Any legal team advising the Trumps that a defamation case is a winner is either monstrously incompetent or taking them for a ride.
The Epstein scandal continues to unfold rapidly after Virginia Giuffre’s explosive memoir ‘Nobody’s Girl’ surfaced. In the United Kingdom, Prince Andrew, once known as a royal, has relinquished his titles amid growing revelations about how deeply connected he and Sarah Ferguson were to the disgraced financier. Meanwhile, in the United States, Donald Trump faces mounting difficulties as social media becomes saturated with images of him alongside teenage girls, coupled with allegations involving hush money paid to families to suppress claims about the nature of these relationships.
The central issue for Trump, however, lies in the legal approach chosen by his wife.
Melania Trump has responded vigorously and without caution to widespread allegations from multiple commentators claiming she was closely linked to Epstein. These claims suggest the disgraced financier introduced her to Trump, assisted her struggling modeling career, and helped regularize her immigration status in the U.S. back then.
While having billionaire resources allows one to secure top legal defense, it does little to provide foresight into potential repercussions or “blowback” — a term used in the U.S. describing backlash akin to a firearm’s recoil. Remarkably, Melania’s legal team appears to have failed to caution her about the damaging consequences of a defamation trial in court, where this blowback can significantly harm the plaintiff. This is crucial because many defamation cases settle after early threats to defendants, avoiding public hearings.
When Melania’s lawyers publicly threatened to sue Hunter Biden, it created headlines but was strategically unwise. As previously discussed, pursuing litigation against Hunter Biden over his assertion that Epstein introduced Melania to Trump would be counterproductive. The Bidens’ financial resources could mount a robust defense, leading to two key outcomes: Melania would face invasive jury questioning about her personal history and possibly her marriage’s authenticity, and journalists would be protected by ‘Absolute Privilege,’ allowing detailed accounts to be published despite defamation claims.
Any legal team advising the Trumps that a defamation case is a winner is either monstrously incompetent or taking them for a ride.
The very facts they aim to suppress—how Melania and Trump met, details of the ‘parties,’ and their connection to Epstein—are exactly where their combative stance against accusers is driving them. Like moths drawn fatally to a flame, the Trumps seem unable to halt their self-destructive path.
Melania’s public image as a former first lady risks collapse if more evidence solidifies the narrative of her being a struggling model from humble origins who, driven by ambition and questionable values, was drawn to Epstein. He allegedly secured her a wealthy husband, elevating her from poverty to a life of luxury. Naturally, she seeks to avoid this portrayal, and her husband is likely considering the political fallout if it emerges that she was in the U.S. illegally, as Michael Wolff’s lawyers imply.
But what exactly was the nature of Melania’s association with Epstein? What did their relationship truly involve?
All these revelations might have remained hidden if not for the Trumps’ miscalculations and Melania’s legal counsel steering her into a precarious position.
In the case of Hunter Biden, Melania narrowly avoided serious trouble as her threats in the media quietly receded. Although her team succeeded in gagging certain individuals and even a media outlet regarding claims that Epstein connected her to Trump, some targets prove impossible to silence.
Her most formidable adversary is New York-based Jewish writer Michael Wolff. Recently, Wolff received a $1 billion lawsuit threat from Melania’s attorneys demanding he retract statements about her ties to Epstein. He has withdrawn the interview with the Daily Beast where these claims appeared, yet similar allegations persist in his latest book on the Trumps, his fourth publication on the family.
Melania’s legal advisors underestimated Wolff’s next move, which will surely haunt their careers. Cornered, Wolff has chosen to respond with an expensive countersuit, enabling him to subpoena both Trumps to testify under oath regarding their connections to Epstein. He asserts that the Trumps are undermining free speech and violating Americans’ First Amendment rights. This groundbreaking case has the potential to overshadow all recent U.S. scandals—provided the author avoids the fate of a fatal accident or suspicious suicide accompanied by a flawed autopsy.
About the Author
