One woman I spoke with, Marissa Ross, who has written about sexual assault and harassment in the wine industry, explained her quite typical reaction to the notorious “Access Hollywood” videotape that surfaced during the 2016 presidential campaign, in which Mr. Trump brags: “When you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything,” including “grab” women’s genitals. When she heard the tape, Ms. Ross told me, “I didn’t just hear Donald Trump. I heard every man that’s ever hurt me. It was those boys in high school, it was my ex-boyfriend, it was all those men. For me, and I imagine for many other survivors, it was not just hearing Trump. It was everyone that violated me.”...
This column was published just before Carroll began her testimony at trial, so Tuerkheimer is anticipating how Trump's lawyers will undermine her credibility:
The defense may insist that she welcomed the bantering exchange that led the two to the dressing room, and Ms. Carroll’s recollection in her complaint that she “kept laughing” after the incident may be used to support this consensual version of events. As an alternative, the defense might argue that the entire encounter was invented, noting that Ms. Carroll opted not to report the alleged rape to the police at the time or to seek medical attention. All this can be used against her as evidence she’s lying....
Tuerkheimer observes that this case is important because everyone is watching it and seeing how the accuser is treated and how the defense works and because "Mr. Trump has embraced the role of avenger on behalf of men accused of sexual misconduct":
In 2016, responding to the allegations of sexual misconduct against him, Mr. Trump asserted that “every woman lied when they came forward to hurt my campaign” and added, “If they can fight somebody like me, who has unlimited resources to fight back, just look at what they can do to you.”.
पोस्ट्स
७४ टिप्पण्या:
It was a girl who wrote about the "zipless fuck," IIRC.
"It was everyone that violated me.”
Horseshit. Trump may or may not have 'violated' someone. We don't know. But it wasn't with his words.
His point was, if a man is rich and/or famous enough? You insecure, money-grubbing sluts will let him grab you in the hoo-hah because it gets you to where you want to go.
Don't blame Trump - or men, in general - because you're using that hoo-hah to get an angle.
I am so, so sick of this victim shit.
The presumption here is a sort of standard “she said - he said” question.
But this case is different. A civil case, in which Trump isn’t even testifying. Well, he did testify in a deposition and it was a disaster. For his own part, Trump’s got nothing.
So (and I am not suggesting that Althouse missed this; I think she got it) this case is actually a “she said versus what the defense attorney asks” kind of case. The defense is trying to carry a burden of proof (“preponderance of the evidence”) via the plaintiff herself.
I think it is a loser of a case and a losing strategy.
But — if I can interject it here — I personally don’t see it as the most important jury verdict next week. I think the Proud Boys insurrection trial is a bigger deal. But that’s just me. I don’t want to see the J6 defendants get any sort of victory. Because the next big J6 insurrection indictment will be even bigger.
To too many women, Mr. Trump has come to represent male sexual entitlement.
There. I fixed it for Deborah Tuerkheimer.
One woman I spoke with, Marissa Ross, who has written about sexual assault and harassment in the wine industry, explained her quite typical reaction to the notorious “Access Hollywood” videotape that surfaced during the 2016 presidential campaign, in which Mr. Trump brags: “When you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything,” including “grab” women’s genitals. When she heard the tape, Ms. Ross told me, “I didn’t just hear Donald Trump. I heard every man that’s ever hurt me. It was those boys in high school”
Women like Marissa Ross are too stupid to parse a simple declarative sentence in the English language. Trump never says that he actually did grab any woman by her genitals. He is clearly saying that when a man is rich and famous some gold-digging women will effectively prostitute themselves to be with that guy. Perfectly true and even in controversial, as most male movie stars and professional athletes can attest. And if Marissa Ross disrespected herself enough in high school to let guys grope her and push her into sexual situations that she regrets decades later (or even at the time), that’s scarcely Donald Trump’s fault, isn’t it?
Hell, having been a high school athlete a mere 60 years ago, I will assure Madam Professor that treating a date with respect was a pretty certain way to not get a second date with that girl.
As an alternative, the defense might argue that the entire encounter was invented, noting that Ms. Carroll opted not to report the alleged rape to the police at the time or to seek medical attention. All this can be used against her as evidence she’s lying....
Of course she’s lying. How stupid can women get? She alleges that she had non consensual sex with Donald Trump in a crowded New York department store, she does not allege that he threatened her with a weapon, and yet she did not scream for help. Why not?
Mr. Trump has embraced the role of avenger on behalf of men accused of sexual misconduct"
And it’s way past time someone did.
What other crimes can be prosecuted strictly on the basis of a statement unsupported by witnesses, forensics or any other evidence whatsoever? I'm sure the statement might lead to an investigation but if the investigation turns up absolutely nothing, does it go to trial?
I kid, I kid.
