Why E. Jean Carroll Should Sue Trump for the Third Time

The man is nuts. He is absolutely screwed up in the head.

Robbie Kaplan, Eugene Carroll’s lawyer who we’ve had on this show. Do you think she goes after him again? Or do you think she’s like, oh my god. How many times can I sue this guy? For defamation.

I think there’s no question that both of these new repeat deformations can now be brought in the United States District Court for the Southern District of

New York, and as a related

case will be assigned to Judge Lewis A Kaplan.

Hello, everyone, and welcome to George Conway explains it all to Sarah I’m Sarah Longwell, publisher of the Bulwark. And because I’m not a lawyer, I have asked my good friend George Conway from the society for the rule of law to explain the legal news to me. Now I have a lot of

things to talk about.

There is, but I have something more important I wanna talk to you about

first. Okay. Is it personal? If you

don’t explain at all.

Okay.

Can you explain Kate Middleton to me? Because you have corgis,

so I don’t really have a clear picture. I don’t have a clear picture in going a

clear picture? No. No. Is it a is it an ITI?

Did you see the did you see the version of them that he did work with with with Bernie Sanders and Mittens and the kids around him.

That was pretty good. Do you follow the royals?

Not not sufficiently to not not, you know, I mean, like everyone else is sort of a side amusement. I I don’t follow I didn’t watch the Oprah interview of the sister-in-law.

Sure. Meghan Markle.

Meghan Markle. Yeah. I never watched suits.

So I only I honestly I’d never had no idea who Meghan Markle was. And then suits is on Netflix now. So I watched like I don’t know, half the first season. And I was suddenly like, Oh, I get it. Why people are all obsessed with her?

Why are they?

I don’t know. I don’t know. Yeah.

I can’t pass judgment on her. I mean, you know, that doesn’t seem like you’d wanna marry into that royal family either. So and they are dysfunctional, the family. So So I pay zero

attention to any of it, but I do

watch the

crown. And so I’m just gonna wait. If you’re not gonna explain it all to me today, that’s fine.

It’s fine. The corgis, the corgis, though, you know, I mean, they they do their thing and

they have it. I thought that you would maybe because I thought the corgis might be an homage to.

Yeah. They all spy on it. They all they’re they spy on their owners and they can They’re

like part of a separate network.

They share information. Yeah.

Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Well, when when I’ll wait for the new episode, the new season of the crown to tell me what’s happening the story since you won’t. So, okay.

Before we move on to our next topic, wanna pay some bills by saying that this show is sponsored by betterhelp dot com. George, last week, we talked about what we would do if we had just one more hour of sleep, and then we go on and lose an hour of sleep with daylight savings time. I don’t know if that is destroying you. It’s destroying me.

Yeah. I I, you know, may maybe you are older than you say you are. I mean, when I changed time zones, I went to the Super Bowl a few weeks ago, and I was basically nonfunctional for a week.

Yeah. It is it is terrible. And with literally, I got my name

and with dogs, I have dogs. Okay? These dogs, you know, normally you can wait till seven, seven thirty before they start barking for food and to go out. Now they’re barking it. They they know what time it really is.

It cannot fool these dogs. They are up between six and six thirty and they want what they want. Now and say, we don’t care. We don’t care about your daylight savings time. Don’t ask humans changing the clock.

We don’t need clocks. We know what time it is.

The point is that it can feel overwhelming trying to get everything done in the day, especially when they take hours from you, while also take care of yourself mentally and physically. That’s why it’s so essential to know what’s important to you. And therapy can be a great way to find out what aspects of your life you should be rising. George, last week, I asked you who in politics do you thought might need therapy? I don’t know if there’s anyone you wanna add to the list, but I did see that Elon Musk tweeted something, like, I’ve never been to therapy, like, as a

Yeah.

As a post.

You know, for the for the other person we may be thinking of. I mean, I don’t know that therapy can help him. I mean, we’ll all do respect to our sponsor. But, for most people, it’s always good to talk somebody who’s talk talk about things with somebody who’s not gonna be who’s not indirectly in your life and who’s seen other people talk about things before and listen to you and and just talking it out and thinking about it, and it helps you structure what you’re doing.

