Filing # 173606585 E-Filed 05/20/2023 05:28:12 PM

FORM 1.997. CIVIL COVER SHEET

The civil cover sheet and the information contained in it neither replace nor supplement the filing
and service of pleadings or other documents as required by law. This form must be filed by the
plaintiff or petitioner with the Clerk of Court for the purpose of reporting uniform data pursuant
to section 25.075, Florida Statutes. (See instructions for completion.)

I. CASE STYLE

IN THE CIRCUIT/COUNTY COURT OF THE TWELFTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT,

IN AND FOR SARASOTA COUNTY, FLORIDA

Plaintiff Case #
Judge
vs.

Defendant

II. AMOUNT OF CLAIM

Please indicate the estimated amount of the claim, rounded to the nearest dollar. The estimated amount of
the claim is requested for data collection and clerical processing purposes only. The amount of the claim
shall not be used for any other purpose.

☐ $8,000 or less
☐ $8,001 - $30,000
☐ $30,001- $50,000
☐ $50,001- $75,000
☐ $75,001 - $100,000
☒ over $100,000.00

III. TYPE OF CASE (If the case fits more than one type of case, select the most
definitive category.) If the most descriptive label is a subcategory (is indented under a broader
category), place an x on both the main category and subcategory lines.

-1-

Filed 05/22/2023 09:25 AM - Karen E. Rushing, Clerk of the Circuit Court, Sarasota County, FL
CIRCUIT CIVIL

☐ Condominium
☐ Contracts and indebtedness
☐ Eminent domain
☐ Auto negligence
☐ Negligence—other
☐ Business governance
☐ Business torts
☐ Environmental/Toxic tort
☐ Third party indemnification
☐ Construction defect
☐ Mass tort
☐ Negligent security
☐ Nursing home negligence
☐ Premises liability—commercial
☐ Premises liability—residential
☐ Products liability
☐ Real Property/Mortgage foreclosure
☐ Commercial foreclosure
☐ Homestead residential foreclosure
☐ Non-homestead residential foreclosure
☐ Other real property actions

☐Professional malpractice
☐ Malpractice—business
☐ Malpractice—medical
☐ Malpractice—other professional
☒ Other
☐ Antitrust/Trade regulation
☐ Business transactions
☐ Constitutional challenge—statute or ordinance
☐ Constitutional challenge—proposed amendment
☐ Corporate trusts
☐ Discrimination—employment or other
☐ Insurance claims
☐ Intellectual property
☒ Libel/Slander
☐ Shareholder derivative action
☐ Securities litigation
☐ Trade secrets
☐ Trust litigation

COUNTY CIVIL

☐ Small Claims up to $8,000

☐ Civil
☐ Real property/Mortgage foreclosure
-2-
 ☐ Replevins
☐ Evictions
☐ Residential Evictions
☐ Non-residential Evictions
☐ Other civil (non-monetary)

COMPLEX BUSINESS COURT

This action is appropriate for assignment to Complex Business Court as delineated and mandated by the
Administrative Order. Yes ☐ No ☒

IV. REMEDIES SOUGHT (check all that apply):

☒ Monetary;
☐ Nonmonetary declaratory or injunctive relief;
☐ Punitive

V. NUMBER OF CAUSES OF ACTION: [ ]

(Specify)

VI. IS THIS CASE A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT?

☐ yes
☒ no

VII. HAS NOTICE OF ANY KNOWN RELATED CASE BEEN FILED?

☒ no
☐ yes If “yes,” list all related cases by name, case number, and court.
N/A
VIII. IS JURY TRIAL DEMANDED IN COMPLAINT?
☒ yes
☐ no

IX. DOES THIS CASE INVOLVE ALLEGATIONS OF SEXUAL ABUSE?

☐ yes
☒ no

I CERTIFY that the information I have provided in this cover sheet is accurate to the best of
my knowledge and belief, and that I have read and will comply with the requirements of
Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.425.

Signature: s/ Jason R. Kobal Fla. Bar # 542253

Attorney or party (Bar # if attorney)

Jason R. Kobal 05/20/2023

(type or print name) Date

-3-
 Filing # 173606585 E-Filed 05/20/2023 05:28:12 PM

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWELFTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT

IN AND FOR SARASOTA COUNTY, STATE OF FLORIDA
CIRCUIT CIVIL DIVISION

TRUMP MEDIA & TECHNOLOGY )

GROUP CORP. ) CASE NO.
)
Plaintiff, ) CASE TYPE: CA Libel / Slander
)
v. ) JUDGE:
)
)
WP COMPANY, LLC ) TRIAL BY JURY
d/b/a The Washington Post ) IS DEMANDED
)
Defendant. )
)

COMPLAINT
Plaintiff, Trump Media & Technology Group Corp. (“Plaintiff” or “TMTG”), by

counsel, files the following Complaint against defendant, WP Company, LLC d/b/a The

Washington Post (“Defendant” or “WaPo”).