After the world-turned-upside-down national howling over the Duke lax hoax and the UVa hoax, a call for actual evidence is "rape denial" and almost as evil as the actual crime itself.
What other crimes can be prosecuted strictly on the basis of a statement unsupported by witnesses, forensics or any other evidence whatsoever? I'm sure the statement might lead to an investigation but if the investigation turns up absolutely nothing, does it go to trial?
I kid, I kid.
After the world-turned-upside-down national howling over the Duke lax hoax and the UVa hoax, a call for actual evidence is "rape denial" and almost as evil as the actual crime itself.
Women have a serious fantasy life. If there's no police report at the time, it didn't happen.
That at least cuts off mind-changing and slow-growing fantasies.
Delusional disorder is a difficult-to-treat clinical condition with health needs that are often undertreated. Although individuals with delusional disorder may be high functioning in daily life, they suffer from serious health complaints that may be sex-specific. The main aim of this narrative review is to address these sex-specific health needs and to find ways of integrating their management into service programs. Age is an important issue. Delusional disorder most often first occurs in middle to late adult life, a time that corresponds to menopause in women, and menopausal age correlates with increased development of both somatic and psychological health problems in women. It is associated with a rise in the prevalence of depression and a worsening of prior psychotic symptoms. Importantly, women with delusional disorder show low compliance rates with both psychiatric treatment and with medical/surgical referrals. Intervention at the patient, provider, and systems levels are needed to address these ongoing problems.
Or you can sue somebody and let the court settle it.
Some women are believable and some are not. E. Jean is not. She waited decades to file the lawsuit. A political operative encouraged her to do it. The facts are implausible.
When any person - male, female or nonbinary- lodges a criminal complaint against another person, the credibility of the accuser is fair game. It’s in the Constitution. It’s called the Confrontation Clause. A person’s liberty is at stake!
Federal judge Lyle Strom told Creighton law students that every trial is about credibility. He tried or presided over thousands of cases. I had one or two in front of him and won both.
Everyone is watching this because Carroll is CRAZY without the HOT. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pInk1rV2VEg
SHE is WHY women are not believed. That and because they FAIL TO DEMUR when it happens.
I don't understand why his comments, made in private, triggered such an outpouring of hate...is it because what he said is often true?
Now do Bill Clinton, JFK, Biden and all the Congress critters that paid off sexual harassment claims with a taxpayer funded slush fund. With Progressives, they think EVERYTHING begins and ends with Trump.
The accuser lied. She SCHEMED this scam as "her patriotic duty". Progressives are nuts, and this lady is at the top of the nut tree.
But the state run media is running with this lie anyways, because the ignorance of the American public will let the left do whatever they want to ruin people
https://www.revolver.news/2023/04/trial-updates-apparently-everybody-in-new-york-raped-e-jean-carroll-scheme-email-she-called-black-husband-ape/
you know..
If i was raped, and So Harmed by it; that i couldn't EVER have sex again...
I'd think that i'd remember what f*cking year it happened in. Just saying
that is to say: what if the accuser, IS the abuser?
Accusers are often doubted, but always believed when it comes to accusing a Republican. At least among a sizeable fraction of people who think they have any remaining credibility with the American public.
"It was those boys in high school, it was my ex-boyfriend, it was all those men."
Lady, has it ever occurred to you that you have been attracted to too many Bad Boys all your life? Yes, we know, it's not your fault. It's evolutionary. But, yeah, that's a big part of the problem for a lot of women.
No lawsuits I hope will fail tag…
I don’t think I’ll ever be able to support this concept of criminal conviction of an innocent man because of a woman’s feelings about all men. It feels too ripe for abuse…
Two to Tango? Call the WAAAAMBULANCE!
Two to Tango? Call the WAAAAMBULANCE!
Of all the allegations of sexual abuse against Trump, the one that rings most true to me is that of Jill Harth. She and her romantic partner at the time were pursuing a business possibility with Trump. I believe it had to do with his beauty pageant business, and they claimed to be able to help with marketing or something. As I recall, they met with him more than once, strictly on business. Trump pretty consistently asked to have some time alone with Jill, and hit on her. When I look it up now, she says there was one time when he was groping her in one room (Ivanka's bedroom? Business meetings in the family home?) while her partner was still in another room, waiting to continue with a meeting. Jill and partner sued, but reached some kind of settlement. Maybe not an NDA requiring silence; maybe in fact a contract along the lines they were seeking.
Carroll by comparison is too much like Christine Blasey Ford; the more you think about it, the less sense it makes.