If any of our listeners are considering starting therapy, give betterhelp a try. It’s entirely online and designed to be convenient, flexible, and suited to your schedule. Just fill out a brief questionnaire to get matched with a licensed therapist and switch therapist anytime for no additional charge. Learn to make time for what makes you happy with better help. Visit betterhelp dot com slash ask George today to get ten percent off your first hand.

I can’t be a therapist myself. I get my credit.

Yeah. Don’t ask me. That’s betterhelp h e l p dot com slash ask George. Okay. Let’s get to the legal news.

I wanna touch quickly on Robert Hur, because we haven’t really talked about this yet on the podcast.

If he had a if he had a, Twitter account or something, would like his pronouns are his and her. Her.

You worry. You’re you’re reading the puns. I get it now. Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. Yeah. I didn’t know where you were going

with that.

He could go his and hers. He could use both.

He could. He could’ve had that had not occurred to me.

Well, I’m I’m very I’m very big on pronouns.

What did you you’re big on puns? Yeah. This is one of your it’s one of the best parlor games you play on Twitter

Mhmm.

Or

X or whatever. Did you watch the state of the union? Did you have an opinion on

it? Yes.

I thought he was very good. I thought he was very effective. I didn’t watch the whole thing, but it was sort of like the nineteen The second debate in nineteen eighty four, you didn’t have to watch all the way to the end to realize

that he recovered from the damage that had

been done. The second debate remember the first debate I was four years old or so. No. Okay. I’m gonna do that.

That’s it. That’s that was that was mean. That was mean. No. I mean, the first debate, he was just kinda not with it.

He was tired. He was rambling. And and everybody says, oh my god. They discovered. He’s seventy seven years old.

And No. He’s seventy he was seventy three at the time. That’s the old he was the oldest president ever at that time in nineteen eighty four. Seventy three born in nineteen eleven.

And

then, you know, people were people were kind of thinking, well, I mean, he’s gonna be seventy seven by the time he gets out. And then The first debate, he was kinda not with it, and and everybody said, Oh my god. He’s he’s old. And then the second debate, he totally Reagan totally busted that balloon about the all the talk about it is being too old because it was the only thing that could really derail his reelection. By making that crack, the famous crack to Mandale, I will not take advantage of my opponent’s youth and inexperience.

Know, in this debate. And and that was just so funny. It just brought the house down. It was like, okay. Bye bye.

Over. Even though the funny thing was, I watched the end of the debate. Actually, I remember that as a kid, and he was summarizing something. Like, we had live in a beautiful country, and he’s he was talking about driving up the Pacific Coast Highway, Highway one. And he started rambling, and he never got off the highway, and his time Spire.

And I remember thinking, oh, no. Is he gonna be back in the soup? But it didn’t matter. Nobody watched the end. So that’s what I did with the state of the union.

I kinda saw like, okay, he’s He’s fine. This is like this is gonna blow them out of the water and it turns out that’s exactly what happens is is that they said, oh, he’s yelling. He showed too much energy. You know, it’s like they get you either way, but it, you know, the the old thing I think is not going to do very much from now on.

Well, that I’m not certain of, but I do agree that he did a good job. But the her was sort of in the ether as Joe Biden gave

And then he got blown out of the water.

Yeah. Right? Because he had said, what did he say? He was a kindly, elderly man. Well, this is all true.

I mean, I I have to say my my first reaction to scanning the her report was You know, in context. Okay. So we forgot some dates. We all forget dates. It’s not I, you know, it I don’t think it’s that bad.

And but the press really was playing it up. And I was thinking I didn’t think that he was I didn’t assume that he was mischaracterizing the testimony. I just assumed that he was just throwing in an additional reason because one of the things that lawyers tend to do and judges and is when we decide to go take a certain position or get to a certain result, we throw the kitchen sink in and we write way too much. And instead of just sticking to the two or three key reasons, we throw in a bunch of other things.

