I thought that Trump's lawyers were going to tell him to drop the defamation case against the Pulitzer Prize Board that awards the prize.
I was wrong.
The prize was given to the New York Times and Washington Post for their reporting on Trump's malfeasance in the 2016 election. I thought it was insanity for Trump to pursue it. They would be opening up a huge can of worms by going over the reporting of Trump's involvement and Russia's gain in the 2016 election. It would show that Trump and his campaign did exactly what they were accused of in the Mueller report.
Trump still seems to think that the four-page memo that Bill Barr put out negates the entire Mueller report. It does nothing of the sort. There are at least 10 instances of obstruction of justice detailed in the report. Trump thinks he was completely "exonerated." Mueller has said publicly that that's not the case.
In my diary Pulitzer Out-Trump's Trump, I explained how Pulitzer's lawyers were using Trump's own tactic of delay, by saying that the case shouldn't go forward while Trump was president and would have to wait until he left office because it would interfere with his duties.
Last week, the lawyers for the board filed a "Protective Order Governing Discovery" to keep the board members communications between themselves secret as to how they came to the determination to award the prize to the Times and the Post.
Judge Robert Pegg of the 19th Judicial Circuit Court in Florida struck down that down on Monday, the 3rd. A list of cases from 2023 shows that he handles a lot of divorce cases and not much else. Just to give you some background.
Trump's lawyer, Quincy Bird, said that Trump is "committed to holding those who traffic in deception and fake news to account."
"The defendants, hiding behind the once-prestigious Pulitzer Prizes, attempted to resurrect a left-wing hoax by giving, as well as continuing to stand by and republishing, it's disgraced award to the organizations that drove the infamous 'Russia Russia Russia' hoax."
So, apparently, we move to the discovery phase of the case. This is where both parties exchange evidence, so they are both working from the same information before the trial begins.
While Trump's lawyers will have access to communications between the Pulitzer Board members, it also would mean, I think, that the Pulitzer Board members lawyer would ask for access to Trump's communications in order to prove that the reporting of the Washington Post and the New York Times was valid. Executive Privilege would probably be invoked and the Pulitzer lawyers could say that Trump's case should be dismissed because of that.
Pulitzer could use everything that's in the Mueller report. Maybe even be able to use everything Mueller had to make the report.
Here's how happy Trump was to have his case move ahead back in July of last year. He's been pushing it forward as fast as he can, ever since. I thought that he would drop the case once he won the presidency. I was wrong again.
Trump's lawyer calling it the "Russia, Russia, Russia hoax" shows he's still following Trump's orders and using his words. This doesn't always work well in court. A lot of judges won't put up with it. That's how we finally got the January 6th report generated by Jack Smith's team.
What Trump and his lawyer are conveniently forgetting is that the stories by the New York Times and The Washington Post are correct.
Trump's lawsuit against the New York Times for its report on the Russian collusion was dismissed in March of 2021.
Trump's lawsuit against the Washington Post for its report was dismissed in February of 2023.
So, Trump and his lawyer think that they can prove defamation by the Pulitzer Board when they couldn't even win either case against the New York Times or the Washington Post.
Now, I'm not a lawyer, but it would seem to me that this was the least likely of all the cases to be won.
They've got the New York Times and the Washington Post on their side. They can use everything that the New York Times and the Washington Post used in their cases to thwart Trump twice.
The other point I made in my original diary, was that by proceeding with this case, Trump and his lawyer are saying that Trump pursuing civil cases while in office is not an impediment to him performing his duties. That means that civil cases against him should also go forward.
Cases like the Capitol policemen suing for mental and physical health problems caused by Trump inspiring the January 6th insurrection, can use this as a guide to other judges who are handling those cases.
I said in my first diary that Trump can't have it both ways. That he can't say he can spend his time in dealing with lawsuits he wants to go forward and saying that other cases would impede on his duties. Commenters said that because he's president, he can have it both ways. I don't think a judge can get away with ruling it that way. Not even the Supreme Court could rule that way. You'll argue with me on this, but it really can't.
The Pulitzer Prize award was done in 2018. Trump's lawsuit against the Pulitzer Prize Board was filed in 2022 when he took umbrage to a statement that the Pulitzer Board put out in which it defended its position, and said that the award of the prizes would stand. Trump called that defamation.
His suit claimed that it amounted to "knowledge or reckless disregard to its falsity." That numerous investigations had proved that the newspaper articles to be false. Just the opposite.
Trump's lawyers and Fox News think that getting access to the Pulitzer Boards internal communications will win Trump's case. I think it will prove that the Pulitzer Board members do proper deliberations in coming up with their choices for prize winners.
Trump will lose in the court of public opinion again when this case proceeds to trial. It's going to be all negative on him when all the information is dug up again and thrown in his face. He'll claim exoneration again and everyone will laugh at that if they bother to look at the facts.
He can't claim it's a witch hunt this time. He's the one pursuing the case.