" For me, and I imagine ". That appears to be the only justification for claiming many women feel this way. Trump's comment that if they can do this to me, think what they can do to you has nothing to do with defending accused rapists and the law professor author knows it. It has to do with the years of lawfare and false accusations he has had to endure since announcing his first run for president. But what the heck, if the facts can be twisted into something that supports your argument, go for it. After all, that's what every ambulance chaser in the country does for a living and they had to learn it somewhere. You say that Trump's lawyers will try to undermine Carroll's credibility. I think that assumes facts not in evidence (i.e. that she has any credibility to begin with). This woman is about as believable as Christine Blasey Ford, and just like the Kavanaugh/Ford imbroglio it stinks of a set up for purely political ends.
"Ms. Ross told me, “I didn’t just hear Donald Trump. I heard every man that’s ever hurt me. It was those boys in high school, it was my ex-boyfriend, it was all those men. For me, and I imagine for many other survivors, it was not just hearing Trump. It was everyone that violated me.”..."
So Ms. Ross is basically saying Trump should pay for her and other women's bad choices in men. C. Jean is just not credible. Her accusations against Trump are about as believable as those by Blasey-Ford against Kavanaugh. Unfortunately, the jurors will probably have the same attitude and convict Trump just because the left and the media have brain-washed them to believe Trump is Hitler, Mao, H. Weinstein, and Satan rolled into one.
Does Trump rely entirely on the assertion that there was no sexual encounter at all, or is he arguing in the alternative that if it happened, it was consensual?
Read Trump’s deposition here: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/read-part-of-trumps-deposition-in-the-e-jean-carrol-libel-lawsuit
Story of O by Anne DesClos (as Pauline reage)
50 shades of Grey by Erika Mitchell (as el James)
The Beauty trilogy by Anne Rice
9 1/2 weeks novel and movie by women
Thousands of "romance novels" a/k/a bodice rippers
Most BDSM books and many movies
Note any common threads?
I'll point out 2
By women largely for women
Graphic coerced* kinky sex often involving whips and paddles.
Since it is often depicted as consensual "coerced" may not be strictly correct but I could not think of a better word. Perhaps fantasy of coercion?
As Jean Carroll said I think most people think of rape as being sexy... think of the fantasies'
John Henry
When she heard the tape, Ms. Ross told me, “I didn’t just hear Donald Trump. I heard every man that’s ever hurt me. It was those boys in high school, it was my ex-boyfriend, it was all those men. For me, and I imagine for many other survivors, it was not just hearing Trump. It was everyone that violated me.”...
And now you understand Christine Ford, Anita Hill, Althouse and the vast majority of women across the country. A chance to get revenge against all men and get lauded by the Left at the same time. What the bad man said made me feel bad, so he must be guilty.
And of course, no woman has ever hurt them, just men. And men are definitely never hurt by women.
Repeal the 19th.
or they could ask her about her rape fantasies.
Maybe bring in .........The Mole.
This woman is about as believable as Christine Blasey Ford, and just like the Kavanaugh/Ford imbroglio it stinks of a set up for purely political ends
Althouse still believes and supports CBF.
Dave Begley said...
Some women are believable and some are not. E. Jean is not. She waited decades to file the lawsuit. A political operative encouraged her to do it. The facts are implausible.
...
Uhhh Dave; I know this has been a bad week for you. But she didn't wait "decades" to sue for a Trump defamatory statements that were made while Trump was president, and shortly after Trump left office. The count for civil battery was enabled by a specific NY statute passed in 2022.
rehajm said...
No lawsuits I hope will fail tag…
I don’t think I’ll ever be able to support this concept of criminal conviction of an innocent man because of a woman’s feelings about all men. It feels too ripe for abuse…
****
Richard said...
What other crimes can be prosecuted strictly on the basis of a statement unsupported by witnesses, forensics or any other evidence whatsoever? I'm sure the statement might lead to an investigation but if the investigation turns up absolutely nothing, does it go to trial?
****
The current trial is not a criminal trial. There is a count for "battery," but it is civil battery.
RBE said...
I don't understand why his comments, made in private, triggered such an outpouring of hate...is it because what he said is often true?
Trump's defamatory statements as alleged in the lawsuit now at trial were published on Trump's "Truth Social," as well as in formal press releases from Trump.
Now do Bill Clinton.
I assume that Tara Reade could not be reached for comment, but according to Politico, Reade is just a grifter.
But, this is what you get with Donald Trump, or any Republican, really.
Maybe Althouse would advise Trump (as she did Brett Kavanaugh) to confess and ask for forgiveness.
Trump’s deposition is restricted to the assertion that nothing at all happened:
“She’s accusing me of rape, a woman that I have no idea who she is. It came out of the blue. She’s accusing me of raping her, the worst thing you can do, the worst charge. And you know it’s not true too. You’re a political operative also. You’re a disgrace. But she’s accusing me and so are you of rape, and it never took place.”
His lawyer could still argue that the story as told by Carroll does not establish that if it happened, it was nonconsensual.
Ann Althouse said...
Does Trump rely entirely on the assertion that there was no sexual encounter at all, or is he arguing in the alternative that if it happened, it was consensual?
