Amarillo, TX – Donald Trump recently filed a massive lawsuit against CBS over its 60 Minutes interview with Kamala Harriswhich he continues to insist, was edited with “malicious” intent.

On Thursday, Trump’s lawyers filed the suit in the Northern District of Texas, arguing that the network committed “interference in elections and voters by distorting information in a malicious, misleading and material manner intended to confuse, deceive and mislead the public , and to try to tip the scales in favor of the Democratic Party. “

The costume refers to a pre-election interview Harris did so with 60 Minutes last month, which Trump repeatedly insisted was edited to make it look better.

He called on CBS and other networks to lose their broadcast license during the interview and repeatedly said threat of legal action.

Donald Trump
Mike Johnson reveals Trump’s ‘massive’ health care changes if re-elected

Trump and his team are now seeking a whopping $10 billion in a lawsuit over alleged campaign finance losses suffered as a result of the interview and are demanding that the network “publicly release the full footage and transcript and unedited.”

At a campaign rally in Nevada the same day, Trump told the crowd from his MAGA followers, “In your honor, I just sued CBS today.”

The former president’s claims were met with great skepticism, as it is common for such interviews to be edited to fit time constraints, and he has conducted numerous interviews that were edited in one way or another. from another.

Critics have pointed out that Trump’s team intentionally filed suit in a specific Texas court to have a Trump-appointed judge oversee the case — a strategy known as “judge shopping” — and argue that the amount of damages requested is unusually high.

The lawsuit also comes as Trump and his MAGA allies have begun laying the groundwork for challenge the results of the election if he does not win by arguing electoral interference from several fronts.

In a statement to The Washington Posta CBS spokesperson described the suit as “completely without merit,” arguing that the show “presented the interview fairly to inform the audience and not mislead them.”