Why do you do that? So just because you’re loquacious, you can’t help it,

you can’t help ourselves. We’re just we’re compulsive. And, you know, if you don’t like this argument, we got another and we got another one. And we got one that if you don’t like this argument, throw that one out and use this one. Right?

It’s alternative. We argue in the alternative. We do all sorts of things, and and and and you know, we can get out of hand. And so I thought maybe that’s what happened with him. But it turned out to be far worse.

I mean, it, you know, when you actually look at the testimony, it wasn’t that. It wasn’t you know, he forgot the year that his son died, you know, but he but he remembered the date. I mean, sometimes that’s that happens to us all the time. I remember it was, you know, the day before Christmas and what year? Oh, I’m, two thousand one, two thousand two, around that because the years all blend together, particularly when you get old like me, you know, old enough to remember the debates in nineteen eighty four, unlike you.

That’s right.

And then, and then, you know, Joe Biden. Yeah. He’s really old. Yeah. He’s he’s really old.

I mean, that’s, you know, that’s a fact.

Yeah. Well, so so her I don’t so he’s a Republican lawyer.

Yeah.

The Trump Trump appointed him to, as the US attorney for Maryland. And then he went to private practice. And then Merrick Garland appointed him to be a special counsel.

For who?

And so why did Merrick Garland choose this guy? Do you think?

My thing he chose, I I think he wanted to choose somebody who would be immune from the criticism that he that the that he was some kind of Democrat that the special counsel was some kind of Democrat in the pocket of the democratically controlled justice department. And, you know, it makes a lot makes a lot of sense. It adds credibility to the investigation to have

somebody who clearly does not have

political motives, to bolster the person being investigated. But then you have the flip side is that maybe maybe they’ll bend over backwards against him. But here, I, you know, he they did there was no Charlie Sykes basically said the evidence was insufficient to charge for any number of reasons. And, you know, I I just was amazed that these words about Biden’s, age and memory really got that much attention because I watched the guy whole impromptu, you know, pressors, not pressors, full pressors, but he he speaks, extemporaneously at times, and he’s ten times more more coherent than the former guy. Mhmm.

And The formwork, I can’t even read correctly from a teleprompter. I mean, you remember the time he gave that speech where they they basically hijacked the Lincoln Memorial for for a campaign speech in July fourth, and he started, you know, the whole thing was on. He was reading from a teleprompter, and he starts talking about about ramming the man parts.

Our army manned the airport. It ranned the ramparts. It took over the airports. It did everything it had to do.

Okay. Right. Instead of manning the ramparts, ramming the man parts, which, you know, And then he talked about, what was it? The the the airports, the revolutionary war airports. Yeah.

What the They were a disaster

What do you know what? Okay. And he does that all the time. And then he’s just basically ignorant about everything. So I, you know, and and then if you ever read a transcript of anything he says, you know, a transcript of his rambling monologues at these rallies.

There’s never a almost never a completed sentence. It’s crazy. So I think he gets you know, there’s this,

there’s this piece by. I wanna say Ed loose in the Financial Times today. And I

love Ed.

It’s it’s about how, his, like, the line democracy dies in darkness is actually, it’s like, now it’s like we die democracy’s gonna die in boredom. Because we just, like, Americans can’t be bothered to look at Trump and see the craziness that VC will watch. I’m like, why do you think Joe Biden being old, because let me tell you what, with voters, they would talk about Joe Biden being old. Joe, because he’s the he’s the president

and look, he there are a cup there are a couple of reasons. I think they’re they’re sort of cosmetic, if you will, bind his white hair.

Yeah.

He doesn’t yell a lot. Unlike the other guy. He yelled a little more at the state of the union address, but that that was perfectly accepted because you’re speaking in a large room with five hundred people. You do have to project your voice more than you are here when I’m, you know, I could do my NPR voice. So you, you know, And he showed the energy to be able to do that.

I think a couple of other reasons are as the white hair doesn’t dye his hair the way Trump does. No orange makeup, obviously. Oh, I’m kidding about the orange makeup. But, also, I think Biden’s walk is a little bit more tent is more tentative and that’s because he, you know, he has back issues. Yeah.