Trump's published statements were that he had never met Ms. Carroll. (Admitted into evidence, of course, is at least one photo of Trump in a conversation with Ms. Carroll, taken outside an NBC-sponsored party in the 1980's. The photo where in his deposition Trump infamously mistook E. Jean Carroll for his second wife Marla Maples.)
Judge Kaplan himself did a nice summary of the Carroll I and Carroll II cases in one of his memorandum opinions which you can read HERE.
Does anyone doubt that Deborah Tuerkheimer and Marissa Ross were among those willing to fellate President Clinton after he was accused?
Neither here nor there: Deborah Tuerkheimer's father, Frank, was a UW Law prof (and continues to hold Emeritus status, https://secure.law.wisc.edu/profiles/fmtuerkh@wisc.edu). Excellent teacher (Evidence) as I recall, and a well-respected federal prosecutor.
When it comes to trials, the default position is to doubt everyone. The expectation is the witnesses will produce credibility through their testimony and evidence. If you are going to assume someone is telling the truth (or not), then why bother with the trial?
In this particular case, the accusation has so many red flags that it is difficult to take seriously without corroborating evidence, which at the moment does not appear to exist.
The idea that we should always believe an entire class of accusers is not the position of a serious person. It is the position of a fanatic.
>"Ms. Ross told me, “I didn’t just hear Donald Trump. I heard every man that’s ever hurt me. It was those boys in high school, it was my ex-boyfriend, it was all those men. For me, and I imagine for many other survivors, it was not just hearing Trump. It was everyone that violated me.”..."<
Go on, don't be shy - tell us exactly what these bizarrely multiple violations of you comprised. (Hint: There is a reason that she didn't.)
From the linked article by Marissa Ross:
>Within 20 minutes of posting, I had messages from four people relaying personal stories of sexual harassment involving Cailan—and over the next two weeks, dozens of other assault survivors contacted me.<
Note how in the course of *one* sentence, "sexual harassment" becomes "assault," and the people who were harassed become "survivors." What complete bullshit!
>But if I hadn’t been consistently vocal, Cailan’s survivors—and the many others who’ve contacted me over the years—may not have felt safe or comfortable reaching out to tell their stories. When you’re abused, whether verbally, physically, or emotionally, it’s common to blame yourself, to feel humiliated and alone. But we’re not alone, and the only way to know that is to talk about it.<
Now the "survivors" have "survived" abuse - verbal, physical, and emotional. Such brave "survivors" of these horrors! (Disclaimer, physical sexual assault, when genuine, is of course inexcusable and criminal. However, earlier in Ross' article these same "survivors" of "assault" by men clearly described being merely *seduced*.)
Notwithstanding the fact that few of the women referenced in these two articles seem to have been actually raped or otherwise sexually assaulted (they were abused and humiliated, remember?), please, enough with the "rape *survivor*/sexual assault *survivor*" hogwash. Survivors survive car crashes and house fires and cancer and Holocausts. Puhleeze, stop demeaning them with this "rape *survivor*" nonsense. Hundreds of millions of people "survive" sexual intercourse every day. Mercifully relatively few of them through the experience of rape. For those, the term "rape victim" conveys the pertinent information quite handily.
Ah, but some of them were beaten or otherwise injured in the process, so that makes them survivors. That's like saying that I'm a nasal fracture survivor because I "survived" that especially nasty fight I was in back in Junior High. My body was terribly violated -- resulting in permanent damage that ultimately required surgical repair. So I, like a "rape survivor", am a survivor too? It's a cool mantle and I want to use it. Wait what? I can't because I merely got my nose violently mutilated rather than just getting my cooch poked?! I see...
OT;
Katie Porter - complete asshole
I think the thing that scares the crap out of me is how easy it is to make the charge and how hard it is to defend.
Donald Trump is known to keep meticulous records of where he is and what he is doing. If Carroll said "It was June 7, 1993 at about 2:30" Trump could probably document that he was having lunch with business associate. Or In California, Or playing golf or some such.
But if Caroll will not, because she can't or just wont, say when this happened, how can he defend himself? This is evil.
I am very skeptical of the story. He just grabs an unknown woman and takes here into the dressing rooms and nobody notices? Even if consensual sex had occurred, there would be some noise and baning around and someone would have notices. Much more so for non-consensual sex.
And nobody at Bloomies questioned a man, even so famous a man as Donal Trump in the ladies dressing rooms?
This whole thing is bullshit and political persecution. Just one more example of the fascism that has crept into our daily lives.
Fascism ins the true, Mussolini, definition. Not the Orwellian def of "Something I don't like"
We need to start calling this crap out for what it is.
