It can get quite complex, with the various sub-distinctions.
Orwell, for example, described himself as "lower upper middle class". Wikipedia gives a history of his ancestry

Will he sue it for a billion dollars?

No country "celebrates" Armistice Day.
It is a Commemoration, a solemn Remembrance

They did beat Spain, which led to them annexing the Philippines, Puerto Rico and some other territories. The Philippines had claimed independence from Spain, but the Treaty ending the Spanish American war gave them to USA as a colony. The USA allowed the Philippines their independence in 1946.

Also not very surprising from Nandy

Why is the BBC giving the convicted felon the oxygen of publicity?

If Johnson says it's a lie, you know it must be true

A bit disrespectful to hyaenas

While the US system, at many levels, is awash with donors money, your electoral system cannot be seen as free and fair.
Most countries have strict limits on electoral donations (although this is being undermined in the UK).
In the USA (and sadly elsewhere) he who pays the piper will call the tune.

At least it helps you know which companies to avoid.

I thought the USA had given up on attracting global talent?

To what extent are these spurious claims just a way of laundering donations from the media owners

Only difference is in the spelling

It seems that the episode of Panorama in question was not broadcast in the USA, nor was it available on iPlayer outside of the UK.

You are absolutely right. He has added this to his substack article: (Update 0820: the BBC has said that the episode of Panorama was not broadcast in the US and the iPlayer recording was not available for download there).

If you are going to claim you didn’t incite an insurrection then perhaps best not to incite an insurrection in front of tv cameras and especially if you don’t have a current tv licence!

Is it possible for anyone with a reputation already in the toilet to claim your reputation has suffered anyway?

What reputational damage had been done?
Some US states have the concept of "libel-proof" persons, those whose reputation is already so low that no libel could damage it further.
I suspect that Trump easily falls into that category.

one might consider him a 'libel proof plaintiff". LOL

www.lexology.com/library/deta...