the presumption is that it is regular and you will comply with it. and really, the only basis for objecting is if there was some sort of privilege. i can t imagine one here. or that it is somehow overly broad. if you asked for millions and millions of documents, a company might say that s unreasonable and might go to court to quash it or narrow the scope of it. ordinarily if you ask for business records and it is within the scope of the investigation, a judge will enforce that subpoena. i also wanted to ask but this breaking news tonight about e. jean carroll. she obviously had a big victory in court in her defamation case. the judge found that former president trump was liable for sexual abuse of miss carroll and also lying about her and defaming her big jury award. they ordered him to pay $5 million to miss carroll. in the wake of that, after he made subsequent further remarks along the same lines as those actionable statements that were
prosecutors sought records on trump s foreign business deals since 2017. now, this is maggie haberman, alan feuer and ben protess reporting. for the federal special counsel jack smith investigating two things. what trump was doing with classified documents that he wasn t supposed to have at his home after he left the presidency. he is also investigating trump s efforts to try to stay in power even after he lost the 2020 election. the times is reporting that as part of the investigation, he has reportedly sent a subpoena to trump s business, and the subpoena asks about trump s business dealings in seven different foreign countries, starting with when he took office as president in 2017. the subpoena reportedly asks about trump business dealings, starting in 2017, in china,
will be blamed? well, it will be the president of the united states of america. that is what they think. one of the things the american people have to see through is the absolute hypocrisy of these republicans who claim to be very, very concerned about our deficit and our national debt. meanwhile, these are the exact same people pay pushing to repeal the estate tax which would provide $1.8 trill to the top .1 of 1%. the very richest. they want to extend trump s tax breaks. most of which went to the most wealthy and corporations. they refused to allow medicare to negotiate prescription drug prices with the pharmaceutical industry. that lost us $1 trillion. these are hypocrites. they claim to be worried about the national debt but they fight
as follows, quote, punitive damages may be awarded to punish a defendant who has acted maliciously and to discourage others from doing the same. a statement is made with malice or made maliciously if it is made with deliberate intent to injury or made out of hatred or ill will or spite or made with willful or want honor reckless disregard of another s rights. both prior and subsequent defamations and subsequent statements of the defendant may reflect a defendant s malice. trump s defamatory statements post verdict show the depth of his malice toward carroll. so that s how the lawyers phrase it in this complaint. it sort of makes sense, right? in laymen s terms and other terms, the jury was told that they re supposed to consider the effect of, sort of the amount of malice this person had when he made his statements defaming this other person. and the jury was instructed that
we call barb mcquaid, co-host of the sisters-in-law podcast. barb, it s really great to see you. thanks for joining us on such short notice tonight. you bet. glad to be with you, rachel. if you can explain what you see as significant, if anything, about this news of the federal subpoena. prosecutors looking into trump s possible foreign business dealings dating back to when he took office in 2017. what does that say to you? well, it is both a fairly routine move but also one with potentially explosive consequences, i think. whenever you re investigating a white collar case, you want to follow the money. it is what deep throat told woodward and bernstein to do. you might find interesting motives, et cetera. in this case when prosecutors are trying to decide whether to file charges, they re looking for aggravating factors like obstruction of justice. another one is disloyalty to the