ami to hand over e-mails, communications, any records they have got that relate to this case. the fbi has got michael cohen s stuff. they don t have ami stuff. not that we know of. according to karen mcdougal s lawyer. pretrial discovery would have included submission of written questions, to president trump. and a request to him that he should hand over any internal documents related to this matter. so the president being forced by the discovery process in this lawsuit to answer question as but and hand over materials related to the settlement. that might have happened. but now the lawsuit has been suddenly settled this evening. so that discovery process will not go forward. one might expect in a case like this that that discovery process would be a freaking nightmare scenario. for american media, for ami, but also for the white house itself. because of that, if you are karen mcdougal, and that tool is
available in your substantive lawsuit about this matter that relates to the president which is now in the middle of what you know is a criminal investigation, you would think you have got all the leverage in the world, right? you would think you can get the world in exchange for making that threat of discovery going away. you could probably get anything to make your lawsuit go away at this point. but they have published the settlement tonight. it does not look like karen mcdougal the world. ami isn t covering her legal fees. she does get the rights to tell her story about her allege add fair with donald trump. you might remember a recent hour of cnn in which she has done that fully already. presumably now can do it for money. but even if she does that, the first $75,000 she gets paid, has to pay to ami. so, why did this case get settled now? why did she get what she got? at what looks from the outside like a point of maximum
influenced by the fact there is a parallel ongoing criminal investigation. and so, folks who might have been deposed or inclined to speak in connection with the civil suit may be taking the fifth for instance. plead the fifth. they don t face exposure in the other thing that matters a lot more. that s ongoing. it also just comb ply k complic of attorneys in the civil matter. i don t know what ms. mcdougal s goals were. not for us to decide. but from mr. cohen s vantage point, from the folks at ami, boy they just want this whole thing to go away. they can t do that. can t make the federal prosecutors go away. but they can make this piece of it go away. when, thinking about what, you know what might be the explosive evidence in this case? worst case scenario for the people involved. there is this prospect that with discovery in the civil lawsuit, that could have resulted, and
if he is talking, why can t she? whoever is first in time to breach is the breacher and th e thereafter, the bad guy, in terms of any contract litigation. if she is right and contract law and litigation is a very hazy thing. each side may take the position that they did not breach. if a court determines that she was right ultimately, that may be the case. the nondisclosure agreement is very clear there is no disbarragement or discussion or anything. if they are claiming they breached first, then they could potentially win if it made it to court. that s another big if. this becomes a very big dare game. a dangerous game of legal chicken. why would the white house want donald trump to go to court. and expose themselves to civil discovery. that would be so broad you can conceal almost nothing even if it isn t directly relevant to the case at issue.
some said we knew he was a creep but not a criminal. a name change is in the works. we are seeing harvey weinstein s name taken off the credits of his shows like project runway. wiping away a name is not going to wipe away the stain on the company s reputation. should they have known he was more than just a creep and is what they did criminal? we will talk about his legal liability, but since we started with the board what kind of trouble are they in legally right now and civilly as well? it would be more civil exposure than criminal exposure. the criminal is the acts of weinstein depending on how they were done and the state laws that apply. civilly, if the company knew and if there were reasons for them to know and they continued to know it and it was a joke around the place, and that would be found out through civil