John Henry
Trump’s deposition is restricted to the assertion that nothing at all happened:
“She’s accusing me of rape, a woman that I have no idea who she is. It came out of the blue. She’s accusing me of raping her, the worst thing you can do, the worst charge. And you know it’s not true too. You’re a political operative also. You’re a disgrace. But she’s accusing me and so are you of rape, and it never took place.”
I don't read this as saying that nothing at all happened - if there was consensual activity, it would be correct to assert that "it's not true" and "it [the alleged rape] never took place."
Why, oh why, should people (men) take rapper seriously, when golddigging whores repeatedly make it a punchline?
That Quote by Trump (Ann 9:09) - holy crap - the man is almost illiterate.
that said - I doubt he raped anyone.
Carroll is 95% certain to be lying flat out about being raped by Donald Trump. You have to seriously stupid to not understand this just based on the evidence given in the actual case. Think about it- you get raped by Donald Trump, one of the most famous men in the world at the time, and you can't even remember what year it was? Almost anyone would remember not just the year, but the season, the month, and probably the day it happened. Christine Blasey-Ford did the same thing, and the reason is pretty obvious- it makes it impossible for the accused to offer an alibi, and a person like Trump would have quite probably been able to offer a detailed account of his where-abouts from contemporary physical records.
The jury is sure to find for Carroll- the trial is a legal sham. Trump might win on appeal if he can get into the federal court system, but he will lose all appeals in the New State courts, I am certain.
Donald Trump: You know and—
Unidentified voice: She used to be great. She’s still very beautiful.
Trump: I moved on her actually. You know she was down on Palm Beach. I moved on her and I failed. I’ll admit it. I did try and fuck her. She was married.
Unidentified voice: That’s huge news there.
Trump: No, no. Nancy. No this was— And I moved on her very heavily. In fact, I took her out furniture shopping. She wanted to get some furniture. I said, ‘I’ll show you where they have some nice furniture.’ I took her out furniture– I moved on her like a bitch, but I couldn’t get there. And she was married. Then all of a sudden I see her, she’s now got the big phony tits and everything. She’s totally changed her look.
Bush: Sheesh, your girl’s hot as shit. In the purple.
Trump: Whoa!
Bush: Yes. Yes, the Donald has scored!
Trump: Whoa!
Bush: Whoa, my man!
Unidentified voice: Wait, wait you’ve got to look at me when you get out and be like ... will you give me the thumbs up? You’ve got to put the thumbs up.
Trump: Look at you. You are a pussy.
Unidentified voice: You’ve got to get the thumbs up. You can’t be too happy, man.
Trump: Alright, you and I will walk down.
Trump: Maybe it’s a different one.
Bush: It better not be the publicist. No, it’s her. It’s her.
Trump: Yeah, that’s her, with the gold. I’ve got to use some Tic Tacs, just in case I start kissing her. You know I’m automatically attracted to beautiful — I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. I just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything.
Unidentified voice: Whatever you want.
Trump: Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything.
Unidentified voice: Yeah those legs, all I can see is the legs.
Trump: Oh, it looks good.
Unidentified voice: Come on, shorty.
Trump: Oh, nice legs, huh?
Bush: Oof, get out of the way, honey. Oh, that’s good legs. Go ahead.
Trump: It’s always good if you don’t fall out of the bus. Like Ford. Gerald Ford, remember?
Bush: Down below. Pull the handle.
Trump: Hello. How are you? Hi.
Arianne Zucker: Hi Mr. Trump. How are you? Pleasure to meet you.
Trump: Nice seeing you. Terrific, terrific. You know Billy Bush?
Bush: Hello, nice to see you. How are you doing, Arianne?
Zucker: I’m doing very well, thank you. [To Trump] Are you ready to be a soap star?
rump: We’re ready, let’s go. Make me a soap star.
Bush: How about a little hug for the Donald? He just got off the bus.
Zucker: Would you like a little hug, darling?
Trump: Okay, absolutely. Melania said this was okay.
Bush: How about a little hug for the Bushy? I just got off the bus. There we go. Excellent. Well, you’ve got a nice co-star here.
Zucker: Yes. Absolutely.
Trump: Good. After you. Come on, Billy. Don’t be shy.
Bush: As soon as a beautiful woman shows up, he just, he takes off on me. This always happens.
Trump: Get over here Billy.
Zucker: I’m sorry, come here.
Bush: Let the little guy in here, come on.
Zucker: Yeah, let the little guy in. How you feel now? Better?
Bush: It’s hard to walk next to a guy like this.
Zucker: I should actually be in the middle.
Bush: Yeah, you get in the middle. There we go.
Trump: Good, that’s better.
Zucker: This is much better. This is—
Trump: That’s better.
Bush: Now, if you had to choose, honestly, between one of us: me or the Donald? Who would it be?
Trump: I don’t know, that’s tough competition.
Zucker: That’s some pressure right there.
