July 28, 2015

"After a painful scalp reduction surgery to remove a bald spot..."

When Donald raped Ivana, as told by The Daily Beast, relying on a book by a reporter named Harry Hurt III. The book, from 1993, relied on a deposition of Ivana in her divorce case against Trump.

At the time, Trump said: "It’s obviously false... It’s incorrect and done by a guy without much talent… He is a guy that is an unattractive guy who is a vindictive and jealous person." Now, there's this defense from Michael Cohen, special counsel at The Trump Organization:
“You’re talking about the frontrunner for the GOP, presidential candidate, as well as a private individual who never raped anybody. And, of course, understand that by the very definition, you can’t rape your spouse. It is true... You cannot rape your spouse. And there’s very clear case law.”
That's a head-slappingly stupid thing to say. There was a time, long ago, when marriage was understood as inconsistent with the idea that one partner could rape the other. But New York, the place of the incident, had abandoned that notion by 1989, when whatever happened happened.

ADDED: Cohen walks it back:

"As an attorney, husband and father there are many injustices that offend me but nothing more than charges of rape or racism. They hit me at my core. Rarely am I surprised by the press, but the gall of this particular reporter to make such a reprehensible and false allegation against Mr. Trump truly stunned me. In my moment of shock and anger, I made an inarticulate comment - which I do not believe -- and which I apologize for entirely," Cohen said in a statement to CNN.
That seems to relate not to the stupid legal opinion about marital rape but to something else Cohen said, which I'll now quote:
"I will make sure that you and I meet one day while we're in the courthouse. And I will take you for every penny you still don't have. And I will come after your Daily Beast and everybody else that you possibly know," Cohen said, according to the Daily Beast. "So I'm warning you, tread very f---ing lightly, because what I'm going to do to you is going to be f---ing disgusting. You understand me?"
Yikes. Also, Ivana Trump is coming to Donald's assistance:
"I have recently read some comments attributed to me from nearly 30 years ago at a time of very high tension during my divorce from Donald. The story is totally without merit. Donald and I are the best of friends and together have raised three children that we love and are very proud of. I have nothing but fondness for Donald and wish him the best of luck on his campaign. Incidentally, I think he would make an incredible president."
So she lied under oath in the deposition? Or did Hurt misreport what was in the deposition?

71 comments:

rhhardin said...

It's not stupid. The court went the wrong way on its being possible to rape your wife.

They got the principle wrong.

A rape is a crime against feminine modesty. In the case of marriage, that isn't an issue.

The correct charge is assault and batter, not rape.

Wm. Buckley made that argument in NR, around 1980 when the matter came up.

Coupe said...

"...there’s very clear case law."

Of course there is case law. None of it relevant today though :-)

Sounds like typical slithering to me.

Terry said...


"After a painful scalp reduction surgery to remove a bald spot..."
. . . "a book by a reporter named Harry Hurt III . . ."
Althouse is just toying with her readers at this point.

Brando said...

I love how Trump goes right to "this is an unattractive person" as if that has anything to do with anything. If a handsome man wrote that account, we should believe it?

I have no idea whether Trump raped Ivana back then--apparently she's agreed as a part of the divorce settlement to not comment on it, and no criminal charges were filed, so there's not much to work with here. But this is how Team Trump handles accusations against them? "The guy making the accusations is ugly" and "it's legally impossible to rape your wife"??? The fact that it was his lawyer who said the latter is jaw-dropping.

I'm sure the Democrats are running scared at the idea that this guy gets the GOP nomination.

Brando said...

"Of course there is case law. None of it relevant today though :-)"

Clearly this lawyer never learned how to Shephardize a case. Next he'll be saying that as compensation for his legal services he is entitled to two suckling pigs and a comely lass of virtue true.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

I'm not a Trump fan. As far as I can see his only selling point is that he is an experienced and successful executive. His job is to surround himself with competent people who can do what needs to be done.

