She’s demanded that the president submit to a seven-hour long deposition filled with un-vetted claims


During the 2016 election, a number of women were encouraged to make various claims against President Donald Trump and his character. Among the claims that surfaced, most of which were never substantiated in any way, was from a former contestant on The Apprentice.

When she made the claim, then-candidate Donald J. Trump called it fiction, causing her to file a lawsuit claiming defamation. Now, according to a leftist Manhattan judge, the president has to sit through a deposition for the case in the next few months, wasting at least seven hours of his extremely valuable time. It’s almost as if liberal judges are chomping at the bit to make the President look bad in any way possible.

Summer Zervos was on the fifth season of the President’s successful show, The Apprentice, which was filmed between September and November 2005 and aired starting February 27, 2006.

A decade later, at the height of the 2016 campaign cycle, she publicly claimed that around a year after the show aired, the president rubbed his genitals against her in 2007, at the Beverly Hills Hotel.

Candidate Trump, then believed to be a long-shot candidate with almost no chance of winning the presidency, responded in an unusually reserved way, and simply called her claims “fiction.” He also suggested that she made the statements for personal gain.

After he disparaged her claims, Zervos decided to file a defamation lawsuit against the president, with the legal assistance of Gloria Allred, a lawyer with a fairly awful liberal track record.

Now, according to the Manhattan Supreme Court, the President of the United States of America will have to submit to a deposition.

Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Jennifer Schecter, who spent her entire 12-year law career before being elected to her current position as a law clerk, said that the president has to sit for a seven-hour deposition related to the case sometime before the end of January 2019.

Donald Trump’s attorney, Marc Kasowitz, said that he hoped to block Zervos and her legal team from being able to drag questions about unsubstantiated claims made by other women who said the president sexually harassed or assaulted them.

Zervos’s lawyer, Mariann Wang, has stated that she’s interested in ‘obtaining information’ from women unrelated to the lawsuit who claimed that the president manhandled them.

Whether these claims are verified or not (and with the entire mainstream media hoping to find some evidence of wrongdoing by President Trump still unable to provide any evidence to back up these claims, it’s highly doubtful that they can be verified), this would mean that they would be forever entered into court records, treated as if they were serious accusations of wrongdoing.

The elected leftist judge has demanded that both sides of the case must make demands for documents by July 13, and respond to those demands for discovery by October.

The case is currently scheduled for trial sometime after the first week of June 2019.

Kasowitz pointed out that due to the President’s responsibilities, he would likely need to request adjournments, or additional time to comply with demands.

Judge Schecter has not yet ruled on such a request, but she did deny a request to delay the case until the United States Supreme Court could make a legal determination about whether or not the United States President is immune from state-level civil lawsuits while occupying the office.

Wang also complained that President Trump’s lawyer demanded the same protective order that was used in Clinton V. Jones, the civil suit between Bill Clinton and Paula Jones. That ‘protective order’ was essentially a request that the majority of information about the case would be sealed from public access until the case was finished.

Wang opposed that request, and Kasowitz said that he’d be open to negotiating a less ‘broad’ protective order.

The problem with this case, and with its timing, is that even though there may be no evidence to any of the claims, it is still almost designed to make President Trump look bad in the public eye.

In many ways, it is similar to the Katie Johnson lawsuit that the left used to impugn his character during the election cycle.

Johnson claimed that the president raped her when she was 13-years-old, while spending time with alleged pedophile Jeffrey Epstein.

The case was filed three different times, with the same claim. The first two times, the case ended due to being inappropriately filed. The third time, it ended because the woman who filed the suit withdrew it.

There was absolutely no evidence to support the claims she made, but the media was transfixed by the claims, and repeatedly used the mere accusation as if it were evidence of real wrongdoing on president Trump’s part.

At this point, it is likely impossible to prove (or disprove) what the president did or did not do to Zervos.

However, it seems like the point is to air every claim, no matter how factually deficient, against the President. The left certainly picked the best venue possible for such an endeavor; one run by a leftist elected by one of the most hard-left portions of the country.