Federal Jury Orders Donald Trump to Pay $83.3 Million in Defamation Case

[ozimoron]

"Chris, I want to point out to you and your viewers, they've tried a lot of these wacky things so far," Rubin continued. "They've asked for a recusal of Judge Kaplan, on the basis of his relationship with another one of E. Jean Carroll's lawyers, and asked for a mistrial after E. Jean Carroll admitted to deleting death threats against her."

 

"This is the third time they tried to get a do-over or cutting it short based on bias or alleged improprieties, because they know they don't have real substantive grounds for appeal," she added.

 

https://www.rawstory.com/trump-do-over-carroll-case/

[rudi49jr]

43 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

I can read.

So can I. But if you don’t provide a link as to who these very competent attorneys are you say Trump now has, who apparently work on an upfront retainer basis, I’m just supposed to take your work for it?

[jerrymahoney]

28 minutes ago, rudi49jr said:

So can I. But if you don’t provide a link as to who these very competent attorneys are you say Trump now has, who apparently work on an upfront retainer basis, I’m just supposed to take your work for it?

Yes I do have a link. But I noted that when someone posted

 

"Because no competent lawyer would touch Trump with a barge pole. His record of non-payment and not listening to advice precedes him."

 

Nobody demanded a link for that.

 

 

All the (Former) President’s Lawyers

Donald Trump’s PACs have spent millions of dollars on a small army of lawyers to defend him in four separate federal and state criminal cases.

 

Aug. 16, 2023, 5:44 p.m. ET  NY Times

 

Here are a dozen of the prominent figures and their bills paid by Mr. Trump’s Save America PAC.

 

https://archive.is/fO6A4#selection-551.16-551.111

[rudi49jr]

1 hour ago, jerrymahoney said:

Yes I do have a link. But I noted that when someone posted

 

"Because no competent lawyer would touch Trump with a barge pole. His record of non-payment and not listening to advice precedes him."

 

Nobody demanded a link for that.

 

 

All the (Former) President’s Lawyers

Donald Trump’s PACs have spent millions of dollars on a small army of lawyers to defend him in four separate federal and state criminal cases.

 

Aug. 16, 2023, 5:44 p.m. ET  NY Times

 

Here are a dozen of the prominent figures and their bills paid by Mr. Trump’s Save America PAC.

 

https://archive.is/fO6A4#selection-551.16-551.111

Thanks for the link.

 

1 hour ago, jerrymahoney said:

Nobody demanded a link for that.

You’re always free to ask. Ask and ye shall receive….

[jerrymahoney]

6 minutes ago, rudi49jr said:

Thanks for the link.

 

You’re always free to ask. Ask and ye shall receive….

OK. But to note those are monies paid on behalf of Trump by the PAC and not money from Trump's personal account(s). But the PAC money is required filings with FEC; personal Trump money, if any, who knows?

[jerrymahoney]

35 minutes ago, rudi49jr said:

 

 

You’re always free to ask. Ask and ye shall receive….

The number from the previous posted article are from FEC filings last AUG 2023. This in just today from Maggie Haberman at the NYTimes:

 

Jan. 30, 2024

 

Trump’s PACs Spent Roughly $50 Million on Legal Expenses in 2023

The former president is facing four criminal indictments and potential trials that could drive his legal bills even higher as he seeks to lock up the Republican presidential nomination.

 

Donald J. Trump piled up legal expenses in 2023 as he was indicted four times, spending approximately $50 million in donor money on legal bills and investigation-related expenses last year, according to two people briefed on the figure. ...

 

Mr. Trump, who has long been loath to pay lawyers himself and has a history of stiffing those who represent him, has used funds in his political action committee, known as Save America, to underwrite his legal bills. The account was originally flooded with donations that were collected during the period immediately after the 2020 election when he was making widespread and false claims of voting fraud.

 

https://archive.is/tclFe

 

[impulse]

19 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

Contrary to your claim above, I don't see anything in your cited report saying Carroll or her attorneys or her civil case had anything to do with the passage of the law.

 

I think she said the quiet part out loud during a CNN interview...

 

CARROLL: Exactly. This would never - I would never have this window, this year of having the ability to bring a lawsuit for rape. Robbie can explain it better.

KAPLAN: Well, E. Jean actually helped to get that law passed. It passed last year. We filed -- it was Thanksgiving Day. It was the first day you could sue. We filed just after midnight on Thanksgiving. And there are a lot of other women throughout the state and, hopefully, throughout this country that they will get other laws like this passed in other states. And New York women should use this law while it's still around, which is until next Thanksgiving.