It’s like, okay, you know, you see people, you know, that’s his that’s just his gait isn’t as he doesn’t take these long strides. And but I think it’s mostly the loudness. Trump is loud. He may absolutely be babbling incoherently, but he’s a but he’s kinda yelling and he looks energetic, and I think he gets away with that, that, and and so I, you know, I think the other issue that’s going on here. There is Trump has not been exposed to the general public over the last three and a half years.

I agree.

And that’s a big factor. And it’s time it w the Democrats and the groups you’re running and all of the other groups who are trying to preserve democracy have to remind people of who Trump is and remind them of what he is doing on a day to day basis. And, you know, it’s exhausting. Yeah. It’s exhausting, but it has to be done.

And people will remember if they will remember the things they didn’t like about Trump. And if the election becomes about Trump, like it did in twenty twenty, with less effort by the Democrats and everybody else. I think I I don’t think anybody hit trump hard enough in twenty twenty to tell you the truth. I I think that people are gonna I I think the boats are gonna move in the right direction, and we already see that. The people, you know, the the lots of Republicans voting for Haley and saying they will not vote for Donald Trump.

And that’s that’s a big problem for them. The question is whether the the Republicans can get back the votes somehow.

Yeah. So I wanna play just to wrap up the her thing. This was, a hearing that I’m not sure who wanted this hearing, whether it was Republicans or Democrats, but I think there was the idea that if you do have this hearing with her, you can sort of reignite the Biden is old thing to try to tamp down the fact that he, you know, did help himself out in the state.

And then

he had

and he had these classified documents yada yada yada.

Yeah. That’s right. But Which

is a significant thing. I mean, you had those documents. You shouldn’t have those documents. Pence had documents. They shouldn’t have the documents, but the difference, of course, is they owned up to it.

Yeah. When they asked the gentleman’s back, people had said, okay. They let them sort of, you know, trump

like Right. Trump basically you’ve trunks he lied. He had his lawyers lie. He moved the documents around, produced some documents and said he produced them all. Tried to, destroy security camera footage of people moving the documents.

Thought they suggested that they with a suggestion that they throw the server into the pool or something or pour pool water on it. I mean, it’s just nutty stuff. Just nutty stuff. I mean, and if he had just Given the documents back when Nara came to him and said, Hey, we think you have some documents. And he just said, Hey, come come to Mar a Lago and pick them all up.

Yeah, there are some documents here. And gave them full access. Thing would have been over. We would we probably would never have even heard about it about the whole thought that he had classified doc.

Don’t you ever feel like we’re awash in special councils? Like, I There was only one special council I’d ever known of, and that was Ken Star and the Monica Lewinsky, situation and Clinton.

We have fewer now that there is this internal justice department regulation because it really gives the the attorney general the opportunity to keep these things in house.

Uh-huh.

But you know, given the fact that they were indicting a former president, I I think he realized that he he wouldn’t be able the attorney general realized he wouldn’t be able to function politically if the questions Kate kept coming to him about what are you doing here? What happened there? And so by sloughing it off into an independent council, it serves or a special council, I keep using the old term. A special council, it’s basically sync. Not not my issue now.

I trust the special counsel and we need to wait and let the special counsel do his work. And so it enables the justice department to function in a way that it would be more difficult to, otherwise. And and an example of that, you know, where the where the where the where the where the Justice Department got all ball up because it was conducting an investigation itself of a Democrat was the Hillary Email’s investigation precisely because that was in house you know, they were that it it paralyzed them. Yeah. And that’s how why Comey did what he did when he pro you know, when it really wasn’t his business as the FBI director to make you know, as public statement about, you could write a whole book on this.

And I’m sure somebody will. Okay. So right now, we’re recording this on Thursday morning, and Trump currently in Judge Cannon’s courtroom in Florida for hearing about the classified documents case. So what is that case about?