If choosing Cohen is an example of Trump's executive ability, then no thanks.

trumpetdaddy said...

All responses by Trump or his spokesmen immediately go to the ad hominem against his critics. It is his standard play to assert some sort of inferiority complex as the motivation for any critic of his.

The psychological makeup this suggests about Trump is scary. People who spend their lives seeking external validation on a grand scale are dangerous, and history is replete with the horrors these people have visited upon others.

narciso said...

of course, they didn't bother ask Ivanka about the story, because they are descending to Gawker depths

Virgil Hilts said...

Maybe he'll make Cohen his attorney general so that he can become the second worst attorney general in history. This reminds me of all the shenanigans that the Obama team pulled when he was first running for office in Illinois. Divorce files (supposedly under seal) mysteriously leaked so as to smear Obama's opponent. Bitter spouses in messy divorces often say nasty and untrue things about the other, so while I do not like Trump I am not going to pay much attention to this.

Ann Althouse said...

"It's not stupid. The court went the wrong way on its being possible to rape your wife."

It was stupid to assert that "there’s very clear case law" for a proposition that is absolutely wrong. It's irrelevant that you think the court got it wrong. A lawyer made a strong, confident assertion about the legal doctrine in the case law and he was wrong. That was stupid. Normally, a lawyer would at least hedge a statement about the law that he was unsure of. This lawyer left himself completely vulnerable. That is very stupid for a lawyer. We're supposed to know exactly how to make the points we want to make without leaving that kind of opening.

YoungHegelian said...

Why is a deposition in a private matter like a divorce case being made public? Is this another Democratic repeat of the "outing" of the Ryan divorce case that got Obama elected senator?

If Ivana Trump had filed criminal charges against Donald Trump that's one thing. But, to pull up matters from a divorce case from family court? I'm sorry, that's simply not anyone else's business. I'm not a big fan of The Donald, but he, like the rest of us, deserves familial privacy.

Hagar said...

The main reason married people cannot be compelled to testify against each other in court is that not a word they say can be believed - whether from love or hate.

"Witness for the Proscution."

Hedy Lamarr (married 6 times) remarked that her best acting was done in divorce court (and profitable it was too).

And when couples are on the brink of divorce, emotions can indeed become violent. It happens every day between otherwise quite civilized people.

Coupe said...

Ivana has commented and admitted it was a lie that she was raped and has retracted the charge.

All is well, after the "lawyer" admits his argument was lacking substance.

mikee said...

Another day during which Hillary Clinton's lifetime of lies is not the primary subject of news discussions.

Saint Croix said...

What's incredibly stupid is for Ivana Trump to say that she was raped, "but not in the criminal sense."

Imagine this sort of stupidity in any other context!

"He murdered my brother. But not in the criminal sense."

I have no idea what the person speaking is saying. It's an insane thing to say.

When Donald raped Ivana

How about we reframe this comment?

"When Ivana made some shit up in the middle of her divorce."

Rape is a crime! It's a serious crime, and a serious accusation to make. When feminists do not take rape seriously, as a crime, they teach the rest of us to not take rape seriously.

Coupe said...

This particular drama is proof positive why States need to get out of the marriage business. It is enabling criminal conspiracies by building infrastructure at the public expense.

It is unconstitutional, as single-Americans are taxed for a public service they cannot participate in.

Hagar said...

You can indeed "rape your wife." Remember "Gone with the Wind"? It was a main development in the plot. But I think it would be difficult to scare up any women from anywhere ready to castigate either Rhett Butler or Clark Gable for the foul deed!

Chris N said...

Style often over substance, author of autobiographies and books designed for the purpose of further brand promotion, dependent on lower info voters and a pretty crude populism, leveraging his office and duties for further brand promotion and power...


Sound like anyone in high office right now?

I submit Trump's true competitor and doppelgänger isn't Sanders but Obama, and this is just proxy warring for all the sentiment locked up on all sides.

