George Conway: Verdict not just about defamation but about Trump's 'distorted state of mind'

Summary

En una conversación intensa, los panelistas discuten la reciente condena de Donald Trump a pagar 83.3 millones de dólares en un juicio por difamación a E. Jean Carroll. Se destaca la importancia de la decisión judicial y su impacto en la percepción pública de Trump, así como el valor de la persistencia y el coraje de Carroll al enfrentarlo públicamente. Se abordan las implicaciones políticas de este evento, la actitud de los republicanos hacia el sistema judicial y la necesidad de reconocer y responsabilizar a Trump por su comportamiento defamatorio y sus mentiras constantes. Además, se resalta el papel inspirador de Carroll para las mujeres de su generación y la relevancia de este caso para el debate sobre la igualdad de género y los derechos de las mujeres.

Takeaways

• 📜 El caso de difamación ganado por E. Jean Carroll contra Donald Trump refleja un fallo de $83.3 millones, lo cual es significativo.
• 🗣️ George Conway, abogado conservador, sugiere que la realidad de la situación está asentándose y que Trump no difamó a E. Jean Carroll.
• 🤔 Se destaca la importancia de respetar las decisiones de los jurados, a diferencia de algunos políticos que han criticado el sistema judicial.
• 👥 Nikki Haley, expresidente del Consejo Nacional de Relaciones Exteriores de los Estados Unidos, se mantiene firme y no cuestiona la decisión del jurado.
• 🚫 Se cuestiona la conducta de Donald Trump en el juicio, incluyendo sus ataques nocturnos contra el juez y E. Jean Carroll.
• 🧐 Se discute la posibilidad de que Trump siga difamando a otros a pesar del fallo, debido a su historial de comportamiento.
• 👵 Molly Jong-Fast, corresponsal especial de 'Vanity Fair', destaca la importancia de la visibilidad y la lucha de mujeres de la edad de E. Jean Carroll.
• 🤝 Se argumenta que el fallo puede inspirar a otros a tomar acciones legales contra las difamaciones de Trump.
• 💰 Se menciona que el fallo podría afectar económicamente a Trump, lo que podría tener implicaciones políticas.
• 🏛️ Se sugiere que la Casa Blanca de Biden no necesita involucrarse directamente en el caso, ya que el caso en sí mismo es convincente.
• 📉 Se discute la estrategia de los demócratas y cómo podrían usar el caso para resaltar la conducta pasada de Trump.

Q & A

¿Quiénes son los invitados principales en la discusión?

Los invitados principales son Shawn Crowley, George Conway, Molly Jong-Fast y Adrienne Elrod.

¿Cuál es el tema central de la discusión?

El tema central es la condena de Donald Trump en un juicio por difamación a E. Jean Carroll y las implicaciones políticas y personales de dicha condena.

¿Por qué se destaca la cantidad de $83.3 millones en la discusión?

La cantidad de $83.3 millones se destaca porque es el monto del fallo en la demanda de difamación presentada por E. Jean Carroll contra Donald Trump.

¿Qué opinan los panelistas sobre el papel de las jurados en este caso?

Los panelistas consideran que la decisión de los jurados es importante y que ha habido un reconocimiento tardío del valor de los jurados en lugar de ser criticados cuando las cosas no salen como se espera.

¿Por qué creen que Donald Trump ha sido condenado en el juicio?

Los panelistas sugieren que la condena se debe en parte al comportamiento de Trump en el juicio y su historial de conducta inapropiada y difamación.

¿Cómo afecta esto a la percepción de Donald Trump?

La discusión indica que la condena puede afectar negativamente la percepción de Trump, destacando su comportamiento y su historial de acusaciones sin fundamento.

¿Qué es la 'ley de visibilidad' que Molly Jong-Fast menciona en su artículo para MSNBC.com?

La 'ley de visibilidad' se refiere a la importancia de que las mujeres, independientemente de su edad, se mantengan visibles y sepan que su voz importa, especialmente en el contexto de la era de misoginia y racismo que se atribuye a Trump.

¿Qué implicaciones políticas tiene este fallo para Donald Trump?

El fallo podría dañarla políticamente al afectar su cuenta bancaria y, por ende, su influencia. Además, establece un precedente que podría hacer que Trump piense dos veces antes de difamar a otros en público.