Bush: Seriously, you had to take one of us as a date.
Zucker: I have to take the 5th on that one.
Bush: Really?
Zucker: Yup. I’ll take both.
Trump: Which way?
Zucker: Make a right. Here we go. [inaudible]
Bush: Here he goes. I’m going to leave you here. Give me my microphone.
Trump: Okay okay. Oh, you’re finished?
Bush: You’re my man. Yeah.
Trump: Oh good.
Bush: I’m going to go do our show.
Zucker: Oh, you want to reset? Okay
Yeah this fella trump would never do THAT to E Jean Carroll right,, WAKE UP Stormy Daniels,and so many others hes even paying one off. C'mon man Yeah I did try to fuck her ,they let you just grab their pussy when your a star!
I feel sad for her but it sounds like she was one of those girls who wouldn't say "no" to a boy/man for fear of not being part of the "cool" kids or group.
That doesn't even begin to address the problems with her credibility.
On CNN she told Anderson Cooper she refused to consider it a rape since that'd diminish the pain of actual rape victims: "I write an advice column for 25 years and women write to me with these devastating stories and they have been violently, you know, disposed of by men. And I just -- I feel too much respect for their suffering.
I didn't suffer, Anderson. I did not suffer. I didn't lose my job. I wasn't beaten."
That was in 2019, so up to then she claims she didn't suffer. Now, of course, her lawsuit is based on what she says was two and a half decades of intense suffering that continues to this day.
Speaking of it being 25 years ago: when exactly did the attack happen? Her earlier version of the story was that she wasn't sure--it was either 1995 or 1996. She's apparently decided now it was some time in 1996, so that's good. The two friends in whom she confided the attack happened also couldn't be sure of when she told them, but they're certain it was shortly after it happened (whenever that was).
Her story now is that the #MeToo stuff, especially seeing Harvey Weinstein publicly accused, convinced her it was important to finally tell her story about Trump. She didn't think it was important in 2015-16 even when other women were accusing Trump and she was terrified at the prospect of him getting elected, of course. The Weinstein stuff happened in 2017 and she first made her accusation public...a full two years later, when she was promoting her book. When she published that book many people told her she should sue Trump for denying the attack, but she refused until now, after apparently getting bankrolled by millionaire and Democrat donor Reid Hoffman.
Carroll has made some money off the topic of sexual assault before--in 2019 before her book was published she gave "The Most Hideous Men in NYC Walking Tour" where she went to different spots and talked about Bill Cosby, Weinstein, Trump, and others. She started that tour outside Bergdorf but didn't mention that's where she's alleging Trump raped her; she took the tour outside Trump tower and mentioned other women's allegations against Trump but not hers. One of the friends who said Carroll told her about the rape back in '96 (or possibly '95) wrote an article about the tour in the New Yorker in April of 2019 but she also didn't mention anything about Trump raping Carrol, the tour being personal, etc.
In her book Carroll says Les Moonves sexually assaulted her in an elevator in the late 90s when she interviewed him for an article she wrote for Esquire. Trump's lawyer asked Carrol why she hasn't also sued Moonves and she said "he did not defame me. He did not call me a liar." That's just wrong; Moonves said he "emphatically denies" her accusation and has said "that never happened." Her article for Esquire didn't contain any mention of that attack; she says such things simply weren't discussed in those days but anyone who remembers the late 1990's might recall that workplace sexual harassment was a pretty hot topic!
In her October 2022 deposition for this case Carroll said no one was paying any of her legal fees for this case. That was a lie, of course, and her lawyer had to send written clarification. The fee payment came from "American Future Republic," and organization founded and funded by Hoffman (the guy who started LinkedIn). Third party funded lawfare isn't against the rules but typically it's something that has to be disclosed so that the defense can argue it motivates the action--as far as I can tell the judge in this case hasn't found the initial obfuscation of the information (via a lie under oath at deposition) and belated admission to be a problem.
The judge has also allowed pretty much every request Carroll's side has made to include outside info including, importantly, Trump's Access Hollywood tape--usually you can't introduce evidence of someone's propensity to commit the kind of act you're suing over but there's an exception: in cases related to sexual assault you can introduce evidence that the defendant has committed prior sexual assault. The judge ruled that Trump's private conversation as captured in the Access Hollywood tape amounted to a confession that he had committed sexual assault in the past and was therefore admissible.
Anyway, the "Believe All Women" indicator has swung back to "Yes" for E. Jean Carroll so that's that, but let's at least be clear about what the actual issues of the credibility of her accusation actually are. None of that matters, of course, but just between ourselves let's be honest.
Good luck proving there's no chance you raped someone 25 years ago!
