

5·
3 days agoNot unless the judge rules that one side must cover the cost incurred by the other. Even then, they could drag out the payment over the course of years due to appeals or bankruptcy filings.


Not unless the judge rules that one side must cover the cost incurred by the other. Even then, they could drag out the payment over the course of years due to appeals or bankruptcy filings.


ABC did that on purpose. They knew they could use the settlement as a disguised bribe to get preferential treatment from Trump. That was worth more than the legal battle that would drag on for years and net them nothing. He still hasn’t paid E. Jean Carroll. He certainly wouldn’t have paid out the ABC case.
What they did is the equivalent of paying a crooked cop. It’s textbook racketeering. “Pay me and we’ll protect you.” -every one of the 5 families.
He could have tried to get their license revoked, but would have lost the ensuing lawsuit on first amendment grounds. ABC was never at risk of losing their license. They willingly chose the bribe. A lawyer that just passed their BAR exam could have won that case.