¿Cómo debería posicionarse la Casa Blanca de Biden con respecto a este caso?

Según Adrienne Elrod, la Casa Blanca de Biden ha sido inteligente al no involucrarse directamente en el caso, ya que el caso habla por sí solo y establece un precedente importante.

¿Por qué creen que Trump continúa difamando a otros?

George Conway sugiere que Trump es un 'narcisista sociopata' y 'patológico mentiroso', y por lo tanto, es probable que continúe difamando a otros para desviar la atención de él mismo.

¿Qué papel jugaron los abogados de Trump en el resultado del juicio?

Se sugiere que los abogados de Trump no le ayudaron y que su presencia en el juicio, posiblemente con la intención de influir en los jurados, resultó en un mal impresión que pudo haber costado a Trump una mayor cantidad de dinero en la sentencia.

Outlines

00:00

📚 Discusión sobre la demanda de difamación de E. Jean Carroll

El primer párrafo aborda la discusión de un panel de comentaristas sobre la demanda de difamación ganada por E. Jean Carroll contra Donald Trump, quien fue sentenciado a pagar 83.3 millones de dólares. Se destaca la importancia de la decisión judicial y cómo afecta la percepción pública de Trump, su conducta durante el juicio y las implicaciones políticas de dicho caso.

05:01

🏛 Consideraciones políticas tras la demanda de difamación

El segundo párrafo se enfoca en las posibles implicaciones políticas de la demanda de difamación y cómo podría afectar a la imagen de Trump. Se discute la estrategia que podría seguir la Casa Blanca de Biden en respuesta a estos eventos y se destaca el valor de la decisión para las mujeres y la importancia de reconocer el coraje de E. Jean Carroll por su persistencia en la búsqueda de justicia.

Keywords

💡Defamation

La difamación es una afirmación falsa que perjudica la reputación de una persona. En el video, se discute un caso de difamación en el que Donald Trump fue hallado responsable y se le ordenó pagar $83.3 millones a E. Jean Carroll.

💡Jurado

Un jurado es un grupo de personas que escuchan la evidencia en un caso judicial y deciden sobre la culpabilidad o inocencia de una parte. En el contexto del video, el jurado desempeña un papel crucial al dictar la sentencia en el caso de difamación.

💡Donald Trump

Donald Trump es un personaje central en la discusión, ya que es la persona contra la cual se presenta la demanda de difamación. Se explora su historial de comportamiento en el juicio y su impacto en la política y la sociedad.

💡E. Jean Carroll

E. Jean Carroll es la demandante en el caso de difamación. Se destaca su valentía y persistencia al presentar la demanda durante la presidencia de Trump, lo que se considera un triunfo simbólico para muchas mujeres.

💡Misoginia

La misoginia se refiere a la hostilidad hacia las mujeres. En el video, se sugiere que la era de Trump introdujo un aumento en la misoginia y el racismo, lo que influye en la percepción pública y las tácticas políticas.

💡Racismo

El racismo es la discriminación o hostilidad hacia individuos o grupos basada en su raza o etnia. Se menciona en el video como un fenómeno que se intensificó durante el mandato de Trump, afectando la dinámica social y política de Estados Unidos.

💡Narcisismo

El narcisismo es un trastorno de la personalidad caracterizado por una vanidad excesiva y una necesidad de admiración. En el video, se describe a Trump como un 'narcisista sociopata', lo que se relaciona con su comportamiento en el juicio y su historial de difamación.

💡Campañas políticas

Las campañas políticas son los esfuerzos para ganar apoyo y votos durante una elección. Se discute cómo el caso de difamación contra Trump podría afectar las estrategias y la percepción pública de las campañas políticas futuras.

💡Sentencia

Una sentencia es la decisión final de un tribunal en un caso judicial. En el video, la sentencia de $83.3 millones en el caso de Carroll contra Trump se presenta como un punto de inflexión y un precedente legal significativo.

💡Precedente legal

Un precedente legal es una decisión judicial que establece un ejemplo para futuras decisiones judiciales similares. El video sugiere que la sentencia en el caso de Carroll contra Trump establece un precedente que podría disuadir a Trump y a otros de difamar a otros en el futuro.

💡Autonomía

La autonomía se refiere a la capacidad de una persona para actuar de manera independiente. En el contexto del video, se menciona la autonomía de las mujeres en relación con el derecho al aborto (Roe v. Wade), que se vio amenazado por las acciones de Trump.

Highlights

Shawn Crowley expresses appreciation for the guest's presence on the show.

Introduction of George Conway, a conservative attorney, and Molly Jong-Fast, a special correspondent at Vanity Fair and host of the Fast Politics podcast.

Discussion on Donald Trump not defaming E. Jean Carroll and the impact of an $83.3 million lawsuit.

Nikki Haley's statement on not second-guessing the jury, contrasting with other Republicans' criticism of the jury system.

George Conway's criticism of Trump's behavior during the trial and his inability to control himself.

Judge Kaplan's comments on Trump's uncontrollable behavior in court.

Conway's assertion that the case is a verdict on Trump's distorted state of mind, not just defamation.

Molly Jong-Fast's opinion piece on MSNBC.com discussing the significance of E. Jean Carroll's visibility and the power it holds.

Jong-Fast's comments on Trump's era of misogyny and racism, and the impact on women's rights.

Adrienne Elrod's view on E. Jean Carroll as a hero for her persistence during Trump's presidency.

Elrod's perspective on the political implications of the civil suit and how it might affect Trump.

Conway's prediction that Trump will continue to defame people due to his psychological projection and pathological lying.

The importance of calling out Trump's behavior as 'crazy' and the need to remind the public of his mental state.

Conway's description of Trump as a narcissistic sociopath and the jury's realization of his deranged state during the trial.

The potential financial implications for Trump due to the lawsuit and his own actions during the trial.

Speculation on whether Trump's lawyers may have negatively impacted his case with their courtroom strategies.

Transcripts

SHAWN CROWLEY, THANK YOU VERY

MUCH FOR COMING IN THIS MORNING.

WE APPRECIATE IT.

>> THANK YOU.

>>> WE WANT TO BRING IN

CONSERVATIVE ATTORNEY GEORGE

CONWAY NOW, AND SPECIAL

CORRESPONDENT AT "VANITY FAIR"

AND THE POST OF "FAST POLITICS"

PODCAST, MOLLY JONG-FAST.

AND FORMER CHIEF OF CHAFF TO THE

D

DCCC AND AN AIDE TO THE BIDEN

AND HILLARY CLINTON CAMPAIGNS,

ADRIENNE ELROD IS WITH US.

>> GEORGE CONWAY, PERHAPS THIS

IS GROUNDED MORE IN THE FACT

THAT REALITY IS SETTLING IN.

ONE, DONALD TRUMP DID NOT DEFAME

E. JEAN CARROLL THIS WEEKEND.

PRETTY REMARKABLE WHAT $83.3

MILLION LAWSUIT WILL DO.

SECONDLY, WE ACTUALLY HEARD A

NATIONAL REPUBLICAN GOING OUT,

TALKING ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF

JURIES INSTEAD OF PEOPLE LIKE

MARCO RUBIO TRASHING THE JURY

SYSTEM AND ATTACKING JURORS AND

OTHER SENATORS, REPUBLICAN

SENATORS DOING IT WHEN THINGS

DON'T GO THEIR WAY.

YOU ACTUALLY HAD NIKKI HALEY

GOING, "I'M NOT GOING TO SECOND

SECOND-GUESS THE JURY.

WHAT

WHAT A QUAINT NOTION THAT IS."

>> A FEW YEARS TOO LATE, I

THINK.

THIS IS WHAT PEOPLE SHOULD HAVE

BEEN DOING ALL ALONG.

THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN HAMMERING

HIM FOR HIS MISCONDUCT.

THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN DOING ALL

THIS AND CRITICIZING HIM AND

CHALLENGING HIS MENTAL

STABILITY.

I THINK THIS CASE IS ACTUALLY

NOT JUST -- THIS DAMAGE VERDICT

IS NOT JUST A VERDICT ABOUT

DEFAMATION.

IT IS A VERDICT ABOUT HIS

INCREDIBLY DISTORTED STATE OF

MIND.

AS SHAWN JUST SAID, HE WAS HIT

WITH THIS JUDGMENT IN PART

BECAUSE OF HIS BEHAVIOR IN COURT

AND HIS BEHAVIOR DURING THE

TRIAL.