The inhibition that applies to women coming forward with accusations against powerful men does not apply to Republican men. They are far more likely to be beatified than demonized for their charges. Anita Hill and Christine Ford did not suffer any loss of reputation or income--rather the opposite. Not so much with Paula Jones and Monica Lewinsky and especially her "friend", Linda Tripp who made the affair public. Linda Tripp publicized a sexual predator at loose in the Oval Office and suffered heaps of derision. Her brave actions probably saved thousands of women from suffering a fate similar to Monica's and what thanks did she get for it. Or look at Mary Jo Kopechne. Her friends and relatives were not even allowed to express outrage at her murderer.....Drag a million dollar lawsuit across the aisle of Bergdorf and you never know what will turn up.
Brian Banks could not be reached for comment.
The card he decided to play was to team up with a private investigator named Freddie Parish. Together they met twice with Wanetta Gibson, and Parish secretly videotaped the sessions. During the meetings, Gibson frankly admitted that her accusations had been false, and said she would like to help Brian clear his name. However, there was a big obstacle standing in the way of her making her recantation public.
In the wake of the supposed rape, Gibson and her mother, Wanda Rhodes, had sued the Long Beach Unified School District for the “lax security” they claimed allowed the rape to take place. The school district settled the lawsuit by paying the two $1.5 million.
Now, as the video reveals, Gibson had some definite limits on her willingness to help the man she had so egregiously wronged. “I will go through with helping you,” she said, “but it’s like at the same time all that money they gave us, I mean gave me, I don’t want to have to pay it back.” Because of that fear of being required to repay the money she had acquired through her fraudulent claim, Gibson refused to repeat her story to prosecutors so that Brian could be exonerated.
But the video exposed her lies. Brian, whose bright prospects as a player were gone, still got a tryout but he had lost ten years.
Another case with no evidence. Just a woman's word.
Greg Price
@greg_price11
We don't talk enough about how likely it is that Jeffrey Epstein was protected as an intelligence asset by multiple nations while trafficking little kids to powerful people for sex.
Quote Tweet
Disclose.tv
@disclosetv
·
3h
JUST IN - CIA's William Burns, Goldman's Kathryn Ruemmler, Noam Chomsky, a Kissinger consultant, a Rothschild, and others met with sex offender Jeffrey Epstein in the years after his conviction.
https://twitchy.com/samj-3930/2023/04/30/wow-epsteins-private-calendar-reveals-many-prominent-figures-met-with-him-after-he-was-convicted/
Remind me. Who enables male sexual entitlement?
There are laws against sexual battery, etc., and in law enforcement the conversation changed to "believe the woman" fifty years ago.
I know. I was there, lecturing to prosecutors from all over the country.
Meanwhile, Hollywood and the media were telling women it wasn't happening.
Technical question: How does one pronounce the first syllable of Tuerkheimer's name? The whole thing reads like a Carol Burnett skit, with Harvey Korman as Trump and Tim Conway as Carroll's attorney. And of course, Carol as Carroll.
Women and men who choose careers using their good looks, pandering to wealthy wine buyers, waiting or waitressing at top restaurants, being pharmacy reps (who dress like escorts), or writing sex columns have made conscious choices to use their sexuality to succeed financially.
It's their choice. But like any high-end escort, if they choose to engage in risky behavior and someone goes too far, they should call the police. That would reflect well on them and demonstrate responsibility. If they don't, their choice to use sex to make money later is not irrelevant, and they are enabling not just the salacious aspects of their career for all their other non-slutty coworkers but excusing a possibly predatory client.
Ms. Carroll was a professional slut whose job was, literally, to brag about her serial sex conquests in print. She (allegedly) chose to flirt, undress, and model lingerie for Trump before, she claims, he (allegedly) raped her in a store filled with people. She was no young naif.
Ms. Ross writes about another of these slutty industries, where both women and men frequently use erotic suggestiveness to woo high-end customers. Having worked in an actual wine bar as a prep cook, it was clear who was letting customers touch them and meet them later for bigger tips. We didn't respect them, and their behavior made the environment less safe for those just trying to do their jobs professionally.
If you are an adult using your sexuality for big bucks, and what happened to you, with or without your collusion, wasn't so bad that it was worth hiding it to keep your financially sweet sex gig going, you aren't credible to me. Real victims who are adult women or men have obligations too. That doesn't describe Carroll, who bragged about having 15 boyfriends and about picking up hitchhikers -- on television -- in 1995, and received a lot of money to file charges against Trump almost 30 years later.
Awww Chuck waiting for the next big thing to drop every time.
"so Tuerkheimer is anticipating how Trump's lawyers will undermine her credibility"
It's obvious she knows there's something to it. Ergo her preemptivity.
The wghle thing reminds of, though slightly different, of a never married woman at The Pearly Gates- "You never helped me find the perfect man!" "Ah, but I did. More then once. And each time you said "I like you as a friend.""
She has, apparently, a very low bar when it comes to selecting a mate. And Jean has as a very selective memory.