The less people have to fight over, the more often they fight.

retired said...

What do expect from Trump? That's the kind of bad stuff he does. The only pol with more bad things to hide is Hillary Clinton.

Bob Boyd said...

"A lawyer made a strong, confident assertion about the legal doctrine in the case law and he was wrong. That was stupid."

Its not just that he was wrong. His statement is unbelievably tone deaf. He comes across as saying, My client believes a man can force his wife to have sex whenever he wants, her feelings are irrelevant and there's nothing she can do about it.
Brilliant!

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Ivana: "I have recently read some comments attributed to me from nearly 30 years ago at a time of very high tension during my divorce from Donald. The story is totally without merit.

My poor robot brain! Well all know women don't lie about rape, but here's a woman now who claims to be saying her statements from 30 years ago (about being raped) weren't true. Maybe we can just assume she's saying that the reports she ever said that are false...but if that's the case why would she need to point out that it was a "time of very high tension?" It sure sounds like she's justifying the original claim (that she was raped) while at the same time saying it wasn't ever true.
Oh well, it's all bad news for Trump, so I'm sure that's all that really matters. Anyway falsely accusing people of rape is no big deal, right?

narciso said...

this tactic is an Axelrod specialty, recall Blair Hull and Jack Ryan's divorces leaked to the LA and Chicago papers, also there's the Tina Brown/Sid Blumenthal tie,

Michael K said...

"doppelgänger isn't Sanders but Obama"

Something to this. I don't like Trump either. Accusations in divorce should be immediately discounted.

Obama was not a qualified candidate but represented a yearning in the electorate. They were disappointed as anyone with common sense could have predicted. As Dr Johnson said about second marriages, "A triumph of hope over experience."

Here we are with Trump.

Coupe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
narciso said...

no Howard Dean, but they made him chairman,

Brando said...

"Another day during which Hillary Clinton's lifetime of lies is not the primary subject of news discussions."

Yep. For a campaign that needs to keep their own candidate under the radar and out of the news until the primaries are over, this is music to their ears.

SeanF said...

Brando: I love how Trump goes right to "this is an unattractive person" as if that has anything to do with anything. If a handsome man wrote that account, we should believe it?

"Unattractive" doesn't necessarily refer to physical appearance. That it was used in the same sentence with "vindictive and jealous" would seem to suggest he was talking about the guy's personality.

Tank said...



Bob Boyd said...
"A lawyer made a strong, confident assertion about the legal doctrine in the case law and he was wrong. That was stupid."

Its not just that he was wrong. His statement is unbelievably tone deaf.


Really. With friends like that ...

Skeptical Voter said...

Well a scalp reduction surgery might account for Trump being a pinhead.

But the fact that a fellow might have committed rape (albeit with someone he was married to) should hardly disqualify him from the Presidency. After all we elected a real rapist to that office twice--see Billy Jeff Clinton.

And before our host gets the vapors about whether Billy Jeff technically committed "real Rape Rape" in the Whoopi Goldberg sense--or as defined in most state Penal Codes, I'd point out that the definition of "rape" on college campuses has become distinctly elastic. Under those standards, William Jefferson Clinton is a serial "rapist". But as one prominent female journalist said at the time, she'd happily give Billy Jeff a blow job, because his position on abortion was right.

So reject Trump because he's a pinhead--and not because he's a quote rapist unquote.

MayBee said...

OH, America. Are we really going to pay attention to the stupid shit again this go-round?

Fen said...

But this is how Team Trump handles accusations against them?

Works for the Dems. Remember Clinton?

Bay Area Guy said...

Is there a reason AA is blogging about this nonsense?

Birkel said...

Remember when Planned Parenthood was selling aborted baby organs and all we could talk about were the allegations from 25 years ago made during a divorce hearing (when every word spoken or written is a known "fact")?

Good times. Good times.

traditionalguy said...