Plaintiff seeks (a) compensatory damages and punitive damages in the sum of

$3,780,000,000.00 or such greater amount as is determined by the Jury, (b)

prejudgment interest on the principal sum awarded by the Jury from May 13, 2023 to the

date of Judgment at the rate of 6.58 percent per year, and (c) costs – arising out of

Defendant’s defamation and conspiracy.

I. INTRODUCTION

1. TMTG is a private Sarasota-based media and technology company that

operates a flagship social media platform called “Truth Social”. On May 13, 2023,

WaPo, acting in concert with a former employee of TMTG who was terminated for

Complaint
1

Filed 05/22/2023 09:25 AM - Karen E. Rushing, Clerk of the Circuit Court, Sarasota County, FL
cause, published an egregious hit piece that falsely accused TMTG of securities fraud and

other wrongdoing. WaPo’s false criminal charges exposed TMTG to public ridicule,

contempt and distrust, and injured TMTG’s business and reputation.

2. WaPo has been on a years-long crusade against TMTG characterized by

the concealment of relevant information in its possession—a bitterly ironic truth for a

publication whose motto is “Democracy Dies in Darkness”. WaPo’s latest defamation

creates an existential threat for TMTG, causing enormous loss. TMTG brings this case to

recover special damages to its business and good will, actual injury to its name and

reputation, and punitive damages for WaPo’s gross misconduct.

II. PARTIES

3. TMTG is a Delaware corporation headquartered in Sarasota, Florida.

4. WaPo is a Delaware limited liability company, whose sole member is

Nash Holdings, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, whose members include

citizens of Delaware. The Washington Post has more than 2,500,000 digital subscribers

in the United States, including tens of thousands in Florida. 20,000,000 people follow

WaPo on Twitter (@washingtonpost), including millions in Florida. WaPo is at home in

Florida. WaPo has agents and offices in Florida. It transacts substantial business in

Florida, including the sale of newspapers, advertising and online subscriptions to

residents of Sarasota, and the operation of an active website that is accessible in Florida,

www.washingtonpost.com. In April 2023, over 132,300,000 people visited

Washingtonpost.com, including millions in Florida. The article at issue in this action

targeted a Florida business, and was accessed and read by thousands of Floridians.

Complaint
2
 III. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

5. The Circuit Court of Sarasota County has subject matter jurisdiction over

this action.

6. WaPo is subject to the Court’s general personal jurisdiction and specific

personal jurisdiction.

7. Venue is proper in Sarasota County, where the false and defamatory

statements were published and where TMTG suffered substantial damage.

IV. STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS

8. On March 15, 2023, the Guardian published an online article entitled

“Federal investigators examined Trump Media for possible money laundering, sources

say”. [https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/mar/15/trump-media-investigated-

possible-money-laundering (the “Guardian Article”)]. The Guardian Article contained

false statements and defamatory implications, including that Federal investigators had

examined TMTG “for possible money laundering”; that “New York prosecutors

expanded criminal inquiry of company last year and examined acceptance of $8m with

suspected Russian ties”; and that “Federal prosecutors in New York involved in the

criminal investigation into Donald Trump’s social media company last year started

examining whether it violated money laundering statutes in connection with the

acceptance of $8m with suspected Russian ties”.

9. The source of the Guardian’s false and defamatory “money laundering”

charges was a former employee of TMTG, Will Wilkerson (“Wilkerson”), who was

terminated for cause. Beginning in 2022, separate and apart from any purported

Complaint
3
disclosures he may have made to the government, Wilkerson began to concoct and

publicly shop false stories about TMTG to numerous media outlets.

10. By May 2023, Wilkerson had come up with yet another fake news story.

Wilkerson knew that WaPo eagerly published false stories about TMTG, its CEO, Devin

Nunes (“Nunes”) and, of course, former President Donald Trump. Wilkerson contacted

WaPo with a salacious story about a porn-friendly bank and securities fraud. Through a

series of meetings and conversations with Wilkerson and his lawyers, WaPo undertook

with Wilkerson to publish agreed false and defamatory statements to injure TMTG.

