Althouse: "E. Jean Carroll Seeks New Damages From Trump for Comments on CNN."

May 22, 2023

"E. Jean Carroll Seeks New Damages From Trump for Comments on CNN."

She's doing what she obviously should, as I discussed here on May 11th. She has a judgment in her favor, and he is repeating the statements that have been found to be defamatory.

69 comments:

pious agnostic said...: Trump will become a cow she can milk forever. Because he'll never shut up.; 5/22/23, 6:52 PM
rcocean said...: Keep the grift going girl.
Squeeze every nickle out of the lie.

Maybe the next Manhattan jury,
will execute him.; 5/22/23, 6:55 PM
Iman said...: Sweet Jaysus, she and her handlers are garbage.; 5/22/23, 6:58 PM
rehajm said...: The best defense against kangaroo courts is more kangaroo courts…; 5/22/23, 7:05 PM
donald said...: She is the whore she said she was. Hey it’s America, you can sue anybody (As we lay people used to think).; 5/22/23, 7:06 PM
Ampersand said...: Should all actionable instances of defamation result in litigation? I think not.; 5/22/23, 7:10 PM
D.D. Driver said...: Your previous post raises a good question: does it go straight to damages? I think it should. If he gets to present evidence on liability it could blow up in Carroll's face because Trump would get a second chance to take the trial seriously and actually put on a defense.; 5/22/23, 7:18 PM
Farmer said...: If I was pissed off about the outcome of the previous one and I had money to burn, I'd welcome another suit. Keep 'em coming. All he needs to do is win the last one.; 5/22/23, 7:27 PM
Blastfax Kudos said...: Everything must serve the sisterhood. Nothing outside the sisterhood. Nothing against the sisterhood.; 5/22/23, 7:31 PM
n.n said...: So, if another jury determines that defamation cannot be inferred for lack of evidence, if not imagination, and even that the original, unsubstantiated accusation is defamatory, will damages be settled out of court with restitution, or progress to a higher level where judges will be tempted to pin the tail on the donkey or some other satisfactory method to break the tie?; 5/22/23, 7:33 PM
Aught Severn said...: At what point is she considered a public figure?; 5/22/23, 7:35 PM
Jaq said...: The jury never found that she had been raped, which was what she had claimed.; 5/22/23, 7:36 PM
gilbar said...: does this go to the same judge? same NY jury?; 5/22/23, 7:38 PM
Dave Begley said...: One out for Trump. The verdict, while final, still hasn’t been appealed. I think it gets reversed.; 5/22/23, 7:41 PM
Lilly, a dog said...: E. Jean Carroll would be suing all of us right now. Donald Trump is just in the way. 4D Chess, duh.; 5/22/23, 7:53 PM
rhhardin said...: A new jury might find him not guilty.; 5/22/23, 7:55 PM
n.n said...: The philosophy of law as faith, religion, and ideology reminds me of a grade school antic: stop hitting yourself.; 5/22/23, 7:57 PM
Tom said...: This will be fun and games for her until she messes up and he finds a favorable venue to counter sue her.; 5/22/23, 8:00 PM
Inga said...: And there are people who think he should be POTUS…; 5/22/23, 8:08 PM
Robert Marshall said...: What are her damages?

She already has a jury verdict which says that Trump defamed her by denying her claim of sexual assault. How does Trump repeating what she has just proven to be untrue cause her any more reputational damage? Who would now think worse of her, because Trump repeats what she's already refuted through a jury verdict?

Seems very weak to me.; 5/22/23, 8:10 PM
farmgirl said...: Unbelievable.
What she should…
She should have reported before almost 3decades went by.
Wth…; 5/22/23, 8:19 PM
Jim at said...: So she can continue to lie her ass off but he can never say she's lying her ass off. Ever.

