been an actual conversation at the ihop and that there was a discussio about the disposing of land. missy a turned out to be hapless, technologically challenged informant at another main meeting, messi wanted to make sure that h didn t find the concealed wire he used his own baby s cover we asked him, what was wron with the baby? we couldn t hear the baby wa screaming. he said, oh. i checked the recording device and i dropped the diaper the reason she was screamin is that those things get kin of hot we were just all appalled that he had done that investigators did believe the initial ihop story after messi was caught out in lie over something else, he wa quietly retired from the investigation. now 18 years after flynn wen missing, prosecutor decided to tell mrs. ihop story to th grand jury, absent of miss himself. we use that as part of th basis for the indictment marginal evidence, maybe. nonetheless, a goo
do not exercise the right to remain silent because, inevitably, the prosecutor wil argue, while he admitted and what he couldn t deny, h didn t admit and so if he didn t testify at the deposition, it would b held against him in the civi suit, and the fact that he has now testified, it might be use against him and not just the pending investigation, but the current ongoing hush money indictment that has happened so alvin bragg is takin notes. i just want to ask you quickly of course, there s the possibility of perjury with th former president to lie unde oath, i mean that is out there still, right there is always a possibility when someone testifies, if they don t tel the truth about material facts they have committed perjury an can be indicted for that crime if they don t tell the truth what about how quickly yo think the civil case might g to trial, and is a settlemen possible well, a settlement is possible i believe the judge in thi
good reason. because, stephanie ruhle, in new york, in a civil matter, you don t have the right against incrimination. you don t have the sam ability. so, if you stay silent in civil matter, then the jury ca be told, hey, the defendan could have told his story, h didn t so you should draw what we cal an adverse inference you sure the seam assume tha trump is admitting to th allegations against him. so, for that reason in a 250 million-dollar case, it s no surprising that trum testified. now, time will tell, is that a good strategy? because donald trump s, to put it mildly, truth challenged. so, anything involving him and an oath is kind of wil robinson danger territory but let s get serious about that let s not be cute about it he s under oath. trump has been known to live repeatedly, is freshly about his businesses, this one is humiliating one. remember when tish james lai it out, massively inflating th
mr. neal katyal, we have heard this before. lawyers tell our clients, as little as possible last summer, trump pleaded the fifth 400 times. suddenly his top, talk, talk talk, talk does that surprise you yeah. first of all, it had to have been a strange feeling for donald trump to actually answe questions instead of hidin behind the fifth amendment, as he always does he didn t hear, though, for good reason. because, stephanie ruhle, in new york, in a civil matter, you don t have the right against incrimination. you don t have the sam ability. so, if you stay silent in civil matter, then the jury ca be told, hey, the defendan could have told his story, h didn t so you should draw what we cal an adverse inference you sure the seam assume tha trump is admitting to th allegations against him. so, for that reason in a 250 million-dollar case, it s no surprising that trum testified. now, time will tell, is that a good strategy?
familiar argument that we re hearing from trustee, from tacopina, saying, look, i m no his pr guy, and his lawyer, an can make him do anything what do you make of that argument well, it is true that the have no control over him we ve all, if you ve been practicing lawyer for a long time, you might have a clien that you ask to not do something, and they do it. this is really out of control. because they are in the cour when he was there, mr. trump he was sober and respectful, h didn t say anything. the judge specifically did not issue a gag order, requested that he in the prosecutors witnesses refrain from sayin things that would cause violent, civil unrest, or endangered th safety of individuals. and then that night, mr. trump went on to florida now, he would argue, of course he said he would not cause violence or endangered the safety of individuals. you know, when you are speakin