11. On May 13, 2023, WaPo published an online article with the clickbait

headline, “Trust linked to porn-friendly bank could gain a stake in Trump’s Truth

Social”. [https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/05/13/trump-truth-social-

loan-questions/ (the “WaPo Article”)].

12. The WaPo Article and follow-on social media republications contain the

following false statements of fact of or concerning TMTG:

● “An obscure financial entity … would gain a sizable stake in former

president Donald Trump’s media company if its merger deal proceeds”;

● “[T]he role ES Family Trust would assume in Trump Media and

Technology Group has never been officially disclosed to the Securities
and Exchange Commission [“SEC”] or to shareholders in Digital World
Acquisition [“DWAC”], the special purpose acquisition company, or
SPAC, that has proposed merging with Trump’s company”;

● “The companies also have not disclosed to shareholders or the SEC that
Trump Media paid a $240,000 finder’s fee for helping to arrange the $8
million loan deal with ES Family Trust”;

● “the recipient of that fee was an outside brokerage associated with Patrick
Orlando, then Digital World’s CEO”;

● “Orlando’s finder’s fee could affect the value of the shares”;

Complaint
4
 ● “Trump’s media company took out an $8 million loan in exchange for
stock, but no one told the SEC”;

● “Trump Media: this time they borrowed money from a bank best known
for servicing the adult entertainment, pledged a stake in the company for
the loan and didn’t tell the SEC”;

● “A Russian banker connected to the porn industry could have gained a

stake in Trump’s Truth Social according to documents”;

● “The Guardian reported in March that federal prosecutors in New York

have been investigating whether the Trump Media loans violated money-
laundering statutes”.

(each of the above is a “Statement” and together the “Statements”). 1

13. WaPo was not content with publication of the false Statements to its

2,500,000 subscribers and republication to its 20,000,000 Twitter followers. The primary

author of the WaPo Article, Drew Harwell (“Harwell”), republished the Article to his

48,000 Twitter followers, which included correspondents at CNN, New York Times,

NBC News, The Atlantic, Huffington Post, the Daily Beast, Business Insider, and the

Guardian. [https://twitter.com/drewharwell/status/1657351704419917825 (“New: The

Truth Social saga just keeps getting weirder. Our latest includes a porn-friendly bank on

a Caribbean island and an $8 million mystery loan”). In order to further spread the smear

and increase the damage to TMTG, WaPo engaged agents from both within and outside

the company to broadly republish the defamation. Harwell and Washington Post “cyber

reporter” Joseph Menn (“Menn”) “boosted” (republished) the WaPo Article on the

1
At 3:24 p.m. on May 13, 2023, WaPo republished the WaPo Article to a
new target audience – its 20,000,000+ Twitter followers. WaPo’s tweet falsely states that
“Trump’s media company took out an $8 million loan in exchange for stock, but no one
told the SEC”). To date, the tweet has been viewed over 331,500 times, retweeted 971
times, quote tweeted 54 times, and liked 1,953 times by Twitter followers and users.
[https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1657466763611717633]. One WaPo reader
posted a meme that stated it was “TIME to Arrest” Donald Trump.

Complaint
5
Mastodon social media network. Menn republished the Article to his 6,658 followers on

Mastodon. Harwell republished Menn’s post to his 67,000 Mastodon followers.

[https://mastodon.social/@[email protected]/110363703525631648 (“Wild

tale about mysterious backing for Truth Social”)]. On May 13, 2023, Washington Post

technology editor Mark Seibel (Seibel”) joined the smear campaign. Seibel republished

the Article to 7,014 more Twitter followers, while falsely claiming that TMTG

“borrowed money from a bank [Paxum Bank] best known for servicing the adult

entertainment.” [https://twitter.com/markseibel/status/1657407145535500288 (“More on

the crazy doings at Trump Media: this time they borrowed money from a bank best

known for servicing the adult entertainment, pledged a stake in the company for the loan

and didn’t tell the SEC”)]. Harwell “liked” Seibel’s tweet. 2 Washington Post business

editor, Lori Montgomery (“Montgomery”), the author of WaPo’s May 17, 2023 response

to TMTG’s retraction demand (see infra), joined the fray on May 13, 2023 by retweeting

the WaPo Article to her 6,805 Twitter followers. Co-author of the WaPo Article,

freelance journalist Matt Bernardini (“Bernardini”), also retweeted the Article to his 427

followers. [https://twitter.com/MattBernardini7/status/1657346969365364737?s=20

(“NEW with @drewharwell and @mateirosca. A Russian banker connected to the porn

industry could have gained a stake in Trump’s Truth Social according to documents”)].