THIS IS A MAN WHO, AS JUDGE

KAPLAN SAID DURING THE TRIAL, HE

CANNOT CONTROL HIMSELF.

HE COULD NOT CONTROL HIMSELF

WHEN HE RAPED E. JEAN CARROLL.

HE COULDN'T CONTROL HIMSELF IN

2019 WHEN SHE CAME FORWARD WITH

THE STORY AND HE LIED AND SAID,

"OH, I'VE NEVER MET HER," EVEN

THOUGH THERE WAS A PHOTOGRAPH

THAT HAD BEEN PUBLISHED ALREADY

OF THEM TOGETHER.

HE COULD NOT CONTROL HIMSELF

AFTER HE WAS PRESIDENT, WHEN HE

CONTINUALLY DEFAMED HER AGAIN

AND AGAIN AND LIED ABOUT WHAT

HAPPENED.

THEN HE COULDN'T CONTROL HIMSELF

THROUGHOUT THE TRIAL WHEN, IN

THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT, HE WAS

ATTACKING THE JUDGE AND

ATTACKING JEAN CARROLL AGAIN,

CALLING HER A LIAR, CALLING HER

A WHACK JOB, AND STANDING

OUTSIDE THE COURTROOM AND

HOLDING THESE OUTRAGEOUS PRESS

CONFERENCES.

NOW, HE HAS BEEN GOOD FOR FOUR

DAYS.

WE'LL SEE HOW LONG THAT LASTS.

I KEEP REMEMBERING BACK IN 2017

AND 2018 AND 2019, WHERE HE'D DO

SOMETHING OR SAY SOMETHING

PARTICULARLY OUTRAGEOUS, AND

PEOPLE WOULD SAY, "OH, MY GOSH,"

AND THEN A FEW DAYS LATER, HE'D

READ SOMETHING OFF A

TELEPROMPTER, AND PEOPLE WOULD

SAY, "OH, THIS IS THE NEW DONALD

TRUMP."

THERE IS NO NEW DONALD TRUMP.

>> THERE IS NO NEW DONALD TRUMP.

MOLLY, NOW REPUBLICANS ARE

FORCED TO DEFEND SOMEONE WHO WAS

FOUND LIABLE FOR $83.3 MILLION

IN THE DEFAMATION LAWSUIT

CONNECTED TO A SEXUAL ASSAULT.

NIKKI HALEY, AT LEAST, IS

CHOOSING NOT TO DO THAT AS PART

OF A MORE AGGRESSIVE ATTACK FOR

HER.

YOU WROTE SOMETHING FOR

MSNBC.COM OVER THE WEEKEND.

"E. JEAN CARROLL, MY MOTHER, AND

THE POWER OF STAYING VISIBLE."

TELL US WHAT THAT MEANS AND WHY

IT IS SIGNIFICANT RIGHT NOW.

>> WELL, I THINK THAT DONALD

TRUMP USHERED IN AN ERA OF

MISOGYNY AND RACISM.

WE KNOW THIS IS TRUE, WHEN HE

WAS ELECTED.

WOMEN, YOU KNOW, OF THAT AGE

WERE REALLY -- YOU KNOW, THESE

WERE THE WOMEN WHO FOUGHT FOR

ROE.

THEN THEY LOST ROE.

BECAUSE OF DONALD TRUMP, RIGHT?

HE PUT THREE CONSERVATIVE

JUSTICES ON THE COURT.

HE EVEN SAID HE WAS PUTTING THEM

ON TO REVERSE ROE.

ROE WAS THE GREAT VICTORY OF

THOSE WOMEN, MY MOTHER

INCLUDED'S, AGE.

IN 1973, THEY WERE ABLE FOR THE

FIRST TIME TO HAVE

AUTONOMY, AND IT CHANGED THE

GAME FOR THEM.

SO TO SEE THIS TAKEN AWAY FROM

THEM, AND THEN HERE IS A WOMAN

DONALD TRUMP'S OWN AGE, RIGHT?

DONALD TRUMP HASN'T BEEN MARRIED

TO A WOMAN HIS OWN AGE IN A LONG

TIME.

THIS WAS A SORT OF INCREDIBLE

VICTORY FOR WOMEN OF THAT

GENERATION, FOR WOMEN OF MY

GENERATION.

