The Wall Street Journal eviscerated President Donald Trump and his “groundless” defamation suit against the paper, its owners and two of its reporters in a scathing 22-page motion to dismiss filed Wednesday.
Last year, Trump slapped the Journal with a lawsuit demanding a whopping $10 billion in damages for reporting about a salacious drawing he allegedly contributed to a book of birthday wishes for disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein.
The article included no accusations of criminal conduct, leading a judge to toss the original suit for failing to demonstrate the outlet acted with “malice” in publishing the piece — the strict legal standard set to prevent public figures and politicians from filing frivolous defamation claims that infringe on the First Amendment.
Nevertheless, Trump responded by filing yet another suit in May, which the Journal tore into as sloppy, redundant and “woefully” weak while standing by journalists Khadeeja Safdar and Joseph Palazzolo (who are also defendants) in its latest motion to dismiss.
Congressman Jamie Raskin Highlights the Note
Congressman Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) addressed Congress last September with a blow-up of a birthday note allegedly penned by President Donald Trump for Jeffrey Epstein behind him.
The Journal's motion states, “In his latest attempt to plead actual malice, President Trump recycles allegations already rejected by this court, makes claims contradicted by the article itself, and again lumps the various defendants together rather than pleading actual malice as to each.”
“Because the first amended complaint falls woefully short of the President’s burden, his case should be dismissed again — this time with prejudice,” the filing continues.
Alleging the second suit does “not remedy any of the defects identified” but actually “compounds” them, the Journal also noted that proving malice seemed a stretch as “there is nothing defamatory about a person sending a bawdy note to a friend.”
Dispute Over Signature Authenticity
Disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein and Donald Trump at Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, Florida, on Feb. 22, 1997.
Also in dispute was the Trump legal team’s claim that the signature at the bottom of the note does not match his actual signature, despite the Journal’s professional analysis.
As Trump’s complaint compares the “Donald” on the birthday message to versions of his full signature, the outlet said, “Plaintiff tellingly does not dispute that resemblance (because he cannot).”
Months after the Journal published the original story in July 2025, the House Oversight Committee appeared to corroborate its findings when it released an image of a note featuring an exchange between “Donald” and “Jeffrey,” outlined in the shape of a woman’s body with Trump’s spiky signature in the place of pubic hair.
“Happy Birthday — and may every day be another wonderful secret,” the unsettling message concludes.