The second co-author of the WaPo Article, Matei Rosca (“Rosca”), tweeted the Article to

his 2,518 followers [https://twitter.com/mateirosca/status/1657350755848683520?s=20],

retweeted Harwell and Seibel, and republished the Article on his website.

2
“Likes” are represented on Twitter by a small heart and are used to show
appreciation for a tweet. A user can view the tweets that another user has liked from
that user’s profile page by clicking or tapping on the “Likes” tab.
[https://help.twitter.com/en/using-twitter/liking-tweets-and-moments].

Complaint
6
[https://reporter.london/]. Rosca led readers to believe that the WaPo Article was “just

scratching the surface”, and that there were additional undisclosed facts and wrongdoing

by TMTG. [https://twitter.com/mateirosca/status/1657396995709890561?s=20 ( )

(“@MattBernardini7 @mateirosca @drewharwell the Washington Post ES Trust/Trump

Media story is just scratching the surface, right? Great work”)]. WaPo’s republication

frenzy and repeated concerted harassment evidences a knowing, deliberate, organized and

systemic effort to promote the false and defamatory Statements worldwide in order to

inflict the greatest possible injury on TMTG.

14. The clickbait headline of the WaPo Article – “Trust linked to porn-

friendly bank could gain a stake in Trump’s Truth Social” – immediately grabbed the

common mind of readers, falsely insinuating that TMTG was involved in shady business

dealings. [See https://twitter.com/ericgarland/status/1657772179793256450 (“Yo WaPo,

you buried the lede here, even by calling it a loan from a ‘porn-friendly bank.’ It’s

PAXUM BANK, one that’s almost surely tied to Russian Mafiya $$$ from sex

trafficking of cam girls in Romania and around the world. Its owner just resigned

yesterday.”)].

15. The Statements immediately conveyed a defamatory meaning to readers.

The express meaning and defamatory gist of WaPo’s Statements is that TMTG

committed securities fraud or aided, abetted and participated in improper acts designed to

conceal material facts 3 from the SEC and shareholders of DWAC, and that TMTG was

being investigated for money laundering. The WaPo Statements impute to TMTG

3
The WaPo Article represents that TMTG’s failure to disclose payment of
the “$240,000 finder’s fee” was a material omission and, therefore, securities fraud.
WaPo states, “Orlando’s finder’s fee could affect the value of the shares”. To be clear,
WaPo’s Statements are baseless because no finder’s fee was ever paid to anyone.

Complaint
7
crimes, dishonesty, want of integrity and corporate malfeasance. Readers concluded that

TMTG and its executives could go to jail because of the non-disclosures described in the

WaPo Article. [See, e.g., https://twitter.com/dave_winx/status/1657723934677008390

(“The beautiful thing about this is that it could potentially lead to charges against Devon

[sic] Nunes”); https://twitter.com/KeyLargo2/status/1657502055047614472 (“Someone,

please put this corrupt mf’er in jail!”)]. Readers of the WaPo Article concluded that

TMTG operated underhandedly and openly disregarded the rule of law. [See, e.g.,

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/05/13/trump-truth-social-loan-

questions/?commentID=99e03c41-0803-41cc-8340-fbd718941d86].

16. To reinforce the WaPo’s Article central thesis – that TMTG engaged in or

was a party to securities fraud – WaPo included in the Article the story of an “investor”,

Tom Sas, a Trump supporter, who was “injured” after he spent $561,000 on DWAC

stock, “his life savings”, because of TMTG’s non-disclosures. On May 13, 2023, WaPo

quote tweeted the Article and highlighted Sas’ misfortune, implying and insinuating that

TMTG’s concealment of material facts caused DWAC’s stock price to plummet to $13

per share. In his quote tweet, Harwell ridiculed Sas and other investors similarly situated.

[https://twitter.com/drewharwell/status/1657366474032381952 (“No matter how your

day is going, at least you didn’t spend your life savings on Truth Social-related stock,

paying $175 for shares that now sell for $13”)]. WaPo’s readers similarly mocked and

laughed at Sas. They called him a “sucker”. After reading the WaPo Article, they quote

tweeted that Sas was the victim of a stock “scam” and “grift”.