Cohen is good at delivering a message given the absurdity of the charge. Raping Ivana 26 years ago was not true then and is not true now....now go argue over the abstract idea of a husband having criminals sex with his lawful wife all you want. That highlights the desperate attempt to slander a winner at all cost on the thinnest of pretexts.

Good job, Attorney/spokesman Cohen.

John said...

I don't know what Ivana said these many years ago but what I took away from it was there was an instance where she did not want sex and he did.

She told him no, he insisted and she finally figured the Hell with it, let's get it over with so I can get some sleep.

I don't get any connotation of forcible rape from what I am reading.

Of course our definition of rape these days has gotten so bastardized that if a woman decides 3 months after consensual sex that "I probably shouldn't have done that." she can cry rape.

I think if there had been actual rape, or Ivana had felt like there was actual rape, we would have heard from her before.

I call bulshit on "rape".

the lawyer seems pretty stupid, though.

John Henry

John said...

Remember 10 days ago how everyone claimed that Trump's comments about McCain would submarine his polls?

Yeah, how's that working out for y'all?

I suspect that this will not hurt him either. I think most people will recognize it for what it is, desperation born of fear.

trump has spent $93,000 on his campaign so far and probably gotten more press than all other candidates of both parties combined.

that his polls do so well is just more evidence that all publicity is good, that there is no such thing as bad publicity.

John Henry

traditionalguy said...

You know Trump is winning big when the media has to start throwing in suicide bombers as interviewers.

At least he did not rape a Mexican like Jeb the Wealthy Snake visiting Mexico City did and then have to marry her.

I cannot prove that about young Mr Bush...but when did that ever stop a Dem accuser from throwing out rumors as fact. You cannot prove a negative. Gotcha!

Anonymous said...

This is one of those stories where it's clear right from the beginning it's not a story at all.

So what's left? Well, let's talk about the response to the story, because the story in and of itself isn't going anywhere.

Wilbur said...

He should have droned repeatedly "There is no controlling legal precedent".

Saint Croix said...

Donald held back Ivana’s arms and began to pull out fistfuls of hair from her scalp, as if to mirror the pain he felt from his own operation. He tore off her clothes and unzipped his pants.

“Then he jams his penis inside her for the first time in more than sixteen months. Ivana is terrified… It is a violent assault,” Hurt writes. “According to versions she repeats to some of her closest confidantes, ‘he raped me.’


What makes this seem true to me is the detail about the hair. I believe that Donald Trump tried to have hair transplant surgery, and when it backfired he blamed his wife and started pulling out her hair. It seems totally in character for him to act this way.

Four years after the event, Ivana is seeking to downplay the assault.

“During a deposition given by me in connection with my matrimonial case, I stated that my husband had raped me,” the Ivana Trump statement said. “[O]n one occasion during 1989, Mr. Trump and I had marital relations in which he behaved very differently toward me than he had during our marriage. As a woman, I felt violated, as the love and tenderness, which he normally exhibited towards me, was absent. I referred to this as a ‘rape,’ but I do not want my words to be interpreted in a literal or criminal sense.”

I can understand a person not wanting to file criminal charges in a family matter. You're willing to forgive them, even for a violent assault. I think that's what is going on here.

Brando said...

"Works for the Dems. Remember Clinton?"

Clinton would have handled this differently. First, he would have said clearly Ivana was lying and was put up to it by a cabal of right wingers who offered her money. Second, he would have stated that he didn't do anything that any other married man ever did. Third, he would have pointed out this was old news and was already hashed out ad nauseum. Fourth, he'd have feminists pointing out that it's not really "rape rape" because reasons.

traditionalguy said...

The tactic is to make Trump seem a taboo among evangelicals by sex allegations.

It will not work. Evangelicals understand a false accusation when they see one because as outspoken Protestants they are used to seeing them all of the time.

Evangelicals have not been afraid of slanders since the Bourbon King revoked the Edict of Nantes and drove out a million Huguenots. It's all too familiar to us.

Bob Boyd said...

"So she lied under oath in the deposition?"

No, what happened was they had drinks and Donald initiated sex.
Ivana was just a woman ahead of her time.

Roughcoat said...

Jack's Smirking Revenge is smirking at this post.

John said...

Donald held back Ivana’s arms and began to pull out fistfuls of hair from her scalp, as if to mirror the pain he felt from his own operation. He tore off her clothes and unzipped his pants.

“Then he jams his penis inside her for the first time in more than sixteen months. Ivana is terrified… It is a violent assault,” Hurt writes. “According to versions she repeats to some of her closest confidantes, ‘he raped me.’

This is from the book? When I read it first, I thought it was Lazlo having fun.

If true, then I recant what I said about it not sounding like rape.

I still think it sounds like bullshit.

John Henry

rhhardin said...

It was stupid to assert that "there’s very clear case law" for a proposition that is absolutely wrong. It's irrelevant that you think the court got it wrong. A lawyer made a strong, confident assertion about the legal doctrine in the case law and he was wrong. That was stupid. Normally, a lawyer would at least hedge a statement about the law that he was unsure of. This lawyer left himself completely vulnerable. That is very stupid for a lawyer. We're supposed to know exactly how to make the points we want to make without leaving that kind of opening.

There probably is case law supporting him. It only went the other way around 1980.

As for stupid lawyers, Epstein regularly says what's wrong with old SCOTUS decisions, and is no dummy. It aids in understanding the law if you also know what's wrongly decided and what isn't. Otherwise it's just a mess.

Trump's guy isn't doing very good rhetoric but it's not because of what lawyers think of it. Never attack, just elaborate your position.

rhhardin said...

It went the other way around 1980 not because women were no longer considered property but because the court got confused about how feminine modesty is to be kept in the legal system without mentioning it.

Anonymous said...

Trump is in the lead, so it is time to trash him....If you want to read about rape...have at it...http://1984arkansasmotheroftheyear.blogspot.com/2013/08/the-clintons-greatest-shame-chelsea-is.html

Tim said...

Sealed divorce records? Who would ever try to open those?

rhhardin said...

Donald held back Ivana’s arms and began to pull out fistfuls of hair from her scalp, as if to mirror the pain he felt from his own operation. He tore off her clothes and unzipped his pants.

If it's a bodice ripper, it's not until around page 150 that he unfurls his manhood anyway.

Drago said...

You drag a half a billion dollars thru the upper east side and you never know what you're gonna find.

Curious George said...

He didn't even tell Ivana that she "better put some ice on that."

What an asshole.

Levi Starks said...

Reading this makes me want to ask a question, with the context of marriage is it possible for a wife to rape her husband?

Big Mike said...

So [Ivana Trump] lied under oath in the deposition?

If she did, it was just a little lie about sex, same as Bill Clinton's lying under oath about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky. No big deal, apparently.

BTW, Althouse, please tell us this Michael Cohen didn't graduate from Wisconsin Law.

n.n said...

It sounds like Ivana has reestablished normal relations with her ex-husband.

Birkel:

Planned Parenthood et al are serial killers. The latest revelation of their sales of human tissue and organs from viable human babies condemned to death is suppressed or downplayed in order to preserve people's sanity. The cognitive dissonance caused by pro-choice doctrine is literally deafening.

damikesc said...

Another day during which Hillary Clinton's lifetime of lies is not the primary subject of news discussions.

That 23 year streak is still going strong.

n.n said...

Levi Starks:

Outside of marriage, is it possible for a woman to rape a man, a boy? Liberal society seems to think it is not possible.

Sebastian said...

Clown candidate has clown layer. This is news?

Hair detail in story rings true.

This is a "candidate" who cares more about his hair than your future.

Anonymous said...

