The BBC has called out ‘bias’ amid Trump’s legal challenge
The Sun’s editor-in-chief Harry Cole joins ‘Fox & Friends’ to discuss UK immigration reform under Keir Starmer and an internal BBC memo vowing to fight President Donald Trump’s case over their planned Jan. 6.
NEWNow you can listen to Fox News articles!
A federal judge last week issued a tough line on President Donald Trump’s $10 billion defamation lawsuit against the BBC, ruling that the broadcaster can investigate how Trump’s January 6, 2021, speech was perceived by the public — but cannot cancel the protest at the US Capitol itself.
The decision was issued by US Magistrate Enjoliqué Lett as the BBC is facing a trial for the 2024 documentary “Panorama” about Trump’s speech on Jan. 6.
The documentary – titled “Trump: A Second Chance?” — was then called misleading by critics who saw it as omitting Trump’s call for supporters to peacefully protest at the Capitol. The document combined remarks Trump made about an hour apart during his speech that made it appear he told his supporters to “fight like hell” on the floor of the Capitol – a comment that was actually taken out of context – shortly before the violence in the Capitol that day.
“All of the ideas embraced by President Trump’s statements on Jan 6 are in jeopardy,” Lett said at the hearing, according to reports. “The full commitment of Jan. 6 doesn’t matter.”
TRUMP, BBC AGREE FOR EDITOR UP TO $10 BILLION LAW FOR DOCUMENT EDITING CONTRACT JAN 6
President Donald Trump. (AP Photo/Paul Sancia, File)
A source close to Trump’s legal team, who accused the BBC of a “fishing trip,” said the judge’s decision on the matter was important.
“It is important because this case is about a limited separation that included nine seconds of speech over 50 minutes and, instead of focusing on that, the BBC is trying to distract the judge, finally the judges in this case, in that limited situation, and what they are trying to do is to expand the scope of this case to remove their case on January 6,” he told Fox News Digital.
“And when the judge made that decision that that wasn’t going to happen, that eliminated the main defense that the BBC wanted to use in this case, which was to create a distraction, to make this case unmanageable and unnecessary, which is, ‘We’re going to try the whole case on January 6 here.’ The BBC has no standing, legal standing or basis to bring such a defence. “
Trump sued the BBC personally in December for both defamation and violating Florida’s Deceptive Trading Act for $5 billion each, seeking $10 billion.
In court on Tuesday, Trump’s lawyers argued in a Miami court that the president’s intent and third-party interpretations of his words are irrelevant because the lawsuit only points to the words Trump used in his speech, according to Politico.
JUDGE THROWS OUT TRUMP’S $10B LAW FOR PLAYING A ROLLING SIX WITH WALL STREET JOURNAL’S EPSTEIN STORY
President Donald Trump and the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) have agreed on a mediator to help settle the president’s $10 billion lawsuit. (Photos by Patrick van Katwijk/Getty)
“What’s important is what he said about what the broadcast said. That’s all. There’s nothing else to check,” said Trump’s lawyer Alejandro Brito.
Brito quoted BBC Chairman Samir Shah’s written apology to Trump last year, in which Shah admitted that the documentary “gave the wrong impression that [Trump] he had made a direct call for an act of violence.”
“He admitted to lying,” Brito told the judge, according to the source.
However, Sasha Dudding, a lawyer for the BBC, noted that Shah took the misleading program as unintentional, and said that the intent of Trump’s speech was a game worthy of investigation by the store’s lawyers, Politico reported.
Dudding pointed to Trump’s own denials in the lawsuit, where he asserted that he was not the one responsible for his supporters rioting in the Capitol, according to Politico.
FROM HUNTER BIDEN LAPTOP TO KAMALA HARRIS EDITING: THE LONG HISTORY OF ’60’ MINUTE CALL
A view of BBC Broadcasting House in London, United Kingdom, on Nov. 12, 2025. (Peter Dazeley/Getty Images)
In the end, Lett ruled that while the BBC could delve into the interpretation of Trump’s speech by his supporters, the case would not further examine the cause or legitimacy of the actual riot.
The judge also ruled that the BBC had failed to comply on other occasions with regard to requests for inspection which had been found in a series of investigations on Jan. 6, the report said.
The issue of editorial integrity comes after a report from The Telegraph revealed extracts from a dossier written by Michael Prescott, a communications consultant hired by the BBC to review its editorial standards.
The reporter alleged that the network’s documentary split two separate comments by Trump an hour apart on the day of the Capitol riots, which mistakenly implied that the president wanted violence from his supporters.
LEGAL ANALYST THINKS TRUMP COULD WIN ‘VISIBLE’ DAMAGES FROM BBC DOCUMENTARY
President Donald Trump speaks during the White House Correspondents’ Dinner in the Presidential Ballroom at the Waldorf Astoria on July 24, 2026, in Washington, DC. (Getty Images)
“We’re going to go down to the Capitol. And I’m going to be there with you. And we’re fighting – we’re fighting like hell,” the documentary showed Trump saying, without realizing that the statement had been edited.
In fact, Trump said, “We’re going to walk down the Capitol. And we’re going to be happy for our brave senators and congressmen and women, and we’re probably not going to be very happy for some of them, because you’re never going to bring our country back with weakness. You have to show strength, and you have to be strong.”
Trump called on his supporters 54 minutes later to “fight like hell” for the integrity of the election.
The dispute eventually led to the resignation of BBC chief executive Deborah Turness and director-general Tim Davie last year.
What has gotten most of the media attention and headlines this week is that Lett ordered Trump to provide financial information as part of the lawsuit, according to Politico.
“All the signs, buildings and businesses of President Trump are contested or allegedly contested. The reputational damage, the economy, all of that is now at issue in this case,” said Lett.
FORMER BBC DIRECTOR-GENERAL TELLS NETWORK THEY SHOULD NOT AGREE TO PAY TRUMP ANY MONEY.
It is reported that Lett supported the decision in Trump’s interview that his businesses were adversely affected by the network, thereby giving the BBC the opportunity to examine the financial records of more than 400 companies controlled by the Trump family trust.
This was widely hailed as a significant blow to Trump. Headlines included “BBC’s MS NOW to access Trump’s financial records as questionable case begins to backfire,” Daily Mail’s “Trump faces scandal in $10bn BBC case,” and The Guardian’s “Trump must release financial details about businesses in $10bn BBC case.”
However, a source close to Trump’s legal team says the judge’s order is “much more limited” than reported, saying he still has to file an order specifying what he will require as part of the discovery process.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE NEWS AND CULTURE
Trump supporters attack the US Capitol on January 6, 2021. (Eric Lee/Getty Images)
“The judge has made it clear that although he will require certain financial information to be disclosed about the trust and the companies owned by the trust, that is not as extensive as the BBC would like,” a source told Fox News Digital. “At the end of the day, the financial information they’re looking for about the Trump Organization has nothing to do with this case … We’re looking at this in a way that’s going to be very narrow and consistent with what’s being reported.”
Trump’s team now argues that it is only seeking redress for damage to his reputation rather than the businesses under his umbrella.
“This case will not be about any damage caused to the Trump Organization. It has always been about damage caused to President Trump,” said a source close to Trump’s team.
Although Lett is reported to have said he does not have the power to drop the business damage claims in the case, Trump could appeal the decision to one of his nominees, US District Court Judge Roy Altman.
The BBC has argued that the case should be dismissed on the grounds that the Florida court has no jurisdiction over what was broadcast by the British broadcaster across the ocean.
Fox News Digital reached out to the BBC for comment but did not immediately receive a response.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS PROGRAM
Brian Flood of Fox News Digital contributed to this report.
