In a move common to Donald Trump amidst allegations and investigations into his many instances of corruption, he took an “investigate the investigators” approach in his backlash against the investigation into his campaign’s alleged collusion with Russian operatives during the 2016 presidential campaign. His bombastic tactics caught up with him in a court case he brought against Hillary Clinton on Thursday, however, and now his legal team will have to pay up as a result.
A Florida judge has ordered Trump lawyers Alina Hanna, Peter Ticktin (Trump childhood classmate) and their associates to pay $50k in sanctions and fees and costs to a defendant Trump named in his unsuccessful RICO suit against Hillary Clinton pic.twitter.com/RauGvf80Zy
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) November 10, 2022
In a court case brought by the Trump legal team regarding the infamous Steele dossier, a man named Charles Dolan was named as a Clinton co-conspirator who lied about Trump’s ties to Russia – these lies included salacious details regarding Trump and sexual activity – which were included in the dossier.
The case described Dolan as a New York resident who served as the chairman of the DNC (this was later amended to title him as the chairman of a Democratic political organization), a senior official in the Clinton campaign, and “an individual with intimate ties to the Clinton Campaign.” In essence, Trump’s legal team argued that Dolan lied to pad the dossier with salacious rumors and then, at the direction of his friend, Hillary Clinton, ensured that those lies led to an investigation.
In the decision, the judge wrote that:
‘In March 2022, Charles Dolan was among 29 defendants initially sued by Mr. Trump. (DE 1). He was identified as a former chairman of the DNC, a senior official in the Clinton Campaign, and a close associate of and advisor to Hillary Clinton. The Complaint alleged that in April 2016, Mr. Dolan participated in discussions about the creation of a “dossier” to smear Mr. Trump and disseminate false accusations to the media (Compl. ¶ 79), and at the direction of Ms. Clinton assisted in preparation of the dossier.’
This is just for defendant Charles Dolan's case. Wait until they get to the other 34+ defendants asking for (or who will ask for) sanctions.@AlinaHabba – girl, you better go get a second job to pay for all of this. https://t.co/dTYr0FDshr
— PULIE2011 AKA [email protected] (@PULIE2011) November 10, 2022
Dolan sued the Trump team and, on Thursday, the judge ruled in his favor. The decision was based on a number of factors. Although Dolan did admit in court that he had lied about Trump to those gathering information about him, key pieces of Trump’s description of him in legal filings were so inaccurate that the case began unraveling. The least consequential lie, for one, the one about Dolan’s residency in New York, was described by the judge as an example of the Trump team’s “cavalier attitude towards facts demonstrated throughout the case.” Dolan is, in fact, a resident of Virginia, and he had told Trump’s lawyers so. The falsehoods, however, did not stop there.
As it turns out, Dolan was neither the chairman of the DNC nor any other Democratic political organization, had worked as a volunteer on the Clinton campaign but had no position in any level of leadership, and Hillary Clinton and her campaign officials had testified that they had never worked with him and didn’t know the man. The judge said explicitly in her ruling that the allegations “were either knowingly false or made in reckless disregard for the truth” and would cost the lawyers $50,000 in court fines . The lawyers were ordered to pay Dolan’s legal fees, as well.”
‘Mr. Dolan had never been the chairman of any such organization. The motion further explained that Mr. Dolan’s role in the Clinton Campaign was limited to knocking on doors as a volunteer.’
W/r/t allegations against Charles Dolan: "Trump’s lawyers were warned about the lack of foundation for their factual contentions, turned a blind eye towards information in their possession, & misrepresented the Danchenko Indictment they claim as their primary support." 2/
— Lisa Rubin (@lawofruby) November 10, 2022
When the facts about Dolan were made clear, allegations about the ties between he and the Clinton campaign fell apart, making the entire case, brought as a RICO case, a frivolous and misguided one, clearly brought solely for headlines and wasting the court’s time and resources. In fact, the judge found “that Plaintiff filed his pleadings for an improper purpose.”
‘Rule 11 sanctions are properly assessed (1) when a party files a pleading that has no reasonable factual basis; (2) when the party files a pleading that is based on a legal theory that has no reasonable chance of success and that cannot be advanced as a reasonable argument to change existing law; or (3) when the party files a pleading in bad faith for an improper purpose…Here, all three are true.’
The judge cited a "toxic combination of political fundraising with legal fees paid by political action committees, reckless and factually untrue statements by lawyers at rallies and in the media, and efforts to advance a political narrative through lawsuits without factual basis"
— Erik Larson (@eelarson) November 10, 2022