What's interesting about this story is Trump actually surrounds himself with really smart people. Unlike say, Obama, who is surrounded by dopes and imbeciles, Trump apparently has one redeeming quality, or maybe it's one strength. He knows how to pick strong people to work for him.

Even his children reflect this. His daughter is one of the most beautiful women I've ever seen. She could have easily been a Paris Hilton or a Kim Kardashian. She graduated Cum Laude from the Wharton School of Business. Adding to the conspiracy theory that Trump is just running to give Hillary! the job, Ivanka and Chelsea are good friends, or so I've seen reported.

His older sons are also well put together. You can argue that it's his money that makes them a success, but what they aren't is also important. And they aren't drug addicts, embarrassments to the family, idiots in nice clothes, etc. His oldest boy also graduated from the Wharton School with a BS. He also has a big family, with the same woman (Married a decade I think) and five kids. This is reality star, drug addict, loser behavior. This is behavior of a successful son.

One wonders if Donald Trump is such a clown, how did his children turn out so well?

The only way I see this hurting Trump is it looks like he didn't pick the best lawyer, which attacks one of his strengths, mentioned above. Trump surrounds himself with good people.

Anonymous said...

Should read, "This isn't reality star, drug addict, loser behavior."

damikesc said...

This is a "candidate" who cares more about his hair than your future.

What does Hillary care about?

Anything at all?

Hagar said...

A high stone wall and a moat around Clinton, Inc. and its money vault.

William said...

Neither Trump, nor his ex- wife, nor his lawyer seem particularly sympathetic, but, on their worst day, they're better people than this journalist.........This is a really scummy charge, and people apparently believe it. Which is worse: to be erroneously called a rapist or to provide an erroneous definition of rape?

n.n said...

William:

Defining rape down. From rape-rape to rape. We are past the point of no return.

virgil xenophon said...

@John Henry/


Why do you no longer post under "ironrails ironweights?"

Just askin'...

Robert Cook said...

"It's not stupid. The court went the wrong way on its being possible to rape your wife.

"They got the principle wrong.

"A rape is a crime against feminine modesty. In the case of marriage, that isn't an issue."


WHAT THE FUCKING FUCK?!

"The correct charge is assault and batter, not rape.

"Wm. Buckley made that argument in NR, around 1980 when the matter came up."


Ah, the crypto-Nazi made that argument. This makes it irrefutably settled.

Robert Cook said...

"One wonders if Donald Trump is such a clown, how did his children turn out so well?"

Ivana?

Robert Cook said...

"Donald held back Ivana’s arms and began to pull out fistfuls of hair from her scalp, as if to mirror the pain he felt from his own operation. He tore off her clothes and unzipped his pants.

"Then he jams his penis inside her for the first time in more than sixteen months. Ivana is terrified… It is a violent assault...According to versions she repeats to some of her closest confidantes, ‘he raped me.’"



Why...it sounds like something from one of Ayn Rand's gothic romance novels!

Sammy Finkelman said...

Brando said... 7/28/15, 10:29 AM

But this is how Team Trump handles accusations against them? "The guy making the accusations is ugly"

Yes. That's exactly how Donald Trump handles accusations against himself, or criticisms.

By making counter-accusations.

It doesn't matter if the counter-accusation is the same thing or something totally different.

It doesn't seem to matter much if the counter-accusation is true or false, just that this other accusation or criticism was made by somebody else in the past, and the other person didn't sue.

and "it's legally impossible to rape your wife"??? The fact that it was his lawyer who said the latter is jaw-dropping.

He's kind of like the Clinton lawyers here. The legal defense may not be quite accurate, but there is some basis for it, or was at one time, and there are legal decisions that you can cite.

Sammy Finkelman said...

The problem for Trump's lawyer, Michael Cohen, could be, that marital rape law is too well known. That's where he's out of touch.

Drago said...

Robert Cook: "Why...it sounds like something from one of Ayn Rand's gothic romance novels!"

Or something so crazy only a notable conspiracy theorist like yourself could fall for it!