That is the case that the Justice Department brought in twenty twenty three, based upon his course of conduct in essentially hiding and squirreling away and keeping and maintaining documents that he was asked to give back that were that contains sensitive social security? Like, what’s security? Today, the hearing is about two motions. He’s made a slew of motions to dismiss. One motion is a motion to dismiss on the grounds that the Presidential Records Act allows him to keep these records, which is just I mean, I I think it’s been debunked about a hundred times in a hundred different ways, a thousand times.

I mean, it it’s ridiculous. List. I mean, I can read to you the provision of the of the provisions of the presidential records act that matter And it says the United States shall reserve and retain complete ownership possession and control of presidential records records will be administered in accordance with the provisions of this chapter. I. E.

Given to the the the the, archivist of the United States and the national archives and records administration that the archivist runs And the president’s former presidents can go and seek permission to look at their documents classified or unclassified, but he has the you if if you were doing it as part of your job, if you were receive the document a memorandum as part of your job or you issued an order or you wrote a note he used to flush them down the toilets by the right trump. You know, those are the property of the United States, which makes sense. I mean, you employ people here at your at your at your company. And, you know, when they do work, it’s yours. It belongs to the company.

Right? And and that’s that’s the way it is for anybody who works for an organization, and it’s true of the president of the United States. But his contention is Two fall. I mean, first he has the ridiculous contention that he can just basically declassify documents with, you know, just by thinking about declassify them and declassifying them in his mind by taking them up to the to the to the private residence of the White House or taking them to Mar a Lago, which is nonsense. There’s a whole procedure but it’s also irrelevant to who owns the records.

He can he can decla if even if he could declassify documents, using, you know, I I you see, this is your I’m too I’m so old. I I remember carnac, the magnificent. I always use that. Karnac, the magnificent was this character that Johnny Carson played on the tonight show where he would he would he would hold an envelope to his head and guess what was in it and there’d always be a joke or something. But You know, even if he were able to do that, which he is not, because there are specific procedures in place for classifying and declassifying documents, it wouldn’t change the fact that all of these materials are owned by the United States of America.

So the presidential records act does not help him at all. It only confirms the point that the records did not belong to him. And of course, the the the other thing about declassification, is that it’s completely irrelevant to the charges at issue here. And that goes to the second motion that he’s making making, which is that the the the the that that the espionage act provisions under which he is a charge each of each count of which can sub could subject him to ten years incarceration as a guest of the United States Bureau of prisons, which I think is the only public housing he deserves to live in. The he’s he’s arguing that that that those provision, that those sections are vague as applied to him, and they are not.

They are absolutely not. It’s very, very simple. If you have, the espionage act, Section seven ninety three, prohibits a lot of things But one of the things that prohibits is if you are in possession of national defense information of the United States that you acquired, you know, as part of your job, and then you are asked to give it back and you do not. You are guilty of a felony subject to imprisonment for ten years, and that’s what happened here. And that’s even apart from obstructing the investigation into his violations of the espionage Act.

So, you know, he he there is no chance that either of these motions that are teed up today will succeed. Or it should be no chance. Even in

judge Kenneth or

Well, yeah, by that, yeah, there is a qualification of that. This case should be tried already. I mean, I know it’s there’s a some complexity because it involves classified documents under all these procedures that have to occur when you have a trial with classified documents, but the fact matter is, the exact contents of the documents aren’t really an issue here. The fact that they are sensitive national security document information, which is what the espionage act applies to. Is something that’s really going to be undisputed.

I mean, this is this is the president of the United States getting something from from the national getting things from the security council or the CIA or the Pentagon. I mean, this stuff is hot stuff. And it was marked as hot stuff. And then the obstruction Charlie Sykes, it doesn’t even none nothing matters other than the fact that he lied and tried to deceive the FBI and hid stuff So none of that there is there is no real, no credible basis to dismiss these charges. By any stretch of the imagination.

Alright. So let’s talk about what happened in Georgia. There was a more going on.

Several came down to Georgia.

George, what’s happening in Georgia?

We have Georgia on our mind. Well, yesterday, the judge who apparently Will Saletan today. I mean, he set that deadline for himself hasn’t ruled yet on the motion to disqualify Fanny Willis, which I think will be denied. Yesterday, he issued a decision dismissing a few counts, a very small number of counts in the indictment.

And Six. Right? The quashed six?

Yeah. And I think I think only three or four of them are against Trump. It’s really not that big a deal. The big enchilada in the case is the, you know, count one, the Rico charge, which is carry substantial pennies. These charges were charges that the defendants or some combination of them.

Tried to persuade Georgia public officials to violate their oaths of office by violating the constitution and laws of the United States in the state of Georgia. And while that is unquestionably a crime, and it was pleaded the elements are pleaded as as as they in federal court. I think they would be sufficient. Georgia requires a little bit more ethnicity as I understand it in an indictment. And and so the judge concluded that this is all well and good.

Yes. You specify there’s an oath and we know what the oath is, but you have to specify a little more about what What constitutional and statutory provisions they were being urged to violate, and you have to list that out. Now, the judge noted in a footnote that there ought to be a procedure. Doesn’t have that they don’t have in Georgia law. Like in the federal courts, where what the def what the defendants would make is a motion for a more definite a bill of particulars or a more definite statement and the prosecutor would just, you know, if it’s granted, the the prosecutor would simply write write a document saying, here’s what we mean by this.

And the case, you know, no charges would be dismissed. And if the bill of particulars was sufficient, I mean, the the charges would stand, in Georgia, they don’t have such a procedure. And because this what they call special demur, which is an old fashioned way of saying a motion to dismiss, was granted for lack of specificity in these particular charges. They actually have to take these charges back to a grand jury and get a true bill on the revised edited charges and then bring that, which takes time, and then they’ll make a mo they’ll make another motion to dismiss. Alternatively, they could take it straight up to an appellate court, but the judge, as a judge notes, it’s probably that’s probably not, a thing that that would work in on an interlocutory basis because these are novel questions of law.

And so what what Fony Willis has to say has to look at is whether or not it’s worth trying to resurrect these counts and delaying the case or she should or whether she should proceed on the remaining counts, which are all pretty substantial. And, I mean, there’s a good argument to me that Now, these these dismissals aren’t gonna matter. And if you try to put this these counts back, you’re just gonna waste time, and it’s you’re just letting the a small tail a corgi sized tail wag a dog. Yeah. There’s, you know, corgis have no tails.

So that’s what you’ll do, right? Like, she’ll just press ahead.

Yeah. That’s what the that’s what a lot people think we don’t know. Some people think that, oh, well, you know, she’ll wanna get these back because that one of the charges is is is does relate directly to Trump’s attempt to persuade to put it nicely course and put it more accurately. Brad Raffensberger of the Secretary of State to basically find him eleven thousand votes, but there are other there are all sorts of other things in the indictment and and and and these All of these events that were in these particular charges are all wrapped into the racketeering claim as part of the racketeering account as part of this entirely massive entire effort to essentially commit fraud on the public.

Speaking of fraud, actually, It’s not really about fraud. It’s about defamation.

Defirmation.

They’re not the same thing. Right?

Well, you know, it’s a it’s about a lying, which you know, some people are really, really both good at and not

good at. Good at just continually lying but

bad at telling convincing

lies. Yeah.

I was I

don’t know who we’re talking about here. You might need therapy, but it wouldn’t do any good.

I was just looking for a transition. I I’m not sure I grabbed one, but I did wanna talk about Eugene Carroll, and defamation just quickly because this dude can’t help himself. So Oh, I love it. He did In fact, pony up Can I just bang

bang my head on the table?

He did pony up the ninety one million dollar bond to cover the verdict in amazing case while it’s on appeal.

So he wants

someone to to do it. And because he can’t seem to help himself, right, at a rally over the weekend, he started talking about e Jean Carroll again. Let’s listen.

Based on false accusations made about me by a woman that I knew nothing about, didn’t know, never heard of. I know nothing about her.

If I didn’t win an appeal, the the most ridiculous decisions, including the miss BergDolph Goodman, A person I never I never met. I have no idea who she is.

