Latest / The Epstein Chronicles / Wall Street Journal Moves to Dismiss Trump’s Epstein Letter Lawsuit (6/11/26)

Transcript

Wall Street Journal Moves to Dismiss Trump’s Epstein Letter Lawsuit (6/11/26) · The Epstein Chronicles

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: What's up, everyone, and welcome to another episode of the
• 0:03
  Epstein Chronicles. So the Wall Street Journal has slapped back
• 0:08
  against Donald Trump and the ten billion dollar lawsuit that
• 0:11
  he refiled against them over the birthday card that they
• 0:15
  say he sent to Jeffrey Epstein. And in their newest filing,
• 0:19
  they're asking the judge to dismiss the case. And I
• 0:22
  think it's interesting that Donald Trump is protesting so much
• 0:26
  when it comes to this birthday card. I mean, filing
• 0:28
  a ten billion dollar lawsuit kind of gives it a
• 0:31
  bit of validity, right, Why are you filing a ten
• 0:34
  billion dollar lawsuit against the Wall Street Journal over something
• 0:37
  like the birthday card story. Meanwhile, we have a paper
• 0:41
  down in South Carolina that's been digging into the allegations
• 0:45
  that were made against Trump in the three to zero two.
• 0:48
  You would think he'd sue them, So why is he
• 0:51
  suing the Wall Street Journal? And I think this might
• 0:55
  be a mistake on the part of Donald Trump because
• 0:58
  I don't see any kind of pathway to victory here.
• 1:04
  And if I was the lawyer for the Wall Street Journal,
• 1:07
  I would ask one simple question. If this is a forgery,
• 1:12
  who forged it and who's trying to frame the president.
• 1:15
  I know I've said that before, but I think that
• 1:17
  is a major component of any discussion being had here,
• 1:22
  because I don't care what side of the isel you're on.
• 1:24
  If somebody's trying to frame the president, probably something that
• 1:28
  the American people need to know about. And you know
• 1:30
  that Donald Trump loves to be the martyr. If somebody
• 1:33
  was framing him, don't you think that Donald Trump would
• 1:35
  be all over TV telling you, look, it's a hoax.
• 1:38
  I'm being framed. But instead, what he's doing is trying
• 1:42
  to kill the story. And I think that's telling. So
• 1:46
  today we have an article from Deadline and the headline
• 1:49
  The Wall Street Journal asked judge to toss Donald Trump's
• 1:52
  revised lawsuit over story on Jeffrey Epstein letter. This article
• 1:57
  was authored by Ted Johnson. Trump's new lawsuit, the Journal's
• 2:02
  legal team wrote, does not remedy any of the defects
• 2:05
  identified in the court's dismissal order. In fact, it compounds them.
• 2:10
  Trump suited The Journal, News Corp. Rupert Murdoch and others
• 2:14
  after the publication of a story on a birthday letter
• 2:17
  sent under Trump's name in two thousand and three to
• 2:20
  Jeffrey Epstein. The letter, the Journal reported contained several lines
• 2:25
  of typewritten text frame by the outline of a naked woman,
• 2:28
  which appears to be hand drawn with a heavy marker,
• 2:32
  adding that a pair of small arcs denotes the woman's breasts,
• 2:35
  and the future president's signature is a squiggly Donald belower
• 2:39
  Waiste mimicking Pubicare. Congress later released a letter identical to
• 2:44
  the one described in the Journal story. And this is
• 2:47
  why I think Donald Trump's gonna have a problem. I
• 2:50
  don't think what he is alleging is true. I don't
• 2:53
  think that it's fake. I don't think that somebody created
• 2:56
  a letter and sent it to Jeffrey Epstein's estate with
• 3:01
  the idea that later on down the road they can
• 3:03
  use it against Trump politically. I don't believe that happened.
• 3:06
  And if it did, then the FBI needs to launch
• 3:08
  an investigation into who did it. And if they don't
• 3:12
  do that, that tells me everything I need to know.
• 3:17
  In April of federal judge dismissed Trump's ten billion dollar lawsuit,
• 3:20
  concluding that it failed to adequately allege actual malice, an
• 3:24
  essential threshold for proving defamation claims. The judge, though, did
• 3:28
  allow Trump to file a revised lawsuit. Yeah, he didn't
• 3:32
  dismiss it with prejudice, so that means that Trump can refile,
• 3:36
  and he did. But I don't think the merit of
• 3:39
  the argument is changed, right. I don't think that there's
• 3:43
  anything new, no bombshell evidence, nothing that team Trump can
• 3:48
  bring to the table and say to the judge, Look,
• 3:51
  this is what we mean, because, in my opinion, Donald
• 3:55
  Trump wrote that letter last month. In the new litigation,
• 3:58
  Trump alleged that the journal recklessly disregarded whether the letter
• 4:02
  was sent by Trump, noting that the article did not
• 4:05
  explain how the signature in the alleged letter was verified,
• 4:08
  among other things. The revised lawsuit also pointed to Trump's
• 4:12
  denials that he wrote the letter, and pointed to statements
• 4:15
  from Glenn Maxwell, Epstein's associate, who's currently serving a sentence
• 4:20
  for her role in trafficking of underage girls. That's Donald
• 4:23
  Trump's character, witness. You want quid pro quo here, it
• 4:28
  is we move Glaine to camp Ran and then in return,
• 4:33
  she says nice things about us and helps us exonerate ourselves,
• 4:37
  if you will, when it comes to allegations made against
• 4:40
  the president. But sure, there's no cover up, none at all.
• 4:44
  This is all just organic and that's how this all works,
• 4:46
  right right. Trump's legal team noted that Maxwell had stated
• 4:52
  that she did not remember submitting a Trump letter for
• 4:55
  Epstein's birthday. The Journal story noted that she did not
• 4:58
  respond to her request for an interview, and her attorney
• 5:01
  did not address the letter. Of course he didn't, and
• 5:03
  that's because, well, in my opinion, Donald Trump wrote it.
• 5:09
  It's rather obvious, and I think that this whole entire
• 5:14
  exercise by Trump is nothing more than intimidation. Once again,
• 5:19
  this man believes that he can intimidate this story into
• 5:21
  the grave. He is sorely mistaken. This isn't the usual
• 5:25
  scandal that you're going to gaslight your way out of
• 5:28
  Those days are over and people are paying attention. The
• 5:32
  Journal's legal team wrote in a response that failure to
• 5:35
  investigate is not actual malice, and plaintiff's allegations are contradicted
• 5:39
  by the article, which reveals the journal did investigate. So
• 5:43
  if it's not real, how did it get in the
• 5:45
  possession of the estate. Did it just magically show up?
• 5:50
  Did somebody lay an egg and it hatched inside of
• 5:54
  the document's room. I mean, how did they get their
• 5:57
  hands on it? If Trump didn't send it, then somebody
• 6:00
  sent it under false pretenses. So we need to know
• 6:03
  who those people are. And you notice they haven't even
• 6:07
  tried to talk about that yet. No FBI investigation, no
• 6:11
  talk about Oh, it's a forgery, because they know what
• 6:14
  would come next. People would demand an investigation. Right, Okay,
• 6:18
  well it's a forgery. Who did it? You can't have
• 6:22
  a crime without a criminal, ken you. So who's in
• 6:26
  charge of the forgery? Who's trying to frame the president?
• 6:29
  Let's hear it. What do you guys got for us?
• 6:32
  But instead all we get are technicalities and loopholes. And
• 6:36
  that's because they know they don't have any kind of
• 6:39
  tenable ground to stand upon, because in fact, the letter
• 6:43
  is real, and that's the only scenario that makes sense
• 6:46
  to me. A spokesman for the president's legal team said
• 6:51
  in a statement, President Trump has filed a powerhouse lawsuit
• 6:54
  against the Wall Street Journal and all of the other defendants.
• 6:59
  The President will continue to hold those who mislead the
• 7:02
  American people with fake news and smears accountable for their actions. Well,
• 7:07
  why don't you start with your own office? Why don't
• 7:10
  you start with yourself. I mean, has this guy ever
• 7:12
  taken accountability for anything? It's always somebody else's fault. There's
• 7:16
  always a fall guy, and always somebody that you can
• 7:19
  point the finger at. And that's how Trump is operated forever,
• 7:24
  certainly not changing now. Even if the article had reported
• 7:28
  that plaintiff personally crafted the letter to Ebstein, and it
• 7:31
  does not. There's nothing defamatory about a person sending a
• 7:34
  body note to a friend. The journal's filing said, well,
• 7:38
  that's true, nothing at all, unless your friend is Jeffrey Epstein,
• 7:42
  and later on down the road you become president. Might
• 7:45
  be something important for the American people to see. And look,
• 7:48
  that letter doesn't prove anything as far as criminality, but
• 7:52
  what it does prove, in my opinion, is the cover up.
• 7:55
  And that's why I keep beating that drum. Look, the
• 7:58
  more profitable thing for me to do would be to
• 8:00
  sit here and tell you about all the salacious stuff
• 8:02
  day in and day out, stuff that we've covered years ago.
• 8:06
  But this cover up's happening right now, in real time.
• 8:09
  And if you want to hold people accountable, in my
• 8:11
  humble opinion, this is the path. So that's why we're
• 8:15
  going to continue to talk about it, and maybe in
• 8:18
  seven years from now everybody else will catch up. The
• 8:22
  Journal also challenged the claim that the article did not
• 8:25
  include any denial from Trump that he signed the letter.
• 8:28
  The Journal's legal team noted that the article dedicated three
• 8:31
  paragraphs to plaintiff's denial, including his insistence that the letter
• 8:36
  was a fake thing and his categorical disavowal of involvement,
• 8:40
  stating this is not me. In addition to the dismissal,
• 8:43
  the Journal seeking attorney fees and costs under the anti
• 8:47
  slap Statute. The Journal also asked the judge to say
• 8:50
  discovery pending the judge's ruling on the motion to dismiss.
• 8:54
  They noted that Trump's team has sought a deposition of Murdoch,
• 8:57
  as it previously requested shortly after the lawsuit was filed
• 9:01
  last year. The whole entire idea is to slow down
• 9:04
  the clock. Oh, we got to depose this one, we
• 9:07
  have to depose that one, and then before you know it,
• 9:11
  they're hoping that this all goes away, goes to the wayside,
• 9:14
  People forget about it, people move on. That's what they
• 9:17
  want to do. That's always been the goal. Confuse off
• 9:23
  the skate move on. And I hate to say it,
• 9:26
  but they've been pretty successful with that strategy. I mean,
• 9:30
  how many people have moved on to other topics? How
• 9:32
  many people believe that this is a hoax and that
• 9:38
  all came from the clever marketing campaign, if you will,
• 9:40
  propaganda campaign that was being run by Trump and his allies.
• 9:45
  Call it a hoax, try and frame it like you know,
• 9:48
  the Russia situation, and then hopefully you get people who
• 9:53
  might have been willing to listen to what's going on
• 9:57
  here to ignore it completely because they feel it's another
• 10:00
  attack on Trump, and if it's an attack on Trump,
• 10:04
  it has to be an attack on them. And that's
• 10:06
  been very successful for Donald Trump and his team because
• 10:09
  they've been able to pump that propaganda out, using influencers,
• 10:13
  using outlets, and when they're challenged on their bullshit, they
• 10:16
  just move the goalposts, just like Donald Trump himself is
• 10:19
  doing in this lawsuit. So what do you folks think?
• 10:23
  Do you think that this lawsuit is gonna move forward?
• 10:25
  Or do you think that the lawsuit's gonna get tossed
• 10:27
  once again? Shoot me some emails and let me know
• 10:32
  all the information that goes with this episode can be
• 10:35
  found in the description box.