Hunter Biden crudely dismissed first lady Melania Trump’s $1 billion lawsuit threat over his “false” and “defamatory” claims linking her to notorious pedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
“F–k that. That’s not going to happen,” Biden sneered with a smug grin during an interview on the YouTube show “Channel 5 with Andrew Callaghan” on Thursday.
Melania Trump’s legal team fired a shot across the bow Wednesday, putting the scandal-plagued Biden on notice for alleging Epstein introduced her to President Donald Trump, a claim her team slammed as baseless. The first lady’s attorneys have also cracked down on others peddling similar falsehoods, forcing the Daily Beast last month to retract an article pushing the same narrative after facing legal heat.
Melania Trump threatened Hunter Biden with a billion dollar lawsuit, demanding we retract our last interview and Hunter issue a formal apology. His response: pic.twitter.com/d4KYqxPcxz
— Channel 5 (@Channel5iveNews) August 14, 2025
Biden doubled down on his accusations in a prior sit-down with Callaghan, alleging, “According to his biographer, Jeffrey Epstein introduced Melania,” citing anti-Trump author Michael Wolff and other dubious sources. He went on to claim, “[It is] beyond a doubt that he [Trump] and Epstein were very close friends for a very long period of time. They spent enormous time together — they spent an enormous amount of time together around young women.”
Attempting to justify his smear, Biden added, “What I said was what I have heard and seen, reported and written, primarily from Michael Wolff, but also dating back all the way to 2019 when the New York Times, I think … reported that sources said that Jeffrey Epstein claimed to be the person to introduce Donald Trump to Melania at that time.”
The first lady’s attorney, Alejandro Brito, has also taken aim at outlets like the Daily Beast for spreading these claims. Veteran Democrat operative James Carville was forced to issue a groveling apology and pull an episode of his podcast after speculating about an “Epstein connection” involving Melania Trump, bowing to pressure from her legal team, according to the New York Post.
“Failure to comply will leave Mrs. Trump with no choice but to pursue any and all legal rights and remedies available to her to recover the overwhelming financial and reputational harm that you have caused her to suffer,” Brito wrote in a letter to offenders, according to Fox News.
The first lady’s legal threat is the latest development in the ongoing Epstein saga, which continues to generate controversy after the Department of Justice and the FBI released a joint memo last month claiming that an “exhaustive review” of evidence from Epstein’s death definitively ruled out murder.
“After a thorough investigation, FBI investigators concluded that Jeffrey Epstein committed suicide in his cell at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York City on August 10, 2019,” the memo reads.
The agencies also denied the existence of a “client list” tied to Epstein, directly contradicting earlier remarks by Attorney General Pam Bondi. Bondi had previously suggested on Fox News that such a list was “sitting on my desk” for review, igniting speculation about Epstein’s possible blackmailing of globalist elites.
Trump has repeatedly sought to downplay the ongoing scandal, accusing Democrats, including Hillary Clinton, of fabricating a hoax around Epstein to blow up his agenda.
In recent weeks, the Department of Justice met with Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s convicted accomplice, for two days of interviews in Tallahassee, Florida, as part of a push for transparency in the Epstein case. Maxwell, serving a 20-year sentence for sex trafficking, was granted limited immunity and answered questions for nine hours, with her attorney claiming she was truthful and cooperative.
* * *
As I approached the start of my first-year torts classes at George Washington University, we have a rather intriguing tort action being threatened by the First Lady. Melania Trump has been pursuing media outlets claiming that she was introduced to or had close contact with the notorious Jeffrey Epstein. However, the latest recipient of a notice letter is none other than the son of the prior president, Hunter Biden.
The letter below focuses on two statements made by Biden in a video interview with Channel 5’s Andrew Callaghan, posted to YouTube in early August.
a. “Epstein introduced Melania to Trump. The connections are, like, so wide and deep.”
b. “Jeffrey Epstein introduced Melania, that’s how Melania and the First Lady and the President met. Really? Epstein made the intro? Yeah, according to Michael Wolff.”
The First Lady’s counsel, Alejandro Brito, wrote to Biden’s attorney, Abbe Lowell, that the statements are defamatory per se. The common law has long recognized per se categories of defamation where damages are presumed and special damages need not be proven. These include: (1) disparaging a person’s professional character or standing; (2) alleging a person is unchaste; (3) alleging that a person has committed a criminal act or act of moral turpitude; (4) alleging a person has a sexual or loathsome disease; and (5) attacking a person’s business or professional reputation.
It would be interesting if Hunter’s counsel claimed that the First Lady is technically a “public official” to trigger a higher standard of proof.
In New York Times v. Sullivan, the Supreme Court crafted the actual malice standard that required public officials to shoulder the higher burden of proving defamation. Under that standard, an official would have to show either actual knowledge of its falsity or a reckless disregard of the truth.
The First Lady has a federal budget, staff, and official duties.
In the end, it is likely a moot point since, even if she is not a public official, she is clearly a public figure.
The actual malice standard was later extended to public figures. The Supreme Court has held that public figure status applies when someone “thrust[s] himself into the vortex of [the] public issue [and] engage[s] the public’s attention in an attempt to influence its outcome.” A limited-purpose public figure status applies if someone voluntarily “draw[s] attention to himself” or allows himself to become part of a controversy “as a fulcrum to create public discussion.” Wolston v. Reader’s Digest Association, 443 U.S. 157, 168 (1979).
Brito is claiming damages of $1 billion notice over statements that are “false, defamatory, disparaging, and inflammatory statements” made about the First Lady:
“These false, disparaging, defamatory, and inflammatory statements are extremely salacious and have been widely disseminated throughout various digital mediums. Indeed, the video has since been re-published by various media outlets, journalists, and political commentators with millions of social media followers that have disseminated the false and defamatory statements therein to tens of millions of people worldwide.”
In laying the foundation for reckless disregard of the truth, Brito is citing the dubious source for the information as “serial fabulist Michael Wolff, whose lies were published by The Daily Beast in the article titled ‘Melania Trump ‘very involved’ in Epstein Scandal: Author.’”
Wolff is highly controversial. We previously discussed how his sensational claims have been regularly challenged. That led to a rare rebuke from Special Counsel Mueller after the publication of his book “Siege: Trump Under Fire.” The Special Counsel’s office has already made a rare public denial of one of those claims: that Mueller’s office actually drafted indictments against Trump for obstruction of justice. The New York Times reported on the new book as coming out “despite lingering questions about its accuracy.”
While Mueller’s office categorically denied the claim, Wolff insisted ‘My source is impeccable, and I have no doubt about the authenticity and the significance of the documents.”
The notice letter is ironic given Hunter Biden’s scorched Earth strategy of threatening lawsuits, including defamation, against critics. It did not work. Indeed, Biden abandoned lawsuits after his pardon by his father.
Previous media outlets have pulled similar statements against the First Lady.
The Daily Beast pulled the article detailing allegations by Wolff that Melania Trump was introduced to her husband, Donald Trump, via a modeling agent connected to Epstein. It ran the following notice: “Editor’s Note. After this story was published, The Beast received a letter from First Lady Melania Trump’s attorney challenging the headline and framing of the article. After reviewing the matter, the Beast has taken down the article and apologizes for any confusion or misunderstanding.”
Likewise, James Carville apologized to the First Lady after repeating the claim and stated on his podcast:
“In last week’s podcast episode, we spoke with Judd Legum. After the episode, we received a letter from Melania Trump’s lawyer. He took issue with our title of one of those YouTube videos from that episode and a couple of comments I made about the first lady. We took a look at what they complained about, and we took down the video and edited out those comments from the episode. I also take back these statements and apologize.”
Hunter Biden is reportedly facing financial challenges and the threat of a lawsuit cannot be welcomed news. Biden has been engaging in unhinged, profane diatribes attacking both Democrats and Republicans. The thrill of trash-talking will likely end if Hunter finds himself yet again in court.
Here is the letter: Melania Trump Lawsuit Letter
Loading recommendations…
