his peers found in favor of E. Jean Carroll in her defamation case against Trump, Judge Lewis Kaplan noted:

“[T]he jury’s finding that Mr. Trump ‘sexually abused’ Ms Carroll implicitly determined that he forcibly penetrated her digitally – in other words, that Mr Trump in fact did ‘rape’ Ms Carroll as that term commonly is used and understood in contexts outside of the New York penal law.”

Nonetheless, Judge Altonaga is letting Trump’s lawsuit against the reporter and news organization go forward. This is a very, very big deal that could signal the beginning of the end for a free and open press in America.

Trump is right now following a road blazed before him by multiple authoritarians and dictators who have taken over democracies in recent years.

When Vladimir Putin took over Russia in 1999, there was a thriving, diverse, and free press in the country. Today there is none; he largely used libel laws to destroy what had been there and replace it with a press landscape entirely owned by oligarchs friendly to him and state outlets.

When Viktor Orbán was elected Prime Minister of Hungary 14 years ago, there was also a flourishing free press in that nation. Today, every major press outlet — from TV to radio to newspapers and internet sites — exclusively sings his praises all day, every day and there’s functionally no meaningful opposition press within the country. All major media in Hungary are now owned by oligarchs beholden to Orbán.

Both men used Trump’s strategy to take down the media in their respective countries.

When Republicans visited Budapest, Hungary in 2022 to celebrate strongman Orbán’s “illiberal Christian democracy” model of government, he had some very specific advice about how to take over and hold a nation:

“Have your own media,” he said to cheers. “It’s the only way to point out the insanity of the progressive left. The problem is that the western media is adjusted to the leftist viewpoint. Those who taught reporters in universities already had progressive leftist principles.”

He added, speaking of Putin-booster Tucker Carlson:

“Of course, the GOP has its media allies but they can’t compete with the mainstream liberal media. My friend Tucker Carlson is the only one who puts himself out there. His show is the most popular. What does it mean? It means programs like his should be broadcasted day and night. Or, as you say, 24/7.”

Both Putin and Orbán started by changing their nation’s libel laws, making it possible for the leaders and their cronies to sue any newspaper, radio, or TV station, blogger, social media user, or website that criticized them for libel.

It’s a much “softer” way of shutting up the press (and the public) than simply storming in and arresting journalists: instead, you drive them and their media outlets into bankruptcy so they self-censor and their outlets can then be acquired by friendly billionaires and turned into pro-government organs.

Russian libel penalties run into the millions of rubles, as Tanya Lokshina, senior Russia researcher at Human Rights Watch noted:

“These high fines can effectively suffocate smaller Russian media outlets and seem designed to increase self-censorship in mass media and online. … Freedom to criticize officials and expose their alleged wrongdoing is crucially important to fostering public debate and to holding officials accountable. The threat of criminal sanction to restrict speech strikes at the very core of Russia’s vibrant community of rights activists and independent journalists.”

Orbán, who visited Trump at Mar-a-Largo just a few weeks ago, followed a similar path, as he told state radio after independent journalists revealed his closest allies’ use of luxury yachts and private jets years ago. Threatening those journalists, he said:

“We do not attack anyone, we do not want to force anything on anybody, we do not say bad things about others, we do not smear people, we do not unnecessarily criticize anyone, we do not want to tell people what to do or how to live their lives, what decisions to make. But, when someone wants to do this to us, then we will protect our independence and the Hungarian way of thinking.”

Russia and Hungary are not, of course, the only countries that use libel laws to destroy opposition press and drive independent commentators, bloggers, social media users, and newsletter writers into bankruptcy.

Currently, such a strategy is employed by strongman leaders in Turkey, Egypt, Thailand, Philippines, India, Pakistan, Indonesia, Malaysia, Saudi Arabia, China, Iran, Belarus, Eritrea, Cuba, and Vietnam, among others.

Here in America, Florida was the first state where Republicans recently tried (unsuccessfully) to “open up” their state libel laws, in that case proposing legislation to make it criminally libelous for reporters to “cite an anonymous source.” More Red states will certainly follow as Orbán’s model is further embraced across the GOP.

And Donald Trump got the memo. After his win in court yesterday, he posted to his Nazi-infested social media site:

“A big win today in high Florida court against ABC fake News, and Liddle' George Slopadopolus. A powerful case! Before you know it, the fake news media will be forced by the courts to start telling the truth. This is a great day for our country. MAGA2024.”

He’s been threatening this for a while. When campaigning in February, 2016, he told attendees at a rally in Fort Worth, Texas:

“One of the things I’m going to do if I win, and I hope we do and we’re certainly leading. I’m going to open up our libel laws so when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money. We’re going to open up those libel laws.
“So when The New York Times writes a hit piece which is a total disgrace or when The Washington Post, which is there for other reasons, writes a hit piece, we can sue them and win money instead of having no chance of winning because they’re totally protected.”

As president, Trump tried to make it happen but didn’t then have the allies in Congress, the courts, and his administration willing to support destroying America’s free and independent press.

During an October, 2017 meeting in the White House with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau he shocked the media in attendance by openly contradicting our Constitution and the Founders of America by saying:

“It is frankly disgusting the way the press is able to write whatever they want to write.”

Three months later, he told his Cabinet that he wants to “take a strong look at our country’s libel laws,” which he called “a sham and a disgrace.” When media reports something bad about him, he said, the laws should be re-written or interpreted by the courts “so that when somebody says something that is false and defamatory about someone that person will have meaningful recourse in our courts.”

He added, reading from prepared notes:

“Our current libel laws are a sham and a disgrace, and do not represent American values or American fairness. So we’re going to take a strong look at that. We want fairness. You can’t say things that are false, knowingly false, and be able to smile as money pours into your bank account ... I think what the American people want to see is fairness.”

And now, after seven years of pushing, Trump has finally found a federal judge who appears to agree with him. If pointing out that another judge had actually said that Trump raped E. Jean Carroll is defamation according to this conservative judge, can you imagine what could happen to those people who’ve called Trump a fascist or worse?

This case could well end up before the Supreme Court, currently dominated by authoritarian right-wingers, which should send shudders down the spines of every reporter, commentator, blogger, radio or TV host, social media participant, Substack writer, and news organization in America.

NOW READ: Boebert, MTG and far-right friends derail Speaker Mike Johnson’s summer plans