Mailwatch(ed) Forum

There is no evidence that the BBC used AI to alter Trump's words, nor has he ever made that claim before. There is also no accusation of the use of AI in the 30 page lawsuit document issued by Trump's legal team.
It looks to me like Trump just made that bit up off the cuff.
I suspect this is an attempt to divert attention away from his disgusting comments on the murder of Rob Reiner which has attracted a lot of criticism even from his MAGA base.

Abernathy wrote: ↑Tue Dec 16, 2025 5:08 pm I find the “argument” that some Floridian viewers may have been using VPNs to watch the Panorama programme at issue and may thereby have had their views on Donald Trump’s “good” reputation adversely influenced shall we say, unconvincing. The phrase “clutching at straws” springs to mind. But that’s just one aspect of the implausibility of Trump’s so-called case.

I’m very pleased that the BBC has decided to contest the action, and the Arkell vs. Pressdram response does indeed seem very apposite.

But Trump is simply doing what powerful, obscenely wealthy men have been doing for many decades - from
Robert Maxwell through the erstwhile Lib Dem MP John Hemming, to Jeff Bezos -using their wealth and power via the legal system to intimidate, crush, and suppress criticism. It’s disgusting tactic, befitting someone who may be the most disgusting human ever to walk the earth.

I think Pol Pot and Hitler might just edge him out but he's certainly out on his own at the moment.