Complaint
8
 17. As was naturally and foreseeably intended by WaPo and Wilkerson, the

Statements were republished millions of times on May 13, 2023 and thereafter, including

by prominent anti-TMTG Twitter users, see, e.g.:

https://twitter.com/MuellerSheWrote/status/1657865291794382848
(“HA! The Russian tied to the bank that loaned Truth Social $8M to stay afloat
also donated $30K to Ron DeSantis, and the bank is the ‘#1 trusted payment
service’ for the porn industry. Oh, the tangled web they weave”);

https://twitter.com/john_sipher/status/1657512249605382144
(“Seems up-and-up. Trump appears to be secretly seeking a loan from a relative
of a Putin ally via a secretive porn financing bank, and is arranging w/o telling it’s
own shareholders. Normal stuff”);

https://twitter.com/svdate/status/1657375596484218881
(“Has Trump ever been involved in a normal business that provided a normal
good or service that didn’t get investigated for fraud in some manner?”);

https://twitter.com/eztempo/status/1657525579548344320
(“Who woulda guessed that Trump’s Truth Social is snarled in a Federal
investigation of money laundering and that the cash is linked to a Putin-allied
oligarch and that Trump Media shareholders are being kept in the dark?”);

https://twitter.com/craigunger/status/1657399351088390145
(“So much corruption. So little time: Trust linked to porn-friendly bank could
gain a stake in Trump’s Truth Social”);

https://twitter.com/rhonda_harbison/status/1658550092968742913
(“Trump Media took $8 million loan from porn-tied bank, unknown trust”);

https://reporter.london/?p=1044
(“Washington Post and Reporter shed light on Trump social media firm
financing”);

https://www.rawstory.com/trump-truth-social-2660106914/
(“Sketchy funding for Trump’s Truth Social was hidden from SEC and investors:
report”).

18. The Statements are materially false. Contrary to WaPo’s Statements,

TMTG did not conceal from or improperly fail to disclose (or cause DWAC to

improperly fail to disclose) to the SEC or DWAC shareholders that ES Family Trust

Complaint
9
would gain a stake in TMTG if TMTG consummated a merger with DWAC. In truth,

DWAC properly disclosed TMTG’s debt in its registration statement filed with the SEC.

TMTG did not conceal material facts from any shareholder or the SEC. WaPo’s

Statements are blatantly false. TMTG also never paid a $240,000 “finder’s fee” to

anyone for helping to arrange the $8 million loan from ES Family Trust. No brokerage

associated with Orlando received any finder’s fee. Orlando did not receive any fee.

WaPo’s Statements are knowing falsehoods. TMTG did not improperly fail to disclose

(or cause DWAC to improperly fail to disclose) payment of a finder’s fee to the SEC,

DWAC shareholders, and/or the investing public. Comparing WaPo’s Statements to the

truth, WaPo’s Statements are plainly materially false and defamatory. [Jews for Jesus,

Inc. v. Rapp, 997 So.2d 1098, 1107-1109 (Fla. 2008); Nunes v. W.P. Company, 2021 WL

3550896, at * 4 (D. D.C. 2021) (“Taken as a whole, the article says (or at least a

reasonable juror could understand the article to say) that Nunes had made baseless claims

about spying on Trump Tower and then visited the White House to inspect documents

that might support those baseless claims. And a reasonable juror could conclude that an

elected official is ridiculous or unfit for office if he searched for evidence to support

baseless claims. Indeed, the online article stated that Nunes had searched for this

evidence ‘late at night,’ suggesting something untoward about the outing”)].

19. Fla. Stat. § 770.01 provides that before any civil action is brought for

publication in a newspaper, periodical, or other medium, of a libel or slander, the plaintiff

“shall, at least 5 days before instituting such action, serve notice in writing on the

defendant, specifying the article or broadcast and the statements therein which he or she

alleges to be false and defamatory.” On May 14, 2023, TMTG served notice on WaPo

Complaint
10
pursuant to § 770.01 and requested retraction. In a May 17, 2023 response written by

Montgomery, WaPo admitted that payment of the “$240,000 finder’s fee” was

“information” that was “material to investors”, but WaPo refused to recognize that no

finder’s fee had ever been paid, that TMTG did not fail or refuse to disclose anything to

the SEC or shareholders, and that its Statements were materially false. To this day,

WaPo refuses to retract the false and defamatory Statements.

20. WaPo’s Statements were not published in good faith. The falsity of the

Statements is not due to an honest mistake of the facts. There are no reasonable grounds

for believing that the Statements are true. Publication of the Statements and republication

of the Guardian article was part of a concerted effort to damage TMTG and interfere with

its business.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION –

DEFAMATION

21. TMTG restates paragraphs 1 through 20 of this Complaint, and

incorporates them herein by reference.

