Trump's got new lawyers waiting to get sanctioned!

My obnoxious headline notwithstanding, the C&D letter is pretty neat, with nifty examples of other people CNN hasn't called liars to "show" "actual malice.". Trumpian logic at its best.

Btw, I'm citing Salon because there's an actual link to the letter, which is really only 26 pages. The rest is exhibits.

https://www.salon.com/2022/07/27/threatens-to-cnn-for-defamation/

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

room101 · 51-55, M

"In this instance, President Trump's comments are not lies: He subjectively believes that the results of the 2020 presidential election........." blah, blah, blah.

Well, I subjectively believe that I'm an absolute Adonis and that I'm the best lover (of any gender) on the planet.

Say that I'm not either of those things or that I'm lying and I'll sue you all (and SW) for defamation😂😂😂

MistyCee

@room101 Subtle difference though is that Trump is saying I'm you're malicious by calling me a liar if I subjectively believe that I'm divine.
I'm not buying it, but it's a bullshit plan to begin with, at least, without at least, a verified complaint under penalty of perjury that he even believes that crap.

Trump could put up, under oath, and could have done so many times, but he hasnt had to and his gotten away with it, this far.

This latest little threat is cute, but he'll never back up it up under oath because it might incriminate him criminally.

It is, however, getting closer to the root of the issue, Trump vs the rest of humanity.

room101 · 51-55, M

@MistyCee I understand but, anybody calling ME a liar, vis-a-vis that I'm an Adonis and the best lover in the world etc etc, would also be doing so maliciously.............in my subjective opinion😂😂😂

The thing that I find baffling in all of this is not that a court of law would hear a case founded on subjectivity (which in itself seems pretty bad) no, it's that a firm (any firm, in any field) is willing to work for trump.

I guess they got paid up front🤷‍♂️

MistyCee

@room101 I actually doubt they got paid up front by Trump, as opposed to getting money from a PAC or even the RNC. And if they did I hope they factored in the potential loss of licenses and or sanctions.

But, having said all that stuff about any lawyer who'd represent Trump, it's really not that terrible a case if they can get him to verify the complaint, i.e., state under oath that he actually believed the allegations are true and correct.

I doubt he'll do that, because it's an invitation to a perjury trap, but it's a pretty good sign he's getting desperate to bluff.

It pretty much boggles the mind trying to figure out a coherent legal strategy behind Trump's moves, at least if you assume there's anything more going on then pure strategy in terms of delay and obfuscation.

At this point, though, bringing a civil suit against CNN and maybe adding others, really does kind of make sense from a strategic point of view.

This suit assuming it's filed, will take forever to get dismissed since it hinges on Trump's "subjective belief" and it's great optics in lieu of testifying under oath.

room101 · 51-55, M

@MistyCee I saw today that the RNC (who have to date paid approx. $2m in legal fees for trump) are saying that they will no longer pay his legal costs IF he runs for the Presidency in 2024.

Which, to me, begs the question, why have they being paying his legal fees anyway?

Fukfacewillie · 56-60, M

@MistyCee @room101 I think they are just working on building a “reasonable doubt” case now to avoid criminal conviction, just in case.

MistyCee

@room101 It's a good question.