Trump's lawyer asserts that @Lawrence O'Donnell's statement that "Russian oligarchs" co-signed Trump's Deutsche Bank loans is false and that some publicly available bank documents prove that Trump is the sole guarantor.
This could be a viable defamation claim by Trump.
This could be a viable defamation claim by Trump.
@Lawrence Ordinarily these suits backfire because the person bringing the suit puts the truth of the underlying statement at issue, opening up discovery on the underlying issue, which often they do not want in the public eye.
However, since Trump merely claims that he was the only guarantor and that narrow issue can be proven via bank documents, this could be very straightforward.
That doesn't mean that O'Donnell "recklessly disregarded the truth," which is what the law requires.
That doesn't mean that O'Donnell "recklessly disregarded the truth," which is what the law requires.
Some of you have raised a couple of issues.
First, you note that O'Donnell said "if true" and merely reported what his source told him. If that is truly the case--if there was no moment where he asserted the truth of the statement itself--that would really help O'Donnell.
First, you note that O'Donnell said "if true" and merely reported what his source told him. If that is truly the case--if there was no moment where he asserted the truth of the statement itself--that would really help O'Donnell.
(I have not listened to O'Donnell's segment and I had not done so when I wrote the initial tweets on the subject, and I agree that his specific words would be very important.)
It is also true that it's not clear whether Trump could prove damages, and whether he could do so would be fact-specific.
The types of damages that can be alleged and proven vary from state to state.
The types of damages that can be alleged and proven vary from state to state.