YOU KNOW, IT WAS THAT WE MATTER.

NO MATTER WHAT AGE WE ARE, WE

MATTER.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

ADRIENNE ELROD, I MEAN,

ACTUALLY, THAT'S THE FIRST THING

I THOUGHT WAS THE HUGE JUDGMENT

CAME DOWN, THIS HUGE NUMBER, IS

THAT THIS WOMAN IS SUCH A HERO.

SHE STARTED THIS DURING HIS

PRESIDENCY AND KEPT GOING.

I DON'T THINK A LOT OF FOLKS

TOOK HER THAT SERIOUSLY.

I THINK EVERYONE IS TAKING HER

SERIOUSLY NOW.

LET'S TALK ABOUT THE POLITICS OF

THIS, ADRIENNE, ESPECIALLY WITH

THE CIVIL SUIT COMING DOWN THE

LINE IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF

WEEKS.

I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH THIS HURTS

TRUMP POLITICALLY.

I GUESS IT COULD HURT HIS BANK

ACCOUNT, WHICH COULD UNDERMINE

HIM A BIT.

HOW DO YOU THINK THE BIDEN WHITE

HOUSE SHOULD POSITION ITSELF?

OF COURSE, WE'LL WATCH NIKKI

HALEY PLAY OFF OF THIS, AS WELL.

>> YEAH, I THINK THE BIDEN WHITE

HOUSE HAS BEEN REALLY SMART

ABOUT THIS.

YOU DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO

GET INVOLVED IN THE STORY LIKE

THIS.

THE STORY SPEAKS FOR ITSELF.

LOOK, I MEAN, I THINK ON A

COUPLE OF FRONTS, I THINK,

NUMBER ONE, THIS SETS A

PRECEDENT.

IF YOU ARE -- WHETHER YOU ARE A

WOMAN, A MAN, WHOMEVER YOU ARE

THAT DONALD TRUMP IS

CONSISTENTLY DEFAMING, THERE IS

NOW A PRECEDENT SET FORWARD

WHERE, YOU KNOW, PERHAPS DONALD

TRUMP IS GOING TO THINK TWICE

BEFORE HE GOES OUT AND RIDICULES

YOU ON THE PUBLIC STAGE.

YOU KNOW, I THINK IT IS ALSO

IMPORTANT.

I LOVE THAT MOLLY TALKED ABOUT,

YOU KNOW, HOW WOMEN OF HER

MOTHER'S GENERATION AND,

FRANKLY, YOU KNOW, WOMEN MY AGE,

TOO, THIS WAS INSPIRING FOR US

TO SEE ON A NUMBER OF LEVELS.

I THINK IF YOU ARE -- I ALWAYS

TALK ABOUT, MIKA, THE SWING

MODERATE VOTERS WHO WILL DECIDE

THIS ELECTION.

YOU'RE LOOKING AT THIS AND

SAYING, YOU KNOW WHAT, GOOD FOR

HER.

I'M GLAD SHE STOOD UP AND DID

THIS AND TOOK THIS STEP.

I DON'T THINK THE BIDEN WHITE

HOUSE NEEDS TO GET INVOLVED IN

THIS BECAUSE IT SPEAKS FOR

ITSELF.

YOU KNOW, E. JEAN HAS BEEN A

HERO TO SO MANY WOMEN.

IF YOU'RE TRUMP AND THE TRUMP

CAMPAIGN, MAYBE YOU ARE THINKING

TWICE BEFORE YOU GO OUT THERE

AND START DEFAMING, YOU KNOW,

INNOCENT WOMEN OUT THERE WHO YOU

EITHER RAPED OR YOU HAVE JUST

CONSISTENTLY DEFAMED TIME AND

TIME AGAIN.

>> GEORGE CONWAY, QUICKLY, JUST

WATCHING TRUMP'S ACTIONS IN THE

DAYS AND WEEKS TO COME, HE CAN'T

TALK ABOUT -- I MEAN, TO WHAT

EXTENT DOES THE DEFINITION OF

DEFAMATION, CONTINUED DEFAMATION

INCLUDE?

HE SEEMS TO BE EDGING CLOSE TO

TALKING ABOUT THIS AS AN ATTACK

ON HIM, THE BIDEN DOJ, WHEN WE

KNOW IT WAS A JURY.