Seems fair.; 5/22/23, 8:25 PM
Mr. Majestyk said...: He should repeat his denial in Alabama and then sue her there for a declaratory judgment that he did not defame her.; 5/22/23, 8:43 PM
Another old lawyer said...: Can the statements still be defamatory if they've been already adjudicated false and that finding nationally publicized and discussed ad nauseam?; 5/22/23, 8:46 PM
MikeD said...: Once more, our esteemed Constitutional Law Prof. supports kangaroo courts in pursuit of political ends. I don't remember(I'm in my 9th decade) but, did our hostess defend Juanita Broderick with such fervor? Or, maybe Tara Reade? Retirement, the MSM and social media have not been kind to to Althouse.; 5/22/23, 8:50 PM
n.n said...: Hell hath no fury like a woman left with the memory of unrequited rape.

Even a "burden" is easier Planned at your friendly neighborhood abortion clinic, or shoot her first, ask questions later... never in a probably Whitmer-event, and be celebrated as a "hero" with pride in parades.; 5/22/23, 8:52 PM
Lucien said...: Once a jury has found that you falsely accused someone of rape, what kind of reputation for truthfulness can you possibly have?; 5/22/23, 8:53 PM
Gahrie said...: If I was Trump I'd set aside a couple of million dollars every year as fuck you money and never stop.; 5/22/23, 9:07 PM
Gahrie said...: No woman must be made to feel bad about, or responsible for, anything, ever.

Apparently this includes lying when accusing men of sexual assault.; 5/22/23, 9:08 PM
walter said...: Movin' on up from the Mouse House to fill it with Vaginas.; 5/22/23, 9:12 PM
D.D. Driver said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; 5/22/23, 9:28 PM
DINKY DAU 45 said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; 5/22/23, 9:38 PM
TickTock said...: And now to disagree with our hostess, do you really think that the statute of limitations on rape is appropriately extended by a suit for defamation?; 5/22/23, 9:40 PM
Maynard said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; 5/22/23, 9:45 PM
D.D. Driver said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; 5/22/23, 9:48 PM
D.D. Driver said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; 5/22/23, 9:48 PM
Chuck said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; 5/22/23, 9:57 PM
Scott said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; 5/22/23, 10:07 PM
Chuck said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; 5/22/23, 10:18 PM
Chuck said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; 5/22/23, 10:19 PM
Wa St Blogger said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; 5/22/23, 10:44 PM
n.n said...: No woman must be made to feel bad about, or responsible for, anything, ever.

That said, except for women shot on stage, women escaping a probable Whitmer-event, women run over in a parade, women (men, and children) shot in a school, women punched by men who identify as women, women scalped in a clinic, women subject to hormonal dysfunction to void "burdens", women injected with a viral-vector agent capable of causing infection and transmission, etc.

Yes, Some, Select [Female] [Women] Lives Matter (SS FWWLM).; 5/22/23, 10:59 PM
Cameron said...: But was it "rape rape" ?; 5/22/23, 11:11 PM
Crazy World said...: Why would you NOT defame an absolute lunatic attention seeking slut and her cat vagina, Election Interference!
Crazy World indeed; 5/22/23, 11:50 PM
gadfly said...: Gahrie said...
No woman must be made to feel bad about, or responsible for, anything, ever.

Apparently this includes lying when accusing men of sexual assault.

Apparently, you didn't read the recent jury's verdict about who did the lying. Have you gone completely misogynistic, Gahrie? Trump is not worthy of your worship.; 5/23/23, 12:12 AM
Jim at said...: And there are people who think he should be POTUS…

At least those people are capable of thinking.; 5/23/23, 12:15 AM
Rt41Rebel said...: Trump is uniquely qualified to turn this mess around. He has survived the largest seven year shitstorm of persecution ever seen in the history of American politics, and he's still very popular and still not in jail. How long do you think that any other candidate for POTUS could fight that much and that hard? 6 months? A year? The faulty premise, of course, is that anyone but Trump would be treated much more kindly by political enemies. More like "Nice Presidency, it would be a shame if something happened to it."; 5/23/23, 12:17 AM
Rt41Rebel said...: "And there are people who think he should be POTUS…"

And there are people that voted for Biden and would vote for him again.; 5/23/23, 12:22 AM
Douglas B. Levