If anyone wants to read this Truth Social post disguised as a lawsuit, here's the complaint in all its absurd glory: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flmd.447437/gov.uscourts.flmd.447437.1.0.pdf I feel like I lost a few IQ points just reading that mess. It's basically a blowjob on paper, extolling the brilliance and perfection and sheer genius of Dear Leader for about 75 pages. But I also flashed back to my federal civil procedure class, and made mental notes as to the many violations of the rules of pleading in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to be found in this verbal dungheap. Let's start with Rule 8, which says that a complaint is to include "a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." There's nothing short or plain about this statement. And: "Each allegation must be simple, concise, and direct. No technical form is required." I didn't see anything simple, concise or direct; the whole thing, complete with photographs, is just a big fat whine about how unfair NYT's reporting was. They claim actual malice, a requirement for a defamation claim against a public figure (this isn't NYT's first rodeo; the actual malice principle came from the landmark case of New York Times v. Sullivan). But Trump's crack team of lawyers doesn't seem to understand what actual malice means in this context - not personal malice or hatred, but the publication of a statement while knowing it was false or with reckless disregard for its truth or falsity. Nothing Trump complains about is factual - it's all opinion, which is protected speech. He just complains that NYT and its reporters hate him and it's so unfair that they don't recognize his genius.
He's trying to extort money from NYT the way he did from CBS. This is SO bad, though, that NYT's lawyers, once they've stopped laughing, should file a Rule 11 motion - sanctions for filing a court document without a reasonable basis in law or fact. But read the thing if you didn't just have lunch.