NEW YORK – The latest chapter in the saga of Stormy v. The Donald involves Stormy Daniels (AKA Stephanie Clifford) suing President Donald Trump for defamation in New York.
Daniel’s defamation claim arose in response to a tweet published by Trump on April 18, in which the President referred to a sketch (or perhaps Daniels herself, it’s not clear from the syntax of Trump’s tweet precisely to whom, or what, he was referring) of a man Daniels said threatened her and told her to keep quiet about her affair with Trump as a “total con job.”
“Mr. Trump’s statement falsely attacks the veracity of Ms. Clifford’s account of the threatening incident that took place in 2011,” the lawsuit asserts. “It also operates to accuse Ms. Clifford of committing a crime under New York law, as well as the law of numerous other states, in that it effectively states that Ms. Clifford falsely accused an individual of committing a crime against her when no such crime occurred. Mr. Trump’s statement is false and defamatory.”
A sketch years later about a nonexistent man. A total con job, playing the Fake News Media for Fools (but they know it)! https://t.co/9Is7mHBFda
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 18, 2018
Since Daniels’ attorney, Michael Avenatti, announced the filing of the case on Monday, many observers, including several attorneys with extensive experience litigating defamation claims, have chimed in to express skepticism about the lawsuit’s merits – and even to warn of its potential to backfire on Daniels.
In interviews with YNOT this week, other attorneys weighed in with their thoughts on the defamation case, as well as other issues surrounding the ongoing legal wrangling between Daniels, Trump and the President’s embattled personal attorney Michael Cohen.
“The defamation suit looks to be a way to ‘work around’ the recent court ruling delaying the Daniels v. Cohen and Trump case in Federal Court,” attorney Karen Tynan told YNOT. “To me, it looks like baiting the President and an attempt to keep President Trump in the hot seat of litigation.”
While this may indeed be Avenatti’s strategy, Tynan further noted that a defamation claim is a difficult vehicle through which to accomplish the goal of keeping the pressure on Trump.
“Defamation cases are tough,” Tynan said. “Damages are very difficult to define, and President Trump’s position will definitely be that he was simply expressing an opinion about her.”
Attorney Corey Silverstein concurred with Tynan, telling YNOT he “would not classify this as one of the strongest defamation cases I’ve ever seen.”
“Moreover, defamation cases are some of the most difficult cases for a Plaintiff to win,” Silverstein added, “so I’m definitely scratching my head at the strategy.”
Making matters worse, Silverstein said those who say Stormy is at risk of the case backfiring may well be onto something.
“Not only is Stormy potentially facing an anti-SLAPP action, Stormy and her attorney should consider the possibility that sanctions could assessed related to this filing,” Silverstein said.
In a broader sense, Tynan and Silverstein both expressed concern that Avenatti’s pursuit of and participation in media coverage may not be serving the best interests of his client.
“I do think that Avenatti is in danger of media saturation right now,” Tynan said. “He’s a very compelling presence on the shows and always has a good quote, but people expect lawyers to be mouthpieces of their clients and expect lawyers to push certain agendas. I believe lawyers can get tuned out over time. Don’t forget, what really matters is what happens in the courtroom!”
On the media’s side of things, Silverstein said it’s easy to understand why there’s such an apparent fascination with the back and forth between Stormy’s camp and Trump’s.
“This case has taken on a life of its own and has turned into a money-maker for news networks and advertisers (take a look at ratings related to Stormy/Cohen/Trump stories and the social media attention it gets),” Silverstein said. “Don’t think for a second that the media won’t do everything in its power to continue to squeeze every penny it can from this soap opera before it’s all over.”
It’s a process in which it’s easy to get caught up, risking a loss of focus on the real goal for any attorney or litigant in the middle of the maelstrom.
“The parties should be concentrating on seeking a resolution,” Silverstein said, “and be less concerned with impressing the public or trying to discredit each other.”
