Chris LaCivita, a senior manager of Donald Trump's successful 2024 presidential election campaign, has abruptly abandoned a defamation lawsuit against the news outlet the Daily Beast. The legal action, filed ten months ago, was dropped on Friday without any retraction, apology, or financial settlement from the publication.
The Core of the Defamation Claim
The lawsuit stemmed from a series of reports by the Daily Beast, including an article by journalist Michael Isikoff headlined "Trump in Cash Crisis – As Campaign Chief’s $22m Pay Revealed." LaCivita alleged the coverage created a false and damaging impression that he was personally profiting excessively from the campaign, prioritising personal gain over its success.
He argued that the multimillion-dollar figures cited represented gross campaign advertising expenditures channelled through his consulting firm, not his personal income. Although the Daily Beast later modified its reporting, reducing the figure to $19.2m and clarifying the funds went to his firm, LaCivita's suit claimed these changes did not rectify the fundamental misrepresentation.
A Sudden Legal Reversal
The decision to drop the case marks a significant reversal from LaCivita's previously combative stance. In March 2024, he publicly declared of the lawsuit, "Fuck around and Find Out," and expressed eagerness to present his case before a jury. His initial legal filing had starkly warned that repairing his reputation could cost millions of dollars.
This legal standoff fits a broader pattern of Trump and his allies using defamation lawsuits to challenge media reporting they deem hostile. According to a November 2024 report by the Atlantic, Trump himself encouraged the action during a campaign flight, telling LaCivita, "You should sue those bastards," and later jokingly referring to him as "my $22m man."
Implications and Aftermath
The lawsuit's quiet dismissal leaves the Daily Beast's reporting unchallenged in court and underscores the difficulties of pursuing defamation claims against media organisations. For LaCivita, it closes a contentious chapter that had threatened to overshadow his role in securing Trump's return to the White House.
The episode highlights the ongoing, often litigious tension between the Trump political orbit and the press, where allegations of defamation are frequently wielded as a tool to dispute critical journalism. The case's conclusion without a trial or settlement means the factual disputes at its heart remain legally unresolved.
