Donald Trump was sued for $4 million after he tweeted a retaliatory tweet calling a woman a “real dummy” and suggesting that she “begged” for a job as part of his campaign staff. Cheryl Jacobus, who is a Republican consultant, had already been turned down for her $4 million defamation lawsuit in a Manhattan lower court back in January, but she brought the lawsuit to a five-judge panel of an appeals court.
Jacobus appeared on CNN last year in February and during the segment, she criticized Trump for lack of transparency in his campaign. Trump caught wind of the comment and he sent out a retaliatory tweet that called her a “real dummy” and shared how she “begged us for a job,” meaning a job with Trump’s campaign.
Trump’s tweet also conveyed how “she went hostile” when they told her “no” to her job request, according to Fox News. Jacobus contends that these comments in Trump’s tweet cost her TV appearances. She also said that Trump’s tweet sparked a “bullying campaign” among his supporters that was aimed at her.
Trump actually sent out two tweets regarding Jacobus’s appearance on CNN and both are seen below.
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 3, 2016
Really dumb @CheriJacobus. Begged my people for a job. Turned her down twice and she went hostile. Major loser, zero credibility!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 6, 2016
Her case was heard by a lower court in January and their findings prompted them to toss the lawsuit out. The court concluded that although Trump’s “intemperate tweets are clearly intended to belittle and demean plaintiff,” they won’t hamper her career as a political consultant. The court also stated that Trump’s statements were his opinion and not fact. The lawsuit was dismissed by that court.
Jacobus then took the case to a five-judge appeals court in New York. A panel of five judges heard the case and passed down their ruling that the original findings stand. According to the New York Post, the appeals court said the lawsuit “was correctly dismissed in the absence of actionable factual allegations that tended to disparage her in the way of her profession, trade or business.”
The panel also found that “the alleged defamatory statements are too vague, subjective, and lacking in precise meaning (i.e. unable to be proven true or false) to be actionable.” The lawyer for Jacobus, Jay Butterman, said they are now exploring their option of taking this lawsuit to the highest authority in the state, the Court of Appeals.
Lawrence S. Rosen, who is Trump’s attorney, said that his client was pleased with the decision. Rosen added:
“Here Ms. Jacobus was very critical of the president during the campaign, on air, then-candidate Trump was certainly within his rights to rebut her attacks and offer his opinion as to what her motivations were”