Transcript for Melania Trump Refiles Daily Mail Online Lawsuit
Legal went from a lot of your trump the First Lady scored a victory against the blogger who falsely claimed she once worked as an escort. And now she's filing a 150 million dollar lawsuit against the Daily Mail for publishing similar allegations. It seems chief national correspondent timing honestly with all the details good morning Tom George good morning to you experts say this is unchartered territory for the office in the First Lady. Going out and suing a media organization. But mrs. Trump's lawyers argued those scandalous unproven allegations hurt future endorsement deals. This morning the First Lady fighting hard to protect not only reputation. But her brand. Lawyers for baloney your trump re filing a lawsuit against the Daily Mail online. Seeking damages worth more than would 150. Million dollars. She's suing the news website for publishing a now retracted report. Containing unsubstantiated. Allegations. That the modeling agency Maloney worked for doubled as an escort service. I. From the beginning. I never had one could act story one. On this story. According to the suit that false report damage mrs. Trump's licensing. Marketing and endorsement opportunities. The suit also states the Daily Mail story could end up come at a worse time because mrs. trump. Had the unique once in a lifetime opportunity to launch a broad based commercial brand in multiple product categories. Each of which could have garnered multimillion. Dollar business relationships. For a multi year term. During which plaintiff is one of the most photographed women in the world. I'm honored to be our first lady's still are more do you Trump's lawyers arguing that false report limited. How much she could profit off the presidency. Mrs. Trump's spokeswoman insists she's not trying to cash in on her new life. Telling ABC news she was not trying to make money from her role as First Lady. It's just kind of fueling the flames. All this discussion about possible conflicts of and Chris. In the in the new term White House. Now the First Lady already has one legal victory she sued a Maryland blogger Webster tore Lee who publish similar allegations to the ones by the Daily Mail online. The First Lady settle back case on Tuesday. Partly publicly apologizing to the First Lady. Mrs. Trump's attorney seen TARP Lee agreed to pay here a substantial sum as a settlement George. OK Tom thanks very much Denny respects talk about this some more so that settlement right there oh victory. For the first later do you think she and her lawyers made a mistake by bush will look. As a legal matter they did the right thing by talking about the damage it's right you have to be able to say why there would be substantial damages. And yet when you're talking excuse me about the First Lady. It's a very different story can't go and say all what's a once in a lifetime opportunity. For her to make a lot of money and then they say well we we didn't mean. We regard to the White House wouldn't what did you mean of course that's what they meant when they made this argument so. It's it's a lawyer making. A Smart legal argument. And not thinking about. What would be the hit the political. And public relations Paul officially consistent than it would that wasn't perhaps even passed by the White House counsel I think this was just. A mistake. Meaning get legally sound. But politically and PR. A disaster this notion that you know oh she's got this great opportunity once in a lifetime to make all this money by by creating a whole these products it has to mean. As First Lady I don't understand how a community thing else another potential conflict of interest cropping an attitude turns out the Pentagon. Maybe renting space at trump tower here in New York aunt and there's something that. Almost no one is talking about and this is another a Mulligan minced claw right constitute in the constitution we talked about this before this idea foreign dignitaries princes etc. Come here and somehow state of trump hotel or something that could violate the constitution would almost no one's talking about. Is it there is also weak domestic reference to a mall humans when talking about the president's paid. It specifically says in another article in the constitution that that's all the presidents supposed to get the president should not get any other more human of any other kind. So I think they're gonna soon be arguments suggesting that the president is getting edition normal humans through. Tax breaks board this sort of rent or something else. It's going to be intersect that has just begun gums thanks very much.
This transcript has been automatically generated and may not be 100% accurate.