What you heard there was just lie after lie after lie And the important point is it’s the same lies that caused him to be liable for defamation in both the first case, which also had a claim of the lending to the physical assault, and the second one. So, he’s just asking for trouble. And what’s interesting is The first clip that we saw was, from a speech that he gave in Marjorie Taylor Greens district. And because it was made in Georgia, I think a reasonable argument could have been made that any claim relating to that defamation would have had to have been brought in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. I mean, the logical place to sue would have been in the Northern District of Georgia.

I think. I mean, not I I haven’t done the research and really analyzed it in-depth. That’s what people get paid hundreds of dollars an hour to do. But that’s my gut gut reaction to that. Then he totally screwed it up.

By doing that by going on TV with this in the second clip, that was a call, a phone call phone interview, with CNBC, the show squawk box, which has a studio. The anchors are based in Manhattan on At the Nasdaq. And so as a result,

I

think there’s no question that both of these new repeat deformations, which essentially say the very same things that he was held liable for again and again. Can now be brought in the United States District Court. For the Southern District of New York. And as a related case will be assigned to Judge Louis a Kaplan who conducted both earlier trials. Now, that doesn’t mean.

I mean, if he had just if if e Jean had to sue in Georgia for that first defamation that we saw. You know, it’s he should still win because the doc there’s this doctrine called issue, preclusion or collateral estoppel, that just as Trump was precluded in the second case from contesting what the that the jury the jury’s finding in the first trial that the rape did happen. That would be binding upon the any jury in a case in the Northern District of Georgia and and the fact that he lival her that these statements which are the same as the same as the ones he was held liable for in the other case, that those were defamatory and met the standards of the first amendment and of, the common law. So but, you know, it’s just an example of this man’s sociopathy and psychopathy. There was no reason for him to go back and continually to tell these lies.

Okay. His people, his people are are gonna believe that he’s been screwed. All he had to say is I’m getting screwed in the legal system. Right? And that would not have been specific enough for a defamation claim by Jean Carroll and his and his his rally goers would clap like trained seals because that’s what they’re gonna do no matter because they don’t actually, you know, they would never actually read newspaper coverage or document or anything about what actually happened in these cases and they don’t know things like the fact that the first jury and that that took the first that made all the findings about what happened at Bergdorf Goodman you know, included some, suburban or exurban people from orange and Rockland counties and, your you know, being the political consultant type, you know the demographics.

There’s plenty of, you know, there’s plenty of people driving around in Trump Trump emblazon pickup trucks out there, including there was one guy in that jury who was, a devoted listener to the Tim Pool podcast. Yeah. But, you know, all these things that you you can’t make those arguments, but the bottom line is he’s so nuts that he’s just he’s just digging himself deeper and it serves no purpose. It’s irrational. It’s absolutely these are not rational lies.

And and the fact of the matter is they’re not rational. They weren’t rational lies. Five year. I mean, in in twenty nineteen because, you know, he’s saying he never met her. There’s a photograph of the meeting.

I mean, there’s a there is a literal photograph where at a at a at a post after party. He knew who this woman was. She was on TV all the time. Local and this guy can’t go five minutes without watching TV. Completely ridiculous.

And then she told two of her friends right after what happened? It’s so it’s just so insane. The man is nuts. He is absolutely screwed up in the head. And that’s one of the things I think that needs to be hit on in this campaign is that he is just.

You could, you know, the notion that we ever had trusted him to handle the nuclear secrets of the nuclear codes. Nuclear secrets now that he’s, you know, you know, left in the ballroom, mean, the notion we trusted him to do anything is just that we were lucky to survive those four years.

To be fair, we didn’t trust him.

We the American people writ large. And I I did vote for him in twenty sixteen.

That’s true. We forgive you for that now. Just No.

I shouldn’t be forgiven for that. Do you

think that Robbie Kaplan, the Eugene Carol’s lawyer who we’ve had on this show. Do you think she goes after him again? Or do you think she’s like, oh my god. How many times can I sue this guy for defamation?