DOES THAT GET HIM IN TROUBLE, OR

CAN HE TALK AROUND IT STILL?

>> HE IS GOING TO DEFAME PEOPLE.

HE IS GOING TO CONTINUE TO

DEFAME PEOPLE BECAUSE HE ENGAGES

IN PSYCHOLOGICAL PROJECTILE.

JOE CAN ATTEST TO THIS.

HE IS ALWAYS GOING TO ACCUSE

PEOPLE OF FALSEHOODS TO DRAW

ATTENTION AWAY FROM HIMSELF AND

BECAUSE HE IS JUST A

PATHOLOGICAL LIAR.

THAT'S WHAT HE DOES.

I'M SURE HE IS GOING TO BE BACK

AT SOME POINT TALKING ABOUT THIS

JUDGE AND TALK ABOUT E. JEAN

CARROLL.

HE IS GOING TO BE SAYING

ABSOLUTELY UNTRUE THINGS ABOUT

EVERYBODY BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT

HE'S DONE HIS ENTIRE LIFE.

THE GOOD THING, THOUGH, ABOUT

WHAT HAS JUST HAPPENED IS HE IS

FINALLY BEING CALLED TO ACCOUNT

FOR IT.

I THINK WHAT WE ALL NEED TO DO,

AND I THINK NIKKI HALEY, YOU

KNOW, FOR SOME REASON IS FINALLY

STARTING TO DO IT.

I THINK THE BIDEN CAMPAIGN, FROM

WHAT I CAN SEE ON THEIR SOCIAL

MEDIA ACCOUNTS, IS TRYING TO DO

IT.

WE NEED TO CALL OUT THE CRAZY.

WE NEED TO POINT OUT THE CRAZY.

HE'S HAD THREE YEARS OF

BASICALLY BEING OFF THE STAGE,

AND PEOPLE HAVE FORGOTTEN HOW

ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY MENTALLY

DISORDERED THIS MAN IS.

THE MORE YOU TALK ABOUT THAT, IN

PARTICULAR, THE CRAZIER IT MAKES

HIM.

I'M NOT JUST TALKING ABOUT THE

POSSIBILITY THAT HE HAS

DEMENTIA.

I MEAN, IF HE WERE A RELATIVE OF

MINE AND SAYING SOME OF THE

THINGS HE WAS SAYING AND

CONFUSING NIKKI HALEY WITH NANCY

PELOSI, SAYING THAT BARACK OBAMA

WAS PRESIDENT, I'D DRAG HIM TO

THE NEAREST NEUROLOGIST.

BUT THAT'S NOT REALLY THE

PROBLEM WITH HIM.

WHAT MAKES HIM DANGEROUS IS HE

IS A NARCISSISTIC SOCIOPATH.

A NARCISSISTIC PSYCHOPATH.

MALIGNANT NARCISSIST.

HE'S ALWAYS BEEN THAT.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HAPPENED

LAST WEEK IS THAT THE JURY SAW

THIS MAN FOR THEMSELVES, JUST A

FEW FEET AWAY, AND THEY SAW HOW

SICK AND DERANGED HE WAS.

THAT'S PART OF THE REASON WHY HE

HAS TO COME UP WITH $83.3

MILLION REALLY FAST THROUGH A

BOND, AND I DON'T KNOW IF HE

CAN.

>> HIS LAWYERS SEE IT.

>> HIS LAWYERS CERTAINLY DIDN'T

HELP HIM AT ALL, WHICH IS AN

UNDERSTATEMENT.

BUT, YOU KNOW, HE WAS COMING TO

THE COURTROOM.

I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS FOR THE

PRESS CONFERENCES OUTSIDE, IF IT

WAS TO INTIMIDATE THE JURORS,

WHAT IT WAS, BUT IT ENDED UP

COSTING HIM A LOT.

IF HE'D STAYED AWAY.

>> AND ZIP IT.

>> IF HE HADN'T MADE THE BAD

IMPRESSIONS HE MADE AND KEPT HIS

HEAD DOWN, HE'D PROBABLY HAVE,

YOU KNOW, AT LEAST $70 MILLION

MORE.

>> YES.

>> HE COST HIMSELF TENS OF

MILLIONS OF DOLLARS GOING INTO