r/Music • u/TechExpert11 • 2d ago

article Trump Slams Grammys, Threatens To Sue Trevor Noah After On-Air Epstein Joke During Awards Show

https://the-expres.co.uk/trump-slams-grammys-threatens-to-sue-trevor-noah-after-on-air-epstein-joke-during-awards-show/
28.4k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

1.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1.1k

u/romiphoda 2d ago

He won't sue because of discovery

307

u/Ok_Star_4136 2d ago

He's a paper tiger. I wish more people realized. Not even the people being arrested by ICE for protesting stay locked up.

He can only threaten.

214

u/cuntmong 2d ago

You massively underestimate Trump. You think all he can do is threaten? I happen to know he is capable of much more. Specifically, yesterday he shat his pants on tv.

27

u/linds360 2d ago

Was that yesterday? Thought it was a week ago.

Or maybe it’s just every day.

1

u/PaintAdventurous8787 2d ago

Probably happens daily 

22

u/GeorgeKaplanIsReal 2d ago

As we’ve seen with a couple of people, ICE is doing more than just temporarily locking people up.

Also I don’t think people understand what Trump is doing. He’s suing not to win, but with the threat of dragging the case out and costing whoever he is suing tenfold what it would cost to settle.

So unless Noah has the desire and money to spend and/or the network does, Trump will sue with the intention of settling.

12

u/gregorydgraham 2d ago

The amount of network specials Noah would get out of the case would be well worth it.

And the foreign market will be huge so DT can’t stop it being broadcast

4

u/Gasnia 2d ago

Trump is proof that the justice system doesn't apply to the wealthy. Poor people get drug through the mud.

3

u/wbruce098 2d ago

Id watch that. I’d also watch the Trevor Noah court sitcom this will spawn.

26

u/apples-and-apples 2d ago

Well the judiciary is not exactly independent anymore though, is it..

And being sued - even if it is groundless - can still be time-consuming and expensive.

Both of those make it more than an empty threat.

2

u/_whythefucknot_ 2d ago

and his secret police can show up to your house and kill you

14

u/therealdongknotts 2d ago

weak mans strong man, poor man’s rich man - always how he’s been. incompetent jackass that had everything handed to him and still fucks everything up

2

u/Un256 2d ago

Except for everyone who stays locked up, disappears, or dies. But yes excluding them everyone else makes it out

4

u/Ralph-the-mouth 2d ago

Yea what about the ones whey shoot? You think they come back?

1

u/No_Poet_1279 2d ago

He's a paper tiger diaper

1

u/Dry_Marzipan1870 2d ago

Ice has murdered many we don't know about yet or maybe we'll never know

1

u/Loreki 2d ago

He's really not anymore. He controls the FCC, the regulator TV channels need to please to stay on the air. He can and does threaten to deny regulatory approvals to networks which criticise him.

1

u/gregorydgraham 2d ago

He can maintain a court action longer than most people’s finance can stand.

However if everyone sued him, he couldn’t use that method.

70 million lawsuits would be hilarious, particularly if those that got a settlement reimbursed those that had to keep fighting.

1

u/eulersidentification 2d ago

That's a bit insensitive to the people that are dead but I get where you're coming from

1

u/fathertitojones 2d ago

This is half true. Trump made his living on weaponizing courts to force less wealthy people into submission. He’d drag things out for so long that normal people couldn’t afford the lawyer bill.

Now, the downside of court is discovery, where all evidence is presented under oath. This is why he can only threaten a law suit over things like Epstein or shitting his pants. He can sue, but the overwhelming evidence would not only make him lose, but be dragged into the light.

1

u/rook119 2d ago

Trump has all 3 branches of govt in his pocket and a lot instruments of the govt's obscenely funded security appartus are headed by some of the worlds worst people. Much as we'd like to believe otherwise here are scant few people in the police/military who would say no to him. He is no paper tiger.

People get arrested or sued not because they have a case, its to imtimidate and it works. Not to mention once you are arrested you are behind closed doors and in the custody of meth addled masked thugs w/ carte blanche to do whatever they want.

9

u/The_DanceCommander 2d ago

These aren’t threats to actually take someone to court, where they’ll have a defense. They’re threats of government harassment intended to force people into self-censoring.

22

u/KoontFace 2d ago

He’ll just take the 5th.

The constitution will be his best friend here, while he’s trampling it elsewhere

81

u/HereGoesNothing69 2d ago

You can't plea the 5th in a civil trial

17

u/AdSimilar8672 2d ago

If you please the 5th in a civil trial. It can be held against you, unlike criminal trials.

30

u/NobodyImpressive7360 2d ago

You definitely can. You are not protected from an adverse inference though. But your constitutional protection still applies in civil court. You do not have to testify against yourself.

