E. Jean Carroll v. Donald J. Trump and United States of America (poll added!)

[neonzx]

Has he said her name yet? Last I checked, he still hadn't. That is really an accomplishment. Robbie Kaplan said she was watching and if he did it again, boom back to court.

He has not said anything publicly about E. Jean since the second verdict. See, the toddler can learn.

[Kendra]

https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/01/politics ... index.html

Attorney Roberta Kaplan said former President Donald Trump threw papers across a table and stormed off during a deposition at Mar-a-Lago after learning that his legal team had agreed to provide her lunch.

Kaplan, who has represented clients in high-profile cases against Trump, including E. Jean Carroll, said on an episode of the “George Conway Explains it All (to Sarah Longwell)” podcast recorded Thursday that she rejected the former president’s request that they work through a lunch break because he believed the deposition was “a waste of my time.”

“And then you could kind of see the wheel spinning in his brain. You could really almost see it,” Kaplan told Republican strategist Sarah Longwell and conservative attorney George Conway, a longtime Trump critic. “And he said, ‘Well, you’re here in Mar-a-Lago. What do you think you’re going to do for lunch? Where are you going to get lunch?’”

Kaplan said she told him that his attorneys had “graciously offered to provide” her team with lunch — a common civil practice between opposing legal teams.

“At which point there was a huge pile of documents, exhibits, sitting in front of him, and he took the pile and he just threw it across the table. And stormed out of the room,” Kaplan shared, adding that Trump specifically yelled at his lawyer Alina Habba for providing them lunch.

“He really yelled at Alina for that. He was so mad at Alina,” she said.

[p0rtia]

I've listened to a few R Kaplan interviews this week, and she's told this delightful story a couple of times. One tidbit not mentioned above: Kaplan _specifically_ brought up the issue of the lunch with fuckhead's lawyers well ahead of time, when they were negotiating the logistics of the depo. IOW, she saw it coming well in advance, and was damned if she was going to be caught in the position fuckhead tried to put her in.

Another tidbit. Kaplan took fuckhead's depo twice last year, first in a case I don't think we've talked about (related to the video phone scam--a case that I think is going to trial quite soon), and second for Carroll 2 (the famous depo). Well. At the end of the first depot (which was as tense and unpleasant as you would expect) when he was leaving, fuckhead said to Kaplan, "See you next Tuesday." Kaplan said, "I think it's Wednesday, isnt' it?" and they went their separate ways. A few minutes later in the car, one of her associates asked her if she knew what "See you next Tuesday" meant; Kaplan did not. The associate explained that this was a juvenile insult of a particularly nasty kind. You turn the the first two words into the letters they sound like, and then the first letters of the last two words....

Love these insights into what being in the same room with this pond scum is like.

[raison de arizona]

What a piece of crap tfg is. It's really quite breathtaking.

[RVInit]

NY Post called the $83.3 mil verdict "eye popping". " It is "mouth shutting" as well since tfg hasn't said nary a word.

So I guess this jury did a good job of figuring out just how much money will it take to get him to shut up.

[Rolodex]

I knew the video phone scam trial was coming up soon; I didn't realize the R Kaplan was involved in that! Anyone who wants to get under his skin needs to hire her!

Is the phone scam in NY? Fed or state? Do we know who the judge is? Or...will he do a settlement like he did with the Trump U scam?

Also, re the lack of Carroll coming from the piehole, it would seem that 83 was the number.

[p0rtia]

A quick Google shows that the federal judge (in NY) dismissed the video phone case a couple of weeks ago, saying the plaintiffs needed to go to state court in the states where they live.

So that'll be quite for a while.

[Rolodex]

A quick Google shows that the federal judge (in NY) dismissed the video phone case a couple of weeks ago, saying the plaintiffs needed to go to state court in the states where they live.

So that'll be quite for a while.

Ah thanks. That does sound vaguely familiar. There are so many cases and I don't know how to use Excel to create a chart. LOL
He's started the stupidest businesses. His video phone was a desktop monstrosity and it was just as cell phones were coming in to use with vid calls not far behind. I think there might have been an element of pyramid to this one, too.

He also started a business selling supplements. It was bespoke, as you'd send in your urine sample and they would crate a custom supplement just for YOU! I can't believe that business flopped!

[bob]

https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/01/politics ... index.html

So much tea (as the kids say) in that article:

Kaplan continued: “He came back in and he said, ‘Well, how’d you like the lunch?’ And I said, ‘Well, sir, I had a banana. You know, I can never really eat when I’m taking testimony.’ And he said, ‘Well, I told you,’ — it was kind of charming. He said, ‘I told you, I told them to make you really bad sandwiches, but they can’t help themselves here. We have the best sandwiches.’”

* * *

In a separate anecdote, Kaplan detailed the end of the deposition when she was set to leave, saying that Trump told her: “See you next Tuesday” – a phrase that is often used as a derogatory euphemism directed at women.

“We come in the room and I say, ‘I’m done asking questions’ and immediately I hear from the other side, ‘Off the record. Off the record. Off the record.’ So they must have planned it. And he looks at me from across the table and he says, ‘See you next Tuesday,’” she recounted.

Kaplan said that she was initially confused, as their next meeting was set for a Wednesday. “You could tell it was like, it was like a kind of a joke again, like teenage boys would come up with. But again, I wasn’t in on the joke,” she said.

[Flatpoint High]

Using private investigators—or, more broadly, the research work they do—is standard fare on a political campaign. Candidates want to dig up dirt on their enemies, and they want to know their own vulnerabilities. But Trump wasn’t looking into himself or his political enemies. In fact, Trump wasn’t doing anything explicitly political.

He was looking into the actions of his own lawyers.

According to a source familiar with the situation, the private investigators were commissioned to look into missteps by Trump’s legal team in the early stages of his rape defamation case against E. Jean Carroll.

Specifically, this source said, the private eye looked into who Trump’s lawyers had interviewed—and who they hadn’t.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-pac ... wn-lawyers

[p0rtia]

Well written article, with framing (of tfg's history of ugly lies and criminality) i wish msm would adopt.

[Sam the Centipede]

So Trump might be considering suing his attorneys for the 90 million or so that the Carroll cases cost him?

That does not sounds an attractive gig for any other law firm, does it? Especially not a competent firm careful of its reputation.

And that's without the issue of Trump not paying bills generally.

Perhaps a lightly modified apothegm is required for Trump: if you can't pay the dime, don't do the crime.

[northland10]

Perhaps a lightly modified apothegm is required for Trump: if you can't pay the dime, don't do the crime.

But he never commits a crime because he can do what he wants. He's Trump.

The entitlement is strong in this one.

[Reality Check]

Specifically, this source said, the private eye looked into who Trump’s lawyers had interviewed—and who they hadn’t.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-pac ... wn-lawyers

Wouldn't it have occurred to the defendant to ask them? Of course that implies he doesn't trust anyone. Something we already knew.

[p0rtia]

Wondering if the focus was on Tacopina, who was brought in only a few months before Carroll 2 went to trial, and who (we have recently heard) fuckhead _says_ was pissed at for advising him not to testify. Tacopina ended his work for fuckhead a few weeks ago, though he did not say why. Well, this would make a good "why," yeah?

[bob]

So Trump might be considering suing his attorneys for the 90 million or so that the Carroll cases cost him?

That does not sounds an attractive gig for any other law firm, does it? Especially not a competent firm careful of its reputation.

And that's without the issue of Trump not paying bills generally.

It is a bad idea because, generally, to win a malpractice case, you have to prove you had a winnable case in the first place.

So, yeah, any reputable firm will cite the press of other business and politely decline.

[Rolodex]

Interesting. And concerning?

[Tiredretiredlawyer]

Not concerning.

[raison de arizona]

Works out good for tfg since he is probably waiting on Carlson to bring back a bucket of bucks for him.

[p0rtia]

If Judge Kaplan is considering sanctions for La Habba et al, would that slow it down?

[bob]

If Judge Kaplan is considering sanctions for La Habba et al, would that slow it down?

Not necessarily. Judgment and sanctions are separate; the judge could enter the judgment and then sanction. But the more efficient action would be to issue a sanctions order alongside the judgment.

[chancery]

1.IMO it's unlikely that Judge Kaplan is considering issuing a sanctions order on his own motion.

2. Even if he is considering a sanctions order, filing the judgment wouldn't curtail his power to issue such an order. The eventual filing of a notice of appeal will transfer jurisdiction from the district court to the court of appeals, but even there I think that the district judge retains power to issue "housekeeping" orders with respect to discipline over attorneys who practice in his court.

Edit: started working on this before bob posted his reply.

[p0rtia]

Thanks for the input, guys

[chancery]

But now that I think about it, bob is correct that issuing the judgment and any sanctions order at the same time makes things a bit tidier for the appeal. But even if a sanctions order comes later and is appealed later, the court of appeals has mechanisms for consolidating the two appeals, and doing so would be unlikely to delay appellate proceedings much, if at all.

[bob]

IMO it's unlikely that Judge Kaplan is considering issuing a sanctions order on his own motion.

Call and raise: Too also, the plaintiff also won't move for sanctions (I WAG).