Trump vs. a free press

Throwing over the First Amendment, Donald Trump has embraced a strategy of intimidating the media with threats to file lawsuits for alleged defamations. Apparently, Trump liked what he saw when a lawyer secretly financed by billionaire Peter Thiel drove Gawker into bankruptcy over a snippet of a Hulk Hogan sex tape.

More recently, the same lawyer, Charles Harder, put at least 10 news outlets on notice that they faced suits over stories, or possible stories, focused on Trump’s wife Melania.

Paradoxically, Harder’s threat threw a spotlight on the unsupported — and flatly denied — claim in some of the articles that Mrs. Trump had worked as an escort early in her career.

Lacking evidence, the assertion was distasteful and irresponsible. Even so, the law of the land bars legal penalty for virtually all such speech in political campaigns in order to guarantee the most robust exchange of ideas.

Since Mrs. Trump’s chances of winning in court are nil, the intimidation comes in the threat of having to pay legal bill upon legal bill until a case is thrown out of court.

Harder’s targets ranged from a far-left website, which appropriately retracted, to respected Politico, which had nothing to do with the escort story but which published a carefully sourced story that raised valid questions about whether Mrs. Trump worked legally when she first entered the country as an immigrant.

The irony is rich given that the National Enquirer, run by Trump ally David Pecker, relentlessly attacks Trump opponents.

The Enquirer falsely connected Ted Cruz’s father to the assassination of John F. Kennedy, and is in the forefront of spinning conspiracy theories about Hillary Clinton’s health.

Even as Trump amplifies that drivel with baseless accusations, and wonders why the Enquirer has yet to win a Pulitzer Prize, he is a candidate who has spoken of “opening up” libel laws to make it easier for the rich and powerful to sue journalists.

The hypocrisy boggles the mind. The threat to freedom chills the spine.