 

https://transcripts.cnn.com/show/ctmo/date/2023-05-10/segment/06

 

My guess is that all 3 of them realized the implications and STFU right after that gem of a statement.

 

[Lacessit]

3 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

Yes I do have a link. But I noted that when someone posted

 

"Because no competent lawyer would touch Trump with a barge pole. His record of non-payment and not listening to advice precedes him."

 

Nobody demanded a link for that.

 

 

All the (Former) President’s Lawyers

Donald Trump’s PACs have spent millions of dollars on a small army of lawyers to defend him in four separate federal and state criminal cases.

 

Aug. 16, 2023, 5:44 p.m. ET  NY Times

 

Here are a dozen of the prominent figures and their bills paid by Mr. Trump’s Save America PAC.

 

https://archive.is/fO6A4#selection-551.16-551.111

The article is dated August 2023, how many of those cited are still working for Trump? Tacopina is not.

 

I would have thought competent lawyers would have convinced Trump to keep his mouth shut, and let them do the work of getting him off. He's losing on all fronts except the primaries, which won't be much use to him in jail.

 

https://americanjournalnews.com/lawyers-turn-down-trump-legal-team-russia-stormy/

 

https://www.salon.com/2023/06/12/none-of-us-want-to-work-for-the-guy-nightmare-client-cant-find-a-new-mar-a-lago-lawyer/

[jerrymahoney]

6 hours ago, Lacessit said:

 

 

ALways great to have the Aussie view on the American legal system.

 

Trump supporter? I voted against Trump twice in Florida.

[Lacessit]

6 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

 ALways great to have the Aussie view on the American legal system.

 

Trump supporter? I voted against Trump twice in Florida.

 

If you mean only Americans can understand their legal and electoral systems, I'd tend to agree. To the rest of the world, it looks like a basket of snakes. When one in ten people in Washington are lawyers, it's not unexpected.

 

You might be surprised to learn there are quite a few non-Americans ( aliens ) who know more about your systems, in all their cock-eyed glory, than many Americans. Conversely, most Americans think we still have kangaroos and wallabies hopping down the streets of Sydney, not that they would know the difference between the two.

 

From the tenor of your posts, I am under the distinct impression you are a Trump supporter.

I can't vote in American elections. I would say Trump makes Biden look like Einstein.

[jerrymahoney]

5 hours ago, Lacessit said:

From the tenor of your posts, I am under the distinct impression you are a Trump supporter.

 

I've worked legal issues internationally.  I just try to understand Trump's side of the case. Not that I think necessarily think he's going to win.

 

But it is an amusement of mine, regardless of who it is, when they make a statement that, if they were familiar with the source document of the case, they would know is just ain't so.

 

But to answer your question above "The article is dated August 2023, how many of those cited are still working for Trump? Tacopina is not." Sure. If you want to know who is working now for Trump, all you have to do is look at who is listed on the case docket as "Counselor of Record" 

 

Right now however I think all Trump's criminal cases and the Carroll follies are a side show compared to what's coming up at the Supreme Court.

 

[Lacessit]

4 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

You can have any impression you want. And I've worked legal issues internationally. But I don't need someone telling me whether Yank or not who I support. I just try to understand Trump's side of the case. Not that I think necessarily think he's going to win.

 

But it is an amusement of mine, regardless of who it is, when they make a statement that, if they were familiar with the source document of the case, they would know is just ain't so.

 

Right now however I think all Trump's criminal cases and the Carroll follies are a side show compared to what's coming up at the Supreme Court.

 

 

 

What Supreme Court case are you talking about? The 14 th Amendment applied by Maine and Colorado?

[Danderman123]

7 hours ago, G_Money said:

He’ll get the money!  One way or the other.

 

 

I am predicting that Trump will not appeal the $83 verdict. He will rely on the appeal of the first verdict, so he doesn't have to post an $83 million bond for the second appeal.

[jerrymahoney]

10 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

I am predicting that Trump will not appeal the $83 verdict. He will rely on the appeal of the first verdict, so he doesn't have to post an $83 million bond for the second appeal.

Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure Rule 4. Appeal as of Right—When Taken

 

(1) Time for Filing a Notice of Appeal.

(A) In a civil case, except as provided in Rules 4(a)(1)(B), 4(a)(4), and 4(c), the notice of appeal required by Rule 3 must be filed with the district clerk within 30 days after entry of the judgment or order appealed from.

 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frap/rule_4

[Danderman123]

7 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure Rule 4. Appeal as of Right—When Taken

 

(1) Time for Filing a Notice of Appeal.

