Trump demands the New York Times for publications that affected his memecoin

United States President Donald Trump filed a lawsuit for defamation and slander against The New York Times before a district court in Florida.

The news was known through a publication in Truth Social, his social network, where he pointed against four journalists of that media and said he claims a sum of 15,000 million dollars as compensation for damages causedin addition to additional punitive compensation “for an amount that will be determined in the trial.”

“Today I have the great honor of presenting a demand for defamation and slander against The New York Timesone of the most nefarious and degenerate newspapers in the history of our country, which has become a virtual ‘spokesman’ of the Democratic Party of the Radical Left ”, said Trump

It is important to mention that, last week, the New York newspaper had advanced that Trump considered to take legal actions due to the publication of articles related to an alleged birthday letter sent by him to the deceased financial and sexual offender Jeffrey Epstein.

He written Of 87 pages he mentions that a series of publications harmed the reputation of the 79 -year -old president, as well as part of his commercial projects and investments, including the Truth Social and Official Trump (Trump) platform, the official memecoin of the US president.

As Cryptoics reported, this Token issued in the Solana Network was launched on January 18, 2025, at the time of the presidential assumption, and Its price literally broke the market: its price went from $ 7 to 30 in a short time.

The day after its launch, the asset reached a historical maximum (ATH) of $ 75.35. However, after the presidential assumption, the price collapsed and is currently negotiated at $ 8.61, as observed in the following graphic provided by TrainingView:

Trump price chart.Trump price chart.
Trump quote throughout its history. Source: TrainingView.

In that context, The New York Times He spread Several articles in which he put the focus on the ethical aspect, pointing out that “the elected president and his family have a direct and potentially lucrative interest in the sale of a cryptocurrency product whose value increased in the hours after its launch, a few days before his investiture.”

The article mentions the distribution of Trump’s total supply, which, as can be seen on the site Get Trump Memes, Only 10% will be allocated to the public offer, which can access users and investors.

Donald Trump’s memecoin has a total supply of 1,000 million tokens. At the time of launch, 200 million tokens (20% of the total) were put into circulation, while another 10% delivered to exchanges to guarantee liquidity in the market.

The remaining 80% is not yet publicly available. These tokens will be controlled by the creators of the Memecoin and by the CIC Digital Group entity, and their release will follow a gradual unlock plan, which means that they cannot be sold or exchanged immediately, but will be released over time as established.

In another article, The New York Times reported The announcement of the private dinner with Trump for the 220 main investors of his memecoin. Fact that was qualified as “your family’s last effort to obtain cryptocurrency profits.”

The news was released on April 23 and, as notoriety, The price of memecoin increased more than 60%indicating that investors acquired the Token to have their place at dinner.

This can generate extreme volatility in the price of memecoin and increase the probability of rapid losses, especially if the demand lowers once the event has passed. In addition, tokens linked to temporary incentives They tend to infect artificially and lack long -term sustainability.

On the other hand, there is the risk of privileged information, since people linked to the project could have had anticipated access to details about the distribution of tokens or mechanics of the event, which would allow them to benefit before the general public.

Now, justice must determine whether these publications effectively harmed the project or if, on the contrary, they did not have a negative impact. That is to say, Token simply did not generate more enthusiasm in the market due to the lack of real utility.



Source link