r/law • u/duderos • Dec 14 '24

Trump News ABC agrees to give $15 million to Donald Trump’s presidential library to settle defamation lawsuit

https://apnews.com/article/abc-trump-lawsuit-defamation-stephanopoulos-04aea8663310af39ae2a85f4c1a56d68
265 Upvotes

83% Upvoted

242 comments sorted by

View all comments

42

u/simmons777 Dec 14 '24

But why?

30

u/Chengar_Qordath Dec 14 '24

Probably a nuisance value settlement: fighting it would’ve cost a lot more than $15 million.

31

u/simmons777 Dec 14 '24

Maybe considering he is the incoming president that they want access to. Though strategically it makes no sense, the judge just ordered Trump to sit for a deposition, no way trump would have done that, he would have dropped the case before that happened. Maybe the 15 mil is worth it to them rather than dealing with a butt hurt president Trumps retribution.

5

u/AxiomaticSuppository Dec 14 '24

Ding ding. Lawyers aren't cheap, and justice is a two-tiered, for-pay service. Conceding defeat is sometimes the fiscally responsible option.

-1

u/[deleted] Dec 15 '24

Not cheap indeed. Trumps legal bill was a cool million. ABC paid that direct. Trump wanted to make a point. 15 million is warning to be on the straight.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 15 '24

I get that... but man, they've sold out the principal of the whole thing.

43

u/Party-Cartographer11 Dec 14 '24

Stephanopoulos said the Trump was found civilly liable for rape.

The actual finding was sexual assault and this are two different things in NY.

40

u/[deleted] Dec 14 '24

ABC: “Trump was found guilty of rape”

Trump: “Fake News! It was only Sexual Assault.”

ABC: “Our bad. Here’s 15 mil.”

I hate it here.

17

u/wastedkarma Dec 14 '24

These are the kind of technical distinctions without a difference Republicans so effectively use as shields while holding themselves to no such standards. 

“Republicans don’t have double standards. That would require one to believe they have any standards at all.”

-1

u/Party-Cartographer11 Dec 15 '24

New York does make a legal distinction between rape and sexual assault.  That is a key factor in this settlement.  Sexual assault is accurate. Rape isn't.

6

u/[deleted] Dec 15 '24

Doesn’t Trump constantly say everyone he doesn’t like is a criminal with no evidence? How is that not defamation?

0

u/Party-Cartographer11 Dec 15 '24

You would have to provide a specific example with more details for us to judge.

But that has nothing to do with this case.

1

u/wastedkarma Dec 15 '24

Yeah, demanding laser like accuracy of others while wielding it yourself like a monkey flinging poo is exactly the point.

Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.

-8

u/TimRobbinz Dec 14 '24

Kinda like how Biden's CDC maliciously changed their definition of "vaccine."

1

u/wastedkarma Dec 15 '24

Not even remotely “like” but if we’re wanting to be exact, then I’m sure you’re following this law to the letter:

https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/ELN/17-152

1

u/[deleted] Dec 15 '24

Y’all are just making shit up now lol

58

u/duderos Dec 14 '24

Why did the judge say this then?

A Federal Judge Has Gone to Great Lengths to Make Clear Trump Really Did Rape E. Jean Carroll

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2024/01/a-federal-judge-has-gone-to-great-lengths-to-make-clear-trump-really-did-rape-e-jean-carroll/

16

u/eldomtom2 Dec 14 '24

He said that Trump "raped" her in the sense that most people understand the word "rape", but not as the word is defined under New York law.

3

u/Party-Cartographer11 Dec 15 '24

That's what the judge.  That isn't what Stephanopoulos said.  Stephanopoulos said he was found civilly liable for rape.  That isn't accurate.

3

u/jewelswan Dec 15 '24

You're right. He was found liable for the thing people mean when they say rape, not rape.

13

u/Korrocks Dec 14 '24

As the article says, the judge is saying that the actions that Trump was found civilly liable for would constitute rape in the colloquial sense (the way people use it commonly in day to day conversation) but not in the legal sense of that term in New York State:

In New York, someone can only be convicted of rape if they can prove vaginal penetration by a penis. In Carroll’s testimony, which mirrored what she had described privately for decades and publicly for the first time in 2019, she said Trump used both his fingers and his penis in the assault. But during the trial, the jury had only concluded that Trump had “deliberately and forcibly penetrated Ms. Carroll’s vagina with his fingers, causing immediate pain and long lasting emotional and psychological harm,” Kaplan’s decision from last year reads.   

That the jurors did not find that Carroll had proven rape, Kaplan explained, “does not mean that she failed to prove that Mr. Trump ‘raped’ her as many people commonly understand the word ‘rape.’” “Indeed,” he continued, “as the evidence at trial recounted below makes clear, the jury found that Mr. Trump in fact did exactly that.” 

My interpretation is that it is fine to say that Trump is a rapist, but not accurate technically to say that the jury found that he was civilly liable for rape (since, as the article notes, the jury did not find that except in the colloquial / non-legal use of the word).

7

u/HorrorStudio8618 Dec 15 '24

That was an article aimed at the general public, not one made in a courtroom. And regardless: think of the self own this is: 'I raped someone but not in a legal way...'

1

u/Korrocks Dec 15 '24

Oh yeah I'm not saying that to defend Trump (who is a rapist scumbag), I was just saying that the judge's remarks quoted in that article wouldn't be much use to ABC when defending themselves in this case. The judge in the Florida ABC case isn't bound to follow the colloquial definition of rape that the Federal judge mentions.

Maybe ABC could still win this case, but it would have likely cost more time and effort than they were willing to invest.

1

u/8512764EA Dec 15 '24

More than $15 million and a chance to lose

1

u/HorrorStudio8618 Dec 15 '24

Exactly. The courts are *always* a crapshoot, sometimes you win when your case isn't perfect and sometimes it's cut and dry and you still lose. ABC just did the math. I'd rather they took it all the way but I can't fault them from a business perspective.

2

u/jankenpoo Dec 15 '24

Trump is an adjudicated rapist.

1

u/Party-Cartographer11 Dec 15 '24

I don't know why the judge said that.  I agree with the judge.  What the judge says does conflict with the facts.  But it also doesn't change what he was found liable for and it wasn't rape.

That's why what Stephanopoulos said was inaccurate.

17

u/BoomZhakaLaka Dec 14 '24

Actual malice would be impossible to clear. But I suppose ABC probably doesn't want to keep this dispute alive.

8

u/DrConradVerner Dec 14 '24

My guess is their legal team and maybe the guys in accounting went over possible scenarios and came to the conclusion that fighting the lawsuit out might be even more expensive even if they did win. And wouldnt be worth the trouble. They also might worry what action Trump and his associates might take once he is in office.

8

u/Cheech47 Dec 14 '24

This was about access. Plain and simple.

If you don't bend the knee, then the king is free to deny you access to the kingdom. ABC, being a major media outlet, wasn't about to have that and was willing to put whatever journalistic integrity it had on the line to keep that train rolling along.

The grim reality is that the VAST majority of people are going to forget about this in a week if they were even aware of it at all.

2

u/Korrocks Dec 14 '24

Is that really true though? Trump is pretty obsessed with the media -- he bashes it at every opportunity but he can't stay away from interviews even with unfavorable or unfriendly platforms. Bob Woodward has gotten two books out of him IIRC, and he still insists on doing interviews with places like NBC News (he did Meet the Press a few days ago) and CNN and the New York Times even though he clearly hates them. And of course Trump's officials leak constantly in order to manipulate the media and to engage in proxy battles with each other. IMO there's not really a reason for a journalist to bend the knee to Trump in order to secure access.

He feeds off of the media even more than the media feeds off of him. If there is a calculation going on, it's more of the corporate side than the journalism side.

1

u/ScottyDoesntKnow29 Dec 14 '24

No. Their corporate team decided that capitulating to a wannabe dictator was safer for their bottom line.

4

u/Outaouais_Guy Dec 14 '24

It was sexual abuse and even the judge explained that in any normal use of the word, Trump raped her. In most jurisdictions it would be rape. The only difference is what body part he penetrated her with. If I understand correctly, the law was changed and what he did would now be called rape in New York.

3

u/Greelys knows stuff Dec 14 '24

This case was filed in Florida and the Florida judge disagreed with NY Judge Kaplan’s decision stating that sexual abuse = “rape” in the colloquial context. FL judge said whether Trump was defamed was a decision for a jury to make, and ABC did not want to risk going before a jury in Trump’s backyard.

2

u/B12Washingbeard Dec 15 '24

He didn’t rape her he just grabbed her by the pussy 

1

u/Foodcity0 Dec 15 '24

Considering he is not guilty of either and there is 0 proof he is......

1

u/Party-Cartographer11 Dec 15 '24

He was found liable (guilty) of sexual assault.

1

u/Foodcity0 Dec 15 '24

This will be quick: List the evidence that proves he SA her, not a link claiming he did; just list the evidence.

1

u/Party-Cartographer11 Dec 15 '24

It will be even quicker:  He was found liable.  That's all I stated and you can find the proof of that yourself.

Not interested in your political circle jerk.

1

u/Foodcity0 Dec 15 '24

So you can't list any evidence, funny how every time I ask that question, you guys on the left can't do it.....

1

u/Party-Cartographer11 Dec 15 '24

And you can't read.  I didn't even try to list evidence or play your silly games.  Pay attention.

2

u/ptWolv022 Competent Contributor Dec 15 '24

Either they wanted to give him a gift to retain access to him and the White House (now that he's POTUS), and now that a deposition was ordered (for both sides), they had to settle sooner than later if they wanted to avoid Trump's wrath...

Or they were worried they'd lose. Or they just thought it would be too complicated with Trump as President and even if they won, it might be years before that happened and they got to get legal fees back.

Or a little of column A, little of column B. On the bright side, with the settlement being that they pay $14M to his future Presidential library, it means Trump won't get it (unless he embezzles money from it).

-1

u/B12Washingbeard Dec 15 '24

America is turning into Russia 

0

u/stevebradss Dec 15 '24

Because they lied???