(A) In a civil case, except as provided in Rules 4(a)(1)(B), 4(a)(4), and 4(c), the notice of appeal required by Rule 3 must be filed with the district clerk within 30 days after entry of the judgment or order appealed from.

 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frap/rule_4

Great. We'll know in 30 days if Trump can raise the $83 million.

[jerrymahoney]

21 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Great. We'll know in 30 days if Trump can raise the $83 million.

Yes. If he files an appeal he has to raise somehow $83 million.

 

And if he doesn't appeal, he at some point has to raise $83 million unless somehow he can stall awaiting  the prior ruling already under appeal as you note above.

 

Since the judgment in this recent case only involves the amount of the damages awarded (if any) that would have to be the sole issue of the appeal. Note as already posted regarding US Supreme Court ruling on damages awarded:

 

https://aseannow.com/topic/1318177-federal-jury-orders-donald-trump-to-pay-833-million-in-defamation-case/?do=findComment&comment=18658162

 

So given the info in that ABA (American Bar Association) link in the link above, the appeal may reference jury instructions as to what Judge Kaplan included or didn't include.

[Lacessit]

2 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

Yes. If he files an appeal he has to raise somehow $83 million.

 

And if he doesn't appeal, he at some point has to raise $83 million unless somehow he can stall awaiting  the prior ruling already under appeal as you note above.

 

Since the judgment in this recent case only involves the amount of the damages awarded (if any) that would have to be the sole issue of the appeal. Note as already posted regarding US Supreme Court ruling on damages awarded:

 

https://aseannow.com/topic/1318177-federal-jury-orders-donald-trump-to-pay-833-million-in-defamation-case/?do=findComment&comment=18658162

 

So given the info in that ABA (American Bar Association) link in the link above, the appeal may reference jury instructions as to what Judge Kaplan included or didn't include.

The $83.3 million will become small change if, as expected, Engoron orders the disgorgement that Letitia James wants, or more, in the NY fraud case.

IIRC, Trump and his lawyer have not exactly endeared themselves to said judge.

[Chomper Higgot]

3 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

If he files an appeal he has to raise somehow $83 million.

Didn’t Trump state that he has $400million in cash?

 

If so there’s no ‘somehow’ about getting $83 million.

 

Other than the ‘somehow’ I don’t think I believe him.

 

[pomchop]

On 1/30/2024 at 7:24 PM, Danderman123 said:

"Trump only sexually assaulted her, he didn't rape her" is not going to sound great on the campaign trail.

 

Trump told the world that he could and did just "grab em by the pxxxy"....which is what he did with caroll but got a little carried away and inserted fingers into said "puxxxy"..  The only reason it is not called rape is because under new york law you have to insert penis into said "puxxy"...otherwise it is sexual assualt..BUT in most all other states fingers into pxxxxy is legally rape..which the judge correctly pointed out.

 

so little donnie only got convicted of sexual assault..so for all the bible beaters that lick trumps rear that is not a problem at all.

 

When somebody tells you in advance what he did then just maybe he did exactly that...and in spite of all the trumpers whining and accusing caroll of making it up the bottom line is the jury listened to all the evidence and found him guilty.....whine all you want but you are still convicted of sexual assault... of course if the jury had voted not guilty then they would be fine patriots but like the election, anything that goes against trump must obviously all be rigged...what a five year old pretending to be a president.

[Danderman123]

The result of the trial is already impacting the polls, where Trump is losing support among women.

 

Let's see if they remember in November.

[G_Money]

18 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

I am predicting that Trump will not appeal the $83 verdict. He will rely on the appeal of the first verdict, so he doesn't have to post an $83 million bond for the second appeal.

That crystal ball of yours is working overtime.

 

 I actually had a link attached to the original post but I assume it didn’t meet the criteria.

 

I thought it was pretty funny.  “Movie Casino banker scene”.  Utube.

 

Perhaps not too far off the mark.

 

 

[Hanaguma]

2 hours ago, pomchop said:

 

Trump told the world that he could and did just "grab em by the pxxxy"....which is what he did with caroll but got a little carried away and inserted fingers into said "puxxxy"..  The only reason it is not called rape is because under new york law you have to insert penis into said "puxxy"...otherwise it is sexual assualt..BUT in most all other states fingers into pxxxxy is legally rape..which the judge correctly pointed out.

 

so little donnie only got convicted of sexual assault..so for all the bible beaters that lick trumps rear that is not a problem at all.