22. WaPo made and published to third-parties, including WaPo’s subscribers,

advertisers, viewers, and followers in Sarasota County, Florida, false factual Statements,

which are detailed verbatim above, of or concerning TMTG. WaPo also republished the

false and defamatory statements published by the Guardian. See, e.g., Doe v. Am. Online,

Inc., 783 So.2d 1010, 1017 (Fla. 2001) (“[E]very repetition of a defamatory statement is

considered a publication.”); id. Lewis v. Abramson, 2023 WL 3322009, at * 18 (D. N.H.

2023) (“Abramson argues that he cannot be held liable for this statement because it is

‘simply a quote from a Guardian article.’ However, ‘one who repeats ... defamatory

Complaint
11
matter is subject to liability as if he had originally published it.’”) (citations and

quotations omitted).

23. By publishing the false and defamatory Statements on the Internet and by

tweeting the false Statements to its 20,000,000+ followers, WaPo knew or should have

known that its false and defamatory Statements would be republished over and over and

over by third-parties to TMTG’s detriment and injury. Republication was the natural and

probable consequence of WaPo’s actions and was actually and/or presumptively

authorized by WaPo as part of its regular way of doing business. In addition to the

original publications, WaPo is liable for the republications of the false and defamatory

Statements by its agents and by third-parties.

24. WaPo’s false Statements constitute defamation per se. The Statements

accuse TMTG of infamous crimes, including securities fraud, other actual misconduct,

incompetence, dishonesty and deception in its trade and business. The Statements tend to

subject TMTG to distrust, public ridicule and contempt. The Statements are inherently

injurious to TMTG’s business.

25. WaPo’s publication and republication of the false and defamatory

Statements damaged TMTG’s business, brand and good will, causing potential users of

Truth Social to refrain from joining the platform, jeopardizing and further delaying the

SEC’s review of the proposed merger with DWAC, and causing loss of future earning

capacity. Publication of the WaPo Article destroyed at least $2.78 Billion of implied

equity value in TMTG. To make matters worse, after reading the WaPo Article TMTG’s

banker, JP Morgan Chase & Co., contacted TMTG to inquire about the year-plus old

transactions with Paxum Bank. Prior to this call, JP Morgan had expressed no concerns

Complaint
12
with the transfers. The calls on May 17 and 18, 2023 evidenced JP Morgan’s concerns

about TMTG’s business caused by the false and defamatory Statements published and

republished by WaPo.

26. WaPo acted with actual malice and reckless disregard for the truth for the

following reasons:

a. First, WaPo and Wilkerson fabricated facts about securities fraud,

and published and republished Statements that were a product of their imagination. They

made up facts out of whole cloth in order to impute securities violations, fraud and

intentional wrongdoing to TMTG. St. Amant v. Thompson, 390 U.S. 727, 732 (1968)

(“Professions of good faith will be unlikely to prove persuasive, for example, where a

story is fabricated by the defendant [or] is the product of his imagination”). In the

Article, WaPo represents that “internal documents” supplied by Wilkerson showed that

ES Family Trust “would gain a sizable stake in former president Donald Trump’s media

company if its merger deal proceeds”. WaPo knew this was false because no real or

authentic documents showed this. Further, the existence and relevant terms of all TMTG

convertible promissory notes were collectively and appropriately disclosed in DWAC’s

securities filings, which was well-known to WaPo because it read all of DWAC’s SEC

filings. WaPo also knew that Wilkerson had arranged the wires from ES Family Trust,

and, thus, that no finder’s fee had been paid to anyone. From discussions with Wilkerson

and his lawyers and his review of documents, WaPo reporter Harwell knew there was no

evidence that any finder’s fee had been paid. In spite of knowing the story was fake or at

least having no evidence of payment of any finder’s fee and, therefore, serious doubts as

to the truth of the story, WaPo accused TMTG of hiding payment of the fictitious

Complaint
13
“$240,000 finder’s fee” from the SEC and shareholders. 4 If true, TMTG’s fraudulent and

deceptive concealment of material facts from the SEC and shareholders would have been,

at the very least, a colossal lack of good business judgment and grounds for the SEC to

delay or deny effectiveness of DWAC’s registration statement pertaining to its merger

with TMTG.

