Jimmy Kimmel threatens to sue Aaron Rodgers after Epstein remark

All right. Soon a federal judge is expected to release the names of dozens of Jeffrey Epstein’s alleged victims and associates. And now comedian Jimmy Kimmel is threatening a lawsuit against New York Jets quarterback Aaron Rodgers for insinuating without any evidence at all that Kimmel’s name might be in those documents. This is what Rodgers said in a radio show. A lot of people, including Jimmy Kimmel, are really hoping that as we again, we didn’t play to amplify that. We played it so you could see what was said here. Kimmel responded, saying in part, For the record,

I have not met, flown with, visited or had any contact whatsoever with Epstein, nor will you find my name in any list other than the clearly phony nonsense. The soft brain wackos like yourself can’t seem to distinguish from reality. Your reckless words put my family in danger. Keep it up and we will debate the facts further in court. Now, clearly, CNN no one has any reporting that Kimmel is linked in any way to the Epstein case. There was some bad blood, it’s notable between Aaron Rodgers and Jimmy Kimmel because of jokes that criminal Kimmel had

made criticizing Rodgers for pushing conspiracy theories. Here now, CNN legal analyst and criminal defense attorney Joey Jackson. Joey, the reason I want to do you want to talk

about this was the issue of defamation. You know, what Aaron Rodgers said has no basis in fact, no evidence to support it. When does something like that become defamation here, John? Important questions to be answered for sure. So what happens is, is remember what defamation is. It’s a false statement that is injurious to someone’s reputation. And as a result of that, it can cause the person great reputational

damage. When you talk about defamation as it relates to public figures, as both Jimmy Kimmel and Aaron Rodgers are, you have to show what’s called actual malice. What on earth does that mean? You have to show knowledge that you made the statement knowing it was false or just reckless disregard as to whether it was false or true. So it’s a very heightened standards. At the end of the day, though, I don’t think it’s yet ripe, ripe for any defamation claim. Certainly no one would want to be listed, talked about in the same sentence. Right. In

terms of. EPSTEIN But when you talk about defamation, one defenses is absolute truth. If in the event it’s true, it may be a terrible thing that someone said, but you know what? It’s not defamatory. The list hasn’t been published yet. And so we’ll see not to suggest at all that anybody’s name, whether it be Kimmel and Rogers, would be on that list at all. But, you know, it’s not ripe yet to the extent that when the list is published, everyone will get to see for themselves who specifically is on it, John, and who’s not. Well,

when Jimmy Kimmel, as he says his name is not on that list, does it then become a legal issue that Aaron Rodgers said it without any basis, apparently whatsoever? So so here’s the issue with that. Right. Remember that if defamation is to end your reputation, certainly you shouldn’t be saying anything. Right. That is injurious to anyone, whether they be public figures, private figures or anything else. The problem with defamation in that regard, though, John, is this follows let’s just say he’s not on the list. That is Jimmy Kimmel was not on the list as he

suggests. He would never be on such a list. Then the world would know that this is just a bad blood argument. And you can argue that if you’re Jimmy Kimmel that it’s injurious to your reputation because in essence, you’re cleared as a result of a list being published to show that you’re not on it. So I don’t see any reputation reputational damage there. As you mentioned at the outset, there’s no love lost between them. Kimmel has made some jokes about Aaron Rodgers that he has not appreciated, including how he’s worn that his and Rodgers, his

hair. And so they’ve gone back and forth. And I think the public may just take that as this and not anything in terms of, you know, mean spirited or to rise to the level. Well, you can argue it’s mean spirited, but to rise to the level of defamation. You know, start Jimmy Kimmel in his social media theme. He did point out, if you continue this, basically I will see you in court. So if Aaron Rodgers were to say anything else, how would that contribute to possible legal jeopardy or civil liability? Yeah, sure. So it would

depend upon what is said. Right. Ultimately at the end of the day. Right. And you have to look at everything in context. I think the argument will be made right. The context of this, of course, is that Jimmy Kimmel, when he makes his comments and statements, it’s comedic in nature not to suggest comedians can injure someone. They certainly can, particularly when you have a platform like him. So too. And Rogers has a tremendous platform and you have to be careful about what you say. And so to the extent that there is no such list, that

includes Jimmy Kimmel and Aaron Rodgers would pretend you to continue to propagate that. Now it could rise to the level because he’s not there, that it’s now alive. Remember what defamation is, just a reset, right? False statement that is injurious to your reputation. You keep repeating something, you keep repeating something. Guess what? In this world, people get to believe it’s true. Now, you may have a cause of action, but I just think it’s a feud between two people who probably have had enough of each other. Joey Jackson, we appreciate it. Thank you very much.