 

When somebody tells you in advance what he did then just maybe he did exactly that...and in spite of all the trumpers whining and accusing caroll of making it up the bottom line is the jury listened to all the evidence and found him guilty.....whine all you want but you are still convicted of sexual assault... of course if the jury had voted not guilty then they would be fine patriots but like the election, anything that goes against trump must obviously all be rigged...what a five year old pretending to be a president.

To be pedantic, he did not get convicted. This was not a criminal case. If this case ever went across a DA's desk, it would be laughed out of the office. A victim from decades past, can't remember even the month or year the alleged crime happened, no physical evidence, no witnesses....get real. A defendant who cannot mount a credible defense for the same reasons? Would never see a courtroom. 

 

Also, the Bad Orange Man never said that he DID grab women by the baby cat.  He merely said that rich and powerful men can get away with stuff like that, and that women let them do it. Which is true. Power is an aphrodesiac. 

[G_Money]

7 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

To be pedantic, he did not get convicted. This was not a criminal case. If this case ever went across a DA's desk, it would be laughed out of the office. A victim from decades past, can't remember even the month or year the alleged crime happened, no physical evidence, no witnesses....get real. A defendant who cannot mount a credible defense for the same reasons? Would never see a courtroom. 

 

Also, the Bad Orange Man never said that he DID grab women by the baby cat.  He merely said that rich and powerful men can get away with stuff like that, and that women let them do it. Which is true. Power is an aphrodesiac. 

And;

 

If the name of the person (Trump) would of been withheld from the jury of the civil case they would of thrown it out in record time from lack of evidence.

 

The name Trump to the liberal jury was all that was needed to hear.  He was guilty before he trial even ended.

 

Another words, if you or I were the defendants, case dismissed.

 

 

[metisdead]

A post with content from an unapproved social media source contravening our Community Standards has been removed.  Please remember social media cannot be used unless it is from a credible news media source or a government agency.

[placeholder]

24 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

To be pedantic, he did not get convicted. This was not a criminal case. If this case ever went across a DA's desk, it would be laughed out of the office. A victim from decades past, can't remember even the month or year the alleged crime happened, no physical evidence, no witnesses....get real. A defendant who cannot mount a credible defense for the same reasons? Would never see a courtroom. 

 

Also, the Bad Orange Man never said that he DID grab women by the baby cat.  He merely said that rich and powerful men can get away with stuff like that, and that women let them do it. Which is true. Power is an aphrodesiac. 

It's true that "women let them do that"? An extremely dumb generalization. Power may be an aphrodisiac for some lowlifes, maybe not so much for the objects, (and that's the way some clowns view women,) of their attention. 

[Hanaguma]

11 minutes ago, G_Money said:

And;

 

If the name of the person (Trump) would of been withheld from the jury of the civil case they would of thrown it out in record time from lack of evidence.

 

The name Trump to the liberal jury was all that was needed to hear.  He was guilty before he trial even ended.

 

Another words, if you or I were the defendants, case dismissed.

 

 

Not to mention the settlement amount is laughable. The average wrongful death settlement in the US is in the $1,000,000 range.  So the jury is saying that the bruised ego of a scatterbrained woman is worth 83 lives.   This will not survive appeal.

[Hanaguma]

2 minutes ago, placeholder said:

It's true that "women let them do that"? An extremely dumb generalization. Power may be an aphrodisiac for some lowlifes, maybe not so much for the objects, (and that's the way some clowns view women,) of their attention. 

Some women do, especially the ones that are attracted to rich and powerful men. They feed off each other. 

[G_Money]

1 hour ago, Hanaguma said:

Some women do, especially the ones that are attracted to rich and powerful men. They feed off each other. 

I believe Henry Kissinger said “Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac”.

 

At least that’s what they tell me at The Castle.

[LosLobo]

A new Quinnipac Poll was released today, possibly this trial may have broken the past trend.

 

Trump is now trailing both Biden and Haley. 

 

'The gender demographic tells a story to keep an eye on.
Propelled by female voters in just the past few weeks, the head-to-head tie with Trump morphs into a modest lead for Biden'.
said Quinnipiac University Polling Analyst Tim Malloy.

 

2024 Matchups: Biden Opens Up Lead Over Trump In Head-To-Head, Quinnipiac University National Poll Finds; Haley Leads Biden 1 On 1, But Trails When Third Party Candidates Are Added | Quinnipiac University Poll

[placeholder]

22 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

Some women do, especially the ones that are attracted to rich and powerful men. They feed off each other. 

First off, now you're saying "Some women" instead of before when it it was just a generalization about women. And how do you tell which women are drawn to powerful men? Does just being with snatching reach of a powerful man mean a woman is attracted to him?