b. Second, WaPo knew Wilkerson had been “ousted” from TMTG,

and that there was bad blood between TMTG and Wilkerson following Wilkerson’s

termination for cause. AdvanFort Co. v. Maritime Executive, LLC, 2015 WL 4603090, at

* 8 (E.D. Va. 2015) (“If, in fact, TME knew of the bad blood between Plaintiffs and

Defendant Cartner, it would have indeed had obvious reason to doubt Cartner’s veracity

and the accuracy of his statements given the blatantly hostile and sarcastic tone of the

Article.”). In spite of serious doubts as to the veracity of Wilkerson’s words, WaPo

published the false and defamatory Statements anyway.

c. Third, WaPo’s Statements were intentionally extreme and

outrageous. WaPo knew that publication of the Statements would cause a media frenzy.

WaPo deliberately and recklessly conveyed a false narrative about TMTG in order to

sensationalize the news and injure TMTG’s business and reputation. See, e.g., Tomblin v.

4
The WaPo Article states that:

“A wire transfer document dated [December 23, 2021] shows that $2 million was
sent to Trump Media by Paxum Bank, whose main office is on the small
Caribbean island of Dominica. A separate wire transfer document, dated Feb. 17,
2022, shows Trump Media being paid another $6 million by ES Family Trust.”

WaPo and Wilkerson concealed from readers that Wilkerson himself arranged the wires.
Wilkerson and WaPo knew that nothing had been concealed from shareholders or the
SEC. The failure to disclose Wilkerson’s role in the wire transfers was intentional. It
demonstrates WaPo’s actual malice.

Complaint
14
WCHS-TV8, 2011 WL 1789770, at * 5 (4th Cir. 2011) (unpublished) (“on the question of

whether WCHS-TV8 deliberately or recklessly conveyed a false message to

sensationalize the news and thus to provide factual support for a finding of malice, there

are disputed facts”).

d. Fourth, WaPo intentionally violated its code of ethics and

consciously abandoned all journalistic standards and integrity in writing, editing and

publishing the Statements, and relying on Wilkerson. WaPo knew it had no evidence that

TMTG had paid a $240,000 finder’s fee to anyone or that TMTG had concealed that fact

from the SEC and shareholders. WaPo published the Statements with the intent to inflict

injury. Curtis Pub. Co. v. Butts, 388 U.S. 130, 161 (1967) (“Where a publisher’s

departure from standards of press responsibility is severe enough to strip from him the

constitutional protection our decision acknowledges, we think it entirely proper for the

State to act not only for the protection of the individual injured but to safeguard all those

similarly situated against like abuse”).

e. Fifth, WaPo harbored extreme bias, ill-will and desire to inflict

harm on TMTG through knowing falsehoods. Don King Productions, Inc. v. Walt Disney

Co., 40 So.3d 40, 45 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (“[a]n intention to portray a public figure in a

negative light, even when motivated by ill will or evil intent, is not sufficient to

show actual malice unless the publisher intended to inflict harm through knowing or

reckless falsehood.”) (citing Garrison v. Louisiana, 379 U.S. 64, 73 (1964)); see Celle v.

Filipino Reporter Enters., Inc., 209 F.3d 163, 186 (2nd Cir. 2000) (“Plaintiff introduced

sufficient circumstantial evidence to establish clearly and convincingly that defendant

Pelayo entertained serious doubts about the truth of the headline ‘US judge finds Celle

Complaint
15
‘negligent.’ This conclusion is based in part on evidence indicating ill will and personal

animosity between Celle and Pelayo at the time of publication”); Duffy v. Leading Edge

Products, Inc., 44 F.3d 308, 315 fn. 19 (5th Cir. 1995) (“[E]vidence of ill will can often

bolster an inference of actual malice.”); ExpertConnect, LLC v. Fowler, 2020 WL

3961004, at * 3 (S.D.N.Y. 2020) (plaintiff alleged that the defendants “‘engaged in a

concerted effort to deliberately disparage the business reputations of Fowler, Parmar, and

Strafluence with false statements’ that they had committed a serious crime and were

under investigation. These statements were made ‘with full knowledge of their falsity’

because ‘[t]here has never been any criminal action commenced against Fowler or

Parmar, no investigation of any sort and, to be sure, no allegations of criminal

conduct.’”). WaPo has a long and well-documented history of spite and hatred for

TMTG, Nunes and President Trump. The WaPo Article is another in a long line of hit

pieces.

f. Finally, prior to publication on May 13, 2023, WaPo knew that

TMTG’s CEO (Nunes) had filed a lawsuit against the Guardian in which Nunes

contended that the statements in the Guardian Article were false and defamatory. In spite

of Nunes’ lawsuit, which WaPo read, WaPo brazenly published and republished the false

and defamatory Guardian statements online and via Twitter millions of times. Nunes v.