I I don’t know what she’s gonna do. I don’t think there’s any reason why she shouldn’t do it. The other thing that may be possible is that she might be able to get judge Kaplan if She brings this third case to issue an injunction against Trump further stating this. And if he violates that injunction, he can be held in contempt, and you it would it would sort of, make the money flow faster. And in in in theory, he could be incarcerated for for violating, you know, for violating a court order.

In theory, okay. Last topic, and we don’t have to spend a lot of time on it. But I’m just curious, do you follow the Hunter Biden stuff?

Well, he’s been indicted. He was indicted in Delaware, but the the charge the the the It’s like

the gun Charlie Sykes. Right?

The gun Charlie Sykes they they no. Actually, he was he was he plead in Delaware. The plea didn’t stick. And as a result, he’s been indicted in the United States District Court for the Central District of California on gun charges and and I think tax charges. I mean, the bottom line is from for in terms of the importance of this to the republic is There has never been any evidence tying Joe Biden anything allegedly nefarious that his son did.

I mean, he, you know, the he he loves his son. He’s entitled to love his son. His son has had problems, obviously. He had a drug problem and and, Yeah. He’s a little bit of a black sheep or a, you know, he’s not he’s just a, you know, you you have to, you know, he loves Joe loves Joe Biden loves his kid.

And, but there’s nothing they have never ever been able to say that Joe Biden did anything. I mean, the best thing that the most think it was this I think it was Comer or somebody was asked the other day. What’s the biggest piece of evidence? The most important piece of evidence you have against the you know, Joe and Hunter, and he says, they once met. Joe Biden came over to a dinner that Hunter Biden was having with some foreign people at Cafe Malano.

Oh, I did see you’re back and forth. Cafe

Malano. Oh, yes. That’s the place when I I’m I’m gonna commit a crime. I’m gonna do it at Cafe Malano because that’s that no one will see you there. It’s the most.

It’s like the Elanes of Washington DC. If you want to be literally there at if you go on to Cafe Malano’s website, they say they have this quote and this beautiful picture of love very attractive people having a good time at their restaurant, and it says the place to be seen Washington Post says that. That’s that’s that was like the, I guess, a restaurant review or something. It’s like, it’s just nonsense. And they they got no evidence that Biden did anything wrong, but they’re just trying to create smoke, which is what, you know, which is which is what they try to do.

Well, there’s no reporting out today actually that the Russian who was out there, who was, who was sort of testified that, in Burisma.

Oh, yeah.

He gets he had the one who got indicted.

Yeah. That he he that he’s somehow that there’s like some tenuous connection to Trump’s associates.

I did not follow that. I mean, it’s it’s just it’s literally like This is that’s a rabbit hole into a rabbit hole. But yeah, that’s a good point. I forgot I forgot to mention that that there was this guy who you know, they had these FBI three zero two’s of the memos that FBI’s FBI agents write when they interview somebody And the guy this this Russian guy had made some wild accusations that didn’t pan out. And now he’s been indicted for lying.

For lying.

About the bidens. Yeah. And it turned out that this was the stuff that

This was their smoking gun.

This was the smoking gun, and it turns out that the that that that it’s been proven to be a lie, and this guy’s gonna go to jail.

Yeah. The trip or the the Biden impeachment has very little left to move forward with. And in fact, we had, Ken Buck stepping down from Congress quitting angrily and part of this. He’s like, I I’m not gonna keep going forward with these like silly impeachments. Nothing here.

Okay. A little all over the place today, but that’s because there’s so many things going on. I don’t know how, you know, this is.

It’s like a juggling thing. You know, I can’t even keep up with it.

Yeah. So how are the American people supposed to keep up it.

Well, it’s gonna be interesting when there are actual trials.

Yeah.

And and we’re gonna have one at the end of the month.

The New York one?

Mhmm. Oh, it’ll be fine.

Alright. George, as always.

Thanks

for explaining the legal news to me, and thanks to everyone for listening. Don’t forget to hit subscribe. Leave us a review on your podcast app. Email us at ask george at the board dot com, and we will see you next week.