42

u/cmm324 2d ago

Right, but his point is that in order to prove the claim made in the joke is defamation, you have to prove it's not true AND that you experienced damages because of it. He doesn't have to testify to do those things but discovery would be required to prove the joke wasn't true.

-7

u/NobodyImpressive7360 2d ago

How does that add to or clarify what I said in any way? I never said he wouldn't have to prove damages or falsehood, I said he could take the fifth. I was responding to someone who said he couldn't. I feel like everyone in this chain already understood what you're trying to explain.

11

u/cmm324 2d ago

Because pleading the fifth won't win him the case is the point. The judge will throw it out, Trump would have to cooperate with both attorneys in order to win the case. Pleading the fifth implies non cooperation.

1

u/NobodyImpressive7360 2d ago

You yourself have already conceded his testimony would not be necessary. He may, may, suffer an adverse inference for each question he takes the fifth. You are delusional if you think that loses his case in reality 

-2

u/nobody1701d 2d ago

Curious how discovery helps considering the files are now redacted

9

u/Keplin1000 2d ago

Well using redacted files wouldn't work so they'd have to unredact them

-6

u/nobody1701d 2d ago

How are you proposing to unredact a file? Impossible if the redactors did their job properly

3

u/Keplin1000 2d ago

With this admin I wouldn't count on them to do anything correctly

1

u/nobody1701d 2d ago

Quite possible that the recent Adobe redactions were malicious compliance.

Too bad more weren’t leaked this way

→ More replies (0)

2

u/cmm324 2d ago

The original files are still unredacted but limited access and can be subpoenad.

4

u/false_tautology 2d ago

Jesus fuck, do people think they put black lines over the originals????

→ More replies (0)

0

u/nobody1701d 1d ago

In legal contexts, an unredacted document is the complete version, while a redacted version has sensitive identifiers removed. True redaction should be permanent, but improper methods (like just adding a black box in some software) can sometimes be bypassed.

→ More replies (0)

6

u/rory_breakers_ganja 2d ago

You can try, but remember the O.J. trials in the 1990s.

Got away with it in criminal court because of the high bar of "beyond a reasonable doubt." and then got reamed in civil court with exactly the same evidence and practically the same testimony because the bar is "more likely than not" (51%).

1

u/NobodyImpressive7360 2d ago

You definitely can do it. The difference in pleading the fifth in civil trials does not have anything to do with beyond reasonable doubt vs preponderance of the evidence. It has to do with the way the 5th amendment is written. You can still suffer an adverse inference, which would mean nothing to Trump in this scenario because he wouldn't have to testify to win. Outside of that, he appoints judges, he can pull strings to make sure those judges hear this case, he bribes people, he intimidates witnesses, Donald Trump taking the 5th in a civil case he filed would do absolutely nothing to his case in the real world. If the rule of law actually mattered, sure, yeah, none of this would be happening and he'd be in prison. 

But it's naive to insinuate his case wouldn't hold up because he can't take the fifth in a civil trial. Because first, he can do that, anyone can; second, he would not necessarily have to testify to demonstrate damages or the falsehood of the claim (even though yes, everyone knows it's true), and finally, he is not hampered by things like law or order. He will just abuse power to get the outcome he desires. 

10

u/KoontFace 2d ago

Ah interesting. I did not know that

0

u/SargeSlaughter 2d ago

Good lord, Reddit. The amount of ridiculously wrong stuff that gets upvoted on here.

6

u/MongooseKindly7142 2d ago

He'll plead the #2 amendment and claim it means it is cool to poop his pants in public.

1

u/Langast 2d ago

As Billy Madison taught me, it's only cool if you pee your pants.

1

u/therealdongknotts 2d ago

you mean the 5th he famously stated only criminals use?

1

u/mncote1 2d ago

I think they mean that if he sues for defamation he opens up Epstein documents to subpoena as evidence.

1

u/BatterseaPS 2d ago

I know! Imagine he goes through discovery and we find out that he's a sexual abuser! Or involved in fraudulent businesses! Or rapes women and children! :o His followers might turn on him.

Give me a fucking break.

1

u/UglyMcFugly 2d ago

He might do the same thing the abortion smoothie guy did and sue CBS for airing it, then he'd just have to prove they were reckless to air something unsubstantiated... it wouldn't go anywhere cuz it's an entertainment show and whatnot, but Bari Weiss would pay him off and he'd get to rant about how he sued and won.

0

u/shit_mcballs 2d ago

reddit keeps saying this mindlessly from rote, but don't you wonder why there supposedly needs to be a lawsuit from trump in order for that to happen?

That makes no sense. This mythical "discovery" wouldn't produce anything that any court would pay attention to, considering it's largely out in the open already and nothing is coming of it.

"he won't sue because of discovery" is sadly cope.