Lizza, 12 F. 4th 890, 901 (8th Cir. 2021) (“‘Republication of a statement after the

defendant has been notified that the plaintiff contends that it is false and defamatory may

be treated as evidence of reckless disregard.’ Restatement (Second) of Torts § 580A cmt.

d (Am. L. Inst. 1977). Lizza tweeted the article in November 2019 after Nunes filed this

lawsuit and denied the article’s implication. The pleaded facts are suggestive enough to

Complaint
16
render it plausible that Lizza, at that point, engaged in ‘the purposeful avoidance of the

truth.’”). WaPo’s republications of the Guardian article constitute reckless disregard for

the truth.

27. As a direct result of WaPo’s defamation, TMTG suffered damages,

including, but not limited to, loss and injury to its business, brand and good will, lost

future earning capacity, damage and injury to reputation (past and future), costs, and

other out-of-pocket expenses in the sum of $2,780,000,000.00 or such greater amount as

is determined by the Jury.

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION –

CONSPIRACY

28. TMTG restates paragraphs 1 through 27 of this Complaint, and

incorporates them herein by reference.

29. Beginning in October 2022 and continuing through the present, WaPo,

outside third parties, Wilkerson and his attorneys combined, associated, agreed or acted

in concert together for the express purpose and illegal objective of injuring TMTG and

intentionally interfering with and destroying its business and reputation. In furtherance

of the conspiracy and preconceived plan, WaPo worked together with others to write,

publish and republish a scandalous story about securities fraud. They engaged in a joint

scheme the unlawful purpose of which was to publish and republish false and defamatory

Statements about TMTG in order to harm TMTG’s business. Wilkerson supplied

documents to WaPo and the parties jointly worked on the fraudulent narrative about

securities fraud. WaPo engaged and worked with outside third parties to republish the

WaPo Article to a worldwide audience. The WaPo Article and its publication and

republications were overt acts in furtherance of the conspiracy.

Complaint
17
 30. WaPo and its co-conspirators acted intentionally, purposefully, without

lawful justification, and with the express knowledge that they were defaming TMTG.

31. WaPo’s actions constitute a conspiracy at common law.

32. As a direct result of WaPo’s willful misconduct, TMTG suffered damages,

including, but not limited to, loss and injury to its business, brand and good will, lost

future earning capacity, damage and injury to reputation (past and future), costs, and

other out-of-pocket expenses in the sum of $2,780,000,000.00 or such greater amount as

is determined by the Jury.

TMTG alleges the foregoing based upon personal knowledge, public statements

of others, and records in its possession. TMTG believes that substantial additional

evidentiary support, which is in the exclusive possession of WaPo, Guardian, Wilkerson

and their agents and other third-parties, will exist for the allegations and claims set forth

above after a reasonable opportunity for discovery.

TMTG reserves its right to amend this Complaint upon discovery of additional

instances of Defendants’ wrongdoing.

CONCLUSION AND REQUEST FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, TMTG respectfully requests the Court to enter Judgment against

WaPo as follows:

A. Compensatory damages in the amount of $2,780,000,000.00 or such

greater amount as is determined by the Jury;

Complaint
18
 B. Punitive damages in the amount of $1,000,000,000.00 or the maximum

amount allowed by law;

C. Prejudgment interest from May 13, 2023 until the date Judgment is

entered at the maximum rate allowed by law;

D. Postjudgment interest at the maximum rate allowed by Florida law;

E. Such other relief as is just and proper.

TRIAL BY JURY IS DEMANDED

DATED: May 20, 2023

TRUMP MEDIA & TECHNOLOGY

GROUP CORP.

By: /s/ Jason Kobal

Jason R. Kobal, Esquire
KOBAL LAW, P.A.
12169 W. Lindebaugh Ave.
Tampa, FL 33626
(813) 873-2440
[email protected]
Florida Bar No.: 0542253

Counsel for the Plaintiff

Steven S. Biss (VSB # 32972)

300 West Main Street, Suite 102
Charlottesville, Virginia 22903
Telephone: (804) 501-8272
Facsimile: (202) 318-4098
Email: [email protected]

Counsel for the Plaintiff

(Application for Admission Pro Hac Vice
To be Filed)

Complaint
19