Trump RUSHES to DOJ After $83 MILLION LOSS!!

Added: 2026-05-10

[00:00:00]Trump is desperate to get out of the two Eene verdicts against him. And perhaps it's less about the money. But the fact that she was never afraid of him. I mean, listen to what she said after one of the verdicts. Take a listen. See, I don't understand how people can be afraid of a fat elderly man who wears a apricot makeup, his hair done up like Tippy Hedrin in the birds and sits in a courtroom and moans and groans and complains and snorts when the Joanna when the jury got a load to him. They were mesmerized.

[00:00:46]You have never seen anything like it. He never sat still and he talked the entire time with an earshot of the jury. He belittled Alina Haba Esquire, his own attorney. He would spit as he was talking. He he he didn't smell so good. E Gene Carol beat Trump twice, getting millions of dollars from juries in two separate trials because Trump defamed her. Well, Trump unsuccessfully tried to appeal that.

[00:01:18]Pellet courts denied his appeal in both cases. He's now asking the Supreme Court to take up these cases and the DOJ is intervening on his behalf in one of them. My name is Dena D with the Midas Touch Network. Let's break this down.

[00:01:33]Now, Trump, of course, is acting like the DOJ is his personal attorney, and we can go into it how he's using it against his perceived political enemies, but in this situation, he is having the DOJ basically substitute the United States as his defendant instead of him. So, let's break this down. As we know, there's two different verdicts. And one of them it had to do with the statements he made about Eugene Carol when he was president. That verdict was to the tune of $83 million. 65 million of that the jury awarded Eugene Carol in the tune of punitive damages which basically juries award when they feel as if the defendant needs to be deterred from continuing that action. Then in the other case, it was $5 million awarded to Ink Jean Carol for comments he made when he was not president. So he has already asked the Supreme Court to take up the $5 million verdict case. He says that the evidence presented at trial, such as the Access Hollywood video and statements by other women showing the pattern of abuse which led the jury to decide that he did defame her when he said he did not sexually abuse her. He's asking the Supreme Court to take up that case. Now, the Supreme Court has a method by which they decide which cases to take because there's obviously thousands of litigants across the country that want the Supreme Court to review their case and perhaps, you know, overturn it to their benefit.

[00:03:11]So, they have something called a conference and at that conference the nine justices get together and discuss whether or not to take the case and then they decide. Four of the nine justices have to agree to take the case. That doesn't mean necessarily that they all even want to take the case for the same reason. They could either want to take a case because they want to overturn precedent or perhaps they want to clarify the president. Either way, it actually takes five justices to determine what the decision of the court is. So this is one less judge required to actually take the case. So, the Supreme Court has discussed whether or not to take the $5 million verdict at seven different conferences. Seven. That is highly unusual. Perhaps one or two or maybe three conferences, but seven conferences means that there's definitely a split among these justices.

[00:04:11]I mean, as we know, there's uh their internal disputes are kind of breaking out in a way that normally isn't.

[00:04:19]They're talking about their cases in very antagonistic ways. We saw Gorsuch just go on Fox Fox and Friends, a very partisan network. I mean, there's a lot of stuff going on with the Supreme Court right now, but four of them can't decide whether or not to take a case, but yet there's enough there for them to keep thinking about it. So, now comes the other verdict, the $83 million verdict.

[00:04:48]And what Trump is trying to get there and well the DOJ is doing for him at our expense is saying that he should be substituted because he was a federal employee because he was president when he made that case. So something called the Westfall Act should apply. The Westfall Act sea says that if a federal employee is sued, then the United States can come in as a substitute, which normally you would want because if you are doing your job and you are sued as a result of that conduct, you would want the defendant to be United States. For example, the same thing if you're an employee, right? If you're an employee and you're doing something within the contours of your job, you would expect the company to be the defendant, not you as an employee. But that's the important part. It has to be an action within the conduct of your job. Clearly statements that Trump made about whether or not he sexually abused and calling her a liar essentially Eugene Carol didn't have anything to do with his job as a president.

[00:06:03]Now, former President George Bush was able to actually use this act because he was sued because of Iraq war and said that his use of misinformation, he should be liable and it was dismissed because it was within the conduct of his job of the decision of whether or not to go to war. Cheney was sued because of a CIA leak and the same idea that act was used to substitute the United States because it was seen as that had to do with the conduct of their job. It's very hard to see how this has anything to do with the conduct of his job and a president regardless of the criminal immunity. Well, first of all, the Supreme Court criminal decision, immunity decision, clearly carved out that a president could be criminally liable for private conduct even while they are president. But this is not about criminal liability. And so the law that applies is actually Clinton v.

[00:07:04]Jones. If you remember Clint, you know, he was sued for private conduct while he was president. He tried to stop it because under the law, a president cannot be sued while their president for official conduct and the Supreme Court ruled that that private conduct was not a part of his job. Clinton v. Jones. A president can be sued civily for private conduct even while they are president.

[00:07:32]Clearly, the fact pattern here applies the same. And so for the Department of Justice to use their limited resource, especially with the less judges that they evidently have now, the mass exodus of judges where we do want them to actually uphold laws are instead using their resources to try to get Trump out of this verdict, out of paying this $83 million, despite the fact that a jury already found he should, despite the fact the appellet court found that he does not have immunity to it. The DOJ is using their resources to go to the Supreme Court hoping the Supreme Court will act like Trump's personal court just like the DOJ is acting like Trump's personal lawyer. But even for the Supreme Court, this is a stretch. So this is now going to be the second case, the second Eene Carroll case that the Supreme Court is going to have to decide whether or not to take or not.

[00:08:35]This is somebody who has said again and again how much money he has. And we see the grifting of the New York Times showing even the first year how much money like a one and a half billion dollars that Trump evidently earned while he was president grifting off the presidency.

[00:08:55]Never mind all the insider trading the poly market. We have no idea who's benefiting there. Never mind the contracts that his sons are getting.

[00:09:04]corruption. Instead of just paying the debt that he is owed, he's using our money to try to get out of it with very bad legal basis. My name is Dena Dah.

[00:09:18]This is the Midest Touch Network. If you haven't yet subscribed to us, be sure to do that. And if you haven't yet found the Mistrial podcast, wherever you listen podcast, be sure to follow us and check out the Mistrial sponsors. So grateful for our sponsors because they don't censor what we have to say which is so critical in this moment and especially with the Trump regime going after reporters and journalists and media.

[00:09:42]>> Want to stay plugged in? Become a subscriber to our Substack at midasplus.com. You'll get daily recaps from Ron Philipski, ad free episodes of our podcast, and more exclusive content only available at midasplus.com.