MAJOR GARRETT:
00:01:58
Why is it a weak case about possible perjury? So I think it's a weak case for a couple of reasons. The idea is that the case is based on a 2022 deposition in which E. Jean Carroll said that she did not think that there was or there wasn't outside funding for her case. Later, she and her attorney corrected the record and said, in fact, that there was outside funding. They flagged that correction for the trial court judge. The trial court judge found that, in fact, she was credible in correcting the record and, I believe, in the case said that President Trump's attorneys should not ask about that particular issue because, again, the judge found there wasn't an issue with her credibility. This issue, in part, went up to the court of appeals, the Second Circuit. The Second Circuit looked at this and similarly found that E. Jean Carroll had credibly said I just forgot in 2022, and that she corrected the record and that this, in fact, did not undermine her credibility in bringing those claims. The other thing I would add-- so again, you have two sets of judges, the district court judge and then the court of appeals judges, looking at this issue. I would also add, it's extremely unusual to have the Department of Justice look into alleged perjury based on a deposition in a case between two private parties. Jessica Levinson, always great stuff. Thank you very much.
