Tom Servo
Nittany Beavers
The most dangerous place is between a select few people and a camera. Gloria Allred is one of those people.
(NOTE: This has nothing to do with the legitimacy or lack thereof of the case.)
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Donald Trump To Be Sued For Defamation Re Alleged Sexual Assault (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter squistion
- Start date
(NOTE: This has nothing to do with the legitimacy or lack thereof of the case.)
rockaction
Footballguy
Vanilla Guerrilla
Footballguy
I was just thinking that the one thing that this election could use is some Gloria Allred.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Man of Constant Sorrow
Footballguy
Imo, that depends on whether this case is being sought for true victim recompense or for political purposes.
If it is the 1st, I agree; if it is the latter, then I could imagine this being longer and more painful.
timschochet
Footballguy
My position 20 years ago was that you should not be able to sue a sitting President. I think the Supreme Court got that wrong, and I haven't changed my mind. These lawsuits should be thrown out or suspended until such time as Donald Trump is no longer POTUS.
knowledge dropper
Footballguy
Well now the womyn have something to talk about during the Million Yenta March Saturday.
McGarnicle
Footballguy
On Howard Stern he admitted to doing this at the Miss USA pageant.Don Quixote said:
avoiding injuries
Footballguy
Not the white women. They can listen though.knowledge dropper said:
BigSteelThrill
Footballguy
Its terrific for her professional purposes. No different then the Donald.rockaction said:
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Too. Bad.timschochet said:
massraider
Footballguy
LOS ANGELES—One of the women who accused Donald Trump of sexual misconduct last year has filed a defamation lawsuit against the president-elect. Summer Zervos, a former Apprentice contestant who alleged in October that Trump groped and kissed her without consent, announced the lawsuit on Tuesday from the offices of her attorney, Gloria Allred.
Her hands visibly shaking as she held a copy of her statement, Zervos said she had “no alternative” but to sue Trump to vindicate her reputation. The lawsuit seems designed to either force Trump into a confession or into giving potentially embarrassing or incriminating testimony in court. Both Zervos and Allred said the lawsuit would be dropped if Trump retracted his statements calling the women who accused him of assault and misconduct “liars.”
Multiple times during the press conference, Allred made an analogy to Paula Jones’ sexual harassment case against Bill Clinton. In a deposition in that case, Clinton lied about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky. It was that lie that led to Clinton’s impeachment. “If President Trump decides not to testify truthfully under oath in this case, should he be required to provide his deposition and or testify at trial, then I think Congress will have a very important decision to make,” Allred said. “I would hope that [Republicans who supported Clinton’s impeachment] would put partisanship aside and do the right thing, apply the same standard to president Trump as was applied to President Clinton.”
While that hypothetical is a long way away, the lawsuit does establish the possibility for a whole lot of evidence to be revealed in court. When I asked Allred at the press conference if any of the other women who have accused Trump would be participating in the lawsuit, she said that she could not say, citing attorney-client privilege. She did note, however, that Allred and Zervos would be attending the Women’s March on Washington on Saturday to protest Trump’s Friday inauguration and that “other accusers” would “be there marching with us.”
Zervos’ lawsuit focuses on a number of allegations that she laid out in an October press conference, which also took place at Allred’s office. The “unwanted touching” is described in the lawsuit as follows:
Ms. Zervos was ambushed by Mr. Trump on more than one occasion. Mr. Trump suddenly, and without her consent, kissed her on her mouth repeatedly; he touched her breast; and he pressed his genitals up against her. Ms. Zervos never consented to any of this disgusting touching. Instead, she repeatedly expressed that he should stop his inappropriate sexual behavior, including by shoving him away from her forcefully, and telling him to “get real.” Mr. Trump did not care, he kept touching her anyway.
The goal of the defamation suit will be to prove that Trump lied when he denied inappropriate and potentially illegal sexual behavior toward Zervos and other women. As such, it cites a series of Trump’s tweets and public statements, ones in which he denies the misconduct allegations, calls the women involved liars, and says they were seeking publicity and to damage his campaign on behalf of Hillary Clinton.
The suit cites “[d]eliberately false, defamatory statements spewed forth and out of his Twitter account—often at odd hours, and on information and belief, written and posted from his home in New York City—and unfettered at large rallies to angry crowds.”
More from the suit:
Mr. Trump immediately lied, saying that he “never met [Ms. Zervos] at a hotel or greeted her inappropriately.” He quickly went further, describing Ms. Zervos’s experience, along with those of others, as “made up events THAT NEVER HAPPENED;” “100% fabricated and made-up charges;” “totally false;” “totally phoney [sic] stories, 100% made up by women (many already proven false);” “made up stories and lies;” “[t]otally made up nonsense.” He falsely stated: “Every woman lied when they came forward to hurt my campaign, total fabrication. The events never happened.” During the last presidential debate, he stated that these women were either being put forward by the Clinton campaign, or were motivated to come forward by getting “ten minutes of fame,” and nothing more.
Zervos met Donald Trump in 2005, when she appeared on the Apprentice. Allred raised the prospect of subpoenaing the outtakes from that show, which have long been rumored to hold potentially inflammatory comments from Trump.
“We would certainly seek any and all information and documents, recordings, etc., which may be relevant to the litigation of our lawsuit,” she said. “We’ll see what NBC decides [to do] if and when they are served a subpoena.”
The lawsuit cites the infamous outtake tape from Access Hollywood, in which Trump boasted about groping and kissing women without their consent, as Zervos’ impetus for coming forward. She had previously been friendly with Trump, which the suit chalks up to her believing his alleged misconduct with her was an isolated incident.
Update, 5:30 p.m. EST: Donald Trump’s spokesperson Hope Hicks sent along this statement: “More of the same from Gloria Allred. There is no truth to this absurd story.”
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2017/01/17/the_new_trump_defamation_lawsuit_is_daring_trump_to_incriminate_himself.html
Her hands visibly shaking as she held a copy of her statement, Zervos said she had “no alternative” but to sue Trump to vindicate her reputation. The lawsuit seems designed to either force Trump into a confession or into giving potentially embarrassing or incriminating testimony in court. Both Zervos and Allred said the lawsuit would be dropped if Trump retracted his statements calling the women who accused him of assault and misconduct “liars.”
Multiple times during the press conference, Allred made an analogy to Paula Jones’ sexual harassment case against Bill Clinton. In a deposition in that case, Clinton lied about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky. It was that lie that led to Clinton’s impeachment. “If President Trump decides not to testify truthfully under oath in this case, should he be required to provide his deposition and or testify at trial, then I think Congress will have a very important decision to make,” Allred said. “I would hope that [Republicans who supported Clinton’s impeachment] would put partisanship aside and do the right thing, apply the same standard to president Trump as was applied to President Clinton.”
While that hypothetical is a long way away, the lawsuit does establish the possibility for a whole lot of evidence to be revealed in court. When I asked Allred at the press conference if any of the other women who have accused Trump would be participating in the lawsuit, she said that she could not say, citing attorney-client privilege. She did note, however, that Allred and Zervos would be attending the Women’s March on Washington on Saturday to protest Trump’s Friday inauguration and that “other accusers” would “be there marching with us.”
Zervos’ lawsuit focuses on a number of allegations that she laid out in an October press conference, which also took place at Allred’s office. The “unwanted touching” is described in the lawsuit as follows:
Ms. Zervos was ambushed by Mr. Trump on more than one occasion. Mr. Trump suddenly, and without her consent, kissed her on her mouth repeatedly; he touched her breast; and he pressed his genitals up against her. Ms. Zervos never consented to any of this disgusting touching. Instead, she repeatedly expressed that he should stop his inappropriate sexual behavior, including by shoving him away from her forcefully, and telling him to “get real.” Mr. Trump did not care, he kept touching her anyway.
The goal of the defamation suit will be to prove that Trump lied when he denied inappropriate and potentially illegal sexual behavior toward Zervos and other women. As such, it cites a series of Trump’s tweets and public statements, ones in which he denies the misconduct allegations, calls the women involved liars, and says they were seeking publicity and to damage his campaign on behalf of Hillary Clinton.
The suit cites “[d]eliberately false, defamatory statements spewed forth and out of his Twitter account—often at odd hours, and on information and belief, written and posted from his home in New York City—and unfettered at large rallies to angry crowds.”
More from the suit:
Mr. Trump immediately lied, saying that he “never met [Ms. Zervos] at a hotel or greeted her inappropriately.” He quickly went further, describing Ms. Zervos’s experience, along with those of others, as “made up events THAT NEVER HAPPENED;” “100% fabricated and made-up charges;” “totally false;” “totally phoney [sic] stories, 100% made up by women (many already proven false);” “made up stories and lies;” “[t]otally made up nonsense.” He falsely stated: “Every woman lied when they came forward to hurt my campaign, total fabrication. The events never happened.” During the last presidential debate, he stated that these women were either being put forward by the Clinton campaign, or were motivated to come forward by getting “ten minutes of fame,” and nothing more.
Zervos met Donald Trump in 2005, when she appeared on the Apprentice. Allred raised the prospect of subpoenaing the outtakes from that show, which have long been rumored to hold potentially inflammatory comments from Trump.
“We would certainly seek any and all information and documents, recordings, etc., which may be relevant to the litigation of our lawsuit,” she said. “We’ll see what NBC decides [to do] if and when they are served a subpoena.”
The lawsuit cites the infamous outtake tape from Access Hollywood, in which Trump boasted about groping and kissing women without their consent, as Zervos’ impetus for coming forward. She had previously been friendly with Trump, which the suit chalks up to her believing his alleged misconduct with her was an isolated incident.
Update, 5:30 p.m. EST: Donald Trump’s spokesperson Hope Hicks sent along this statement: “More of the same from Gloria Allred. There is no truth to this absurd story.”
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2017/01/17/the_new_trump_defamation_lawsuit_is_daring_trump_to_incriminate_himself.html
massraider
Footballguy
Trump should be fine as long as he has been truthful about these allegations.
timschochet
Footballguy
Breyer voted for it (it was a unanimous decision) but argued that if the President could show that a lawsuit interfered with his constitutionally assigned duties, then his Presidential immunity would apply.
I think that the Jones case demonstrated that in fact it did interfere. Clinton's White House was embroiled in the testimony and defense and everything that came out afterward, interfering with his governing (which was, IMO, the whole purpose of the lawsuit.) I don't think the Supreme Court properly considered the full scope of Presidential duties. It is simply too important to the nation that the President not be involved in civil lawsuits during his time in office.
That's how I see it, anyhow.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
timschochet
Footballguy
bigbottom
Footballguy
One could easily argue that it was Clinton's perjury and the ensuing investigation that was the distraction, not the litigation itself. I can't see Clinton making the argument that he should be immune from suit while in office because he plans to perjure himself and be subsequently impeached.
Keep in mind that even under Breyer's concurrence Clinton would have the burden of articulating precisely how the litigation would interfere with his ability to perform his official duties. Sitting for a deposition historically has not created an interference justifying immunity.
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
It very much is after reading your argument.
eta - President is too important, right?
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Trump per him is taking 3 days to celebrate his inauguration, yeah please tell us how he doesn't have the time.
bigbottom
Footballguy
I think a guy who is able to juggle 3,500+ lawsuits over the course of three decades while building a billion-dollar empire and pursuing careers in real estate, hospitality and entertainment, not to mention a presidential campaign, is going to have a difficult time establishing that a single defamation lawsuit will unduly interfere with his ability to perform his official duties. Indeed, the fact that he publicly threatened to file defamation lawsuits following the election against all the women who came forward to complain undermines an argument that he would be unable to defend a single case.
Last edited by a moderator:
massraider
Footballguy
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
The President should be above the law. Duly noted.timschochet said:
Ramsay Hunt Experience
Footballguy
Yeah, I think Breyer's concurrene in Clinton v. Jones is stupid because he's completely misconstruing the concept behind immunity. The idea is that you are immune from prosecution or civil suit for actions taken in your official capacity. Immunity has nothing to do with whether being sued for actions not taken in your official capacity is a distraction. The courts have the tools to dismiss truly unmeritorious suits against the President already, as they did with all the birther suits against Obama.
If Congress wanted to toll such suits during the President's time in office, they could do so. But the courts can't create an entirely new category of immunity.
Ditka Butkus
Footballguy
That dude Gloria Allred is nothing but a troublemaker.
massraider
Footballguy
She sure likes press conferences.
I find it interesting that the suit isn't about sexual assault, but defamation.
Bronco Billy
Footballguy
Not sure how this matters. There's already been precedent set that a sexual predator can serve as President and not be removed.
Joe Summer
Footballguy
You leave Jefferson out of this!
massraider
Footballguy
Who said anything about removing him?
I think Allred is looking to get Trump in a deposition, and looking to get old Apprentice tapes out in the open.
Bronco Billy
Footballguy
Yeah, I know what she's doing. I just find it interesting that she had no interest in protecting women from serial assaulters depending upon the who the predator was.
massraider
Footballguy
That's not true.
If she can get publicity, she doesn't care who she's going after. There's no political motivation, it's publicity for her.