Women and men are equal in rights and complementary in Nature/nature. Notwithstanding the trial of conceiving and birthing a human life, women posses no greater intrinsic moral virtue than men.
Meanwhile, serial presidential child sniffer/grabber who inside his family goes by "Pedo Pete" is accused of showering with daughter well past any parental norm.
There's also the Tara Reade bold-finger accusation that far closer resembles what Trump was yapping about.
Remind me. Who enables male sexual entitlement?
There are laws against sexual battery, etc., and in law enforcement the conversation changed to "believe the woman" fifty years ago.
I know. I was there, lecturing to prosecutors from all over the country.
Meanwhile, Hollywood and the media were telling women the change wasn't happening. Reporting is not pleasant, but it is necessary for a number of reasons, deterrence being one of them.
Thomas, Kavanaugh, Trump? You have to admire the commitment of progressive women. Of course, they have no commitment to timely reporting, but political timing ...? Oh yeah!
SD of NY Court? NY judge? NY jury? Just the legal process every Republican defendant dreams of. /S
Haven't read the comments yet, but this piece seems to explain precisely why "the woman" in these situations should be heard with extreme skepticism. I am not sure I buy the thesis, but she seems to be saying that women project all of their fears and hatreds on to any man who gets accused, the facts be damned.
as far as I can tell the judge in this case hasn't found the initial obfuscation of the information (via a lie under oath at deposition) and belated admission to be a problem.
Of course not ! New York Judge. Alvin Bragg has nothing on him.
hombre said...
...
SD of NY Court? NY judge? NY jury? Just the legal process every Republican defendant dreams of. /S
Yes. SDNY.
Where the plaintiff resides.
Where the cause of action arose.
Where most of the witnesses are.
Where the defendant resided at the time the cause of action for civil battery arose, and where the defendant still maintains a residence and a business.
How’d you do on ‘venue’ in First Year Civ Pro? Is there another venue that you would propose? If so, on what basis?
Chuck:
It has been a bad week. Nebraska Antifa is now onto me. No lie.
Maybe it's just from living here but it's darkly amusing when people dismiss a "bad" verdict in a southern state with "well you know how things are down there, you can't expect anyone to get a fair trial in MS/GA/SC/the South" but get very offended if anyone suggests juries in DC, or NYC might not be 100% impartial.
Bias is a real problem for the outgroup; me and my friends are all fairminded, neutral arbiters of fact.
Chuck has no interest in Pedo Pete the child sniffer (and more!) and the compromise brought to our government via Biden crime family because....
Chuck said...
"I am afraid you are mistaking me for someone who has an interest in fair treatment of Donald Trump. I'm not your guy. I am interested in smearing him, hurting him and prejudicing people against him."
3/4/16, 4:46 PM
Dear Chuck,
When selecting an attention starved psycho to frame Trump, best to find a neurotic gal in appropriate venue for maximized success.
Unfortunately, they sometimes allude to rape fantasies.
Oh well..
Begley,
Antifa has a soccer league. Throw them a bone.
Hombre is correct. Unfortunately, judges, police brass in big cities, and leftist DAs didn't change their attitudes and weren't made to. Only the police were told to do so, and only the police -- the beat cops and Captains and detectives -- did.
Begley, you decided to f* around. I guess you now get to find out.
Perhaps not be such a crusading asshole next time if you don't want to meet the opposing crusading assholes.
I heard this repeatedly as I researched my book about why accusers are often doubted."
Writes Deborah Tuerkheimer, lawprof and author of "Credible: Why We Doubt Accusers and Protect Abusers,"
They are often doubted because it is often the case that their stories are obvious trash.
Girl and boy in college have sex. Boy got what he wants. Girl wanted relationship, sent happy texts after the sex, then turns the story into "he raped me" when the guy doesn't respond.
No, we don't believe her story, and neither does any other sane person.
"He raped me on a glass table, it shattered, and he kept on raping me with the glass cutting into my back."
But there are no medical records of her going ANYWHERE to get that sliced up back treated.
Again, we don't believe her story, and neither does any other sane person.
As an alternative, the defense might argue that the entire encounter was invented, noting that Ms. Carroll opted not to report the alleged rape to the police at the time or to seek medical attention.
Which is why we know that she is lying, too
If you did not contemporaneously act like you were raped, in such a way that we can see your actions documented, it's because you're lying now.
And if you're trying to destroy some man's life with a fake rape accusation, then you, are the monster
As is anyone who supports you
Chuck, nice to see you are still alive and able to post comments. People in your condition often have serious trouble.
"The count for civil battery was enabled by a specific NY statute passed in 2022."
Yes, they passed a law allowing this case because otherwise the statute of limitations would not have allowed it.
Isn't it awesome? Rule of law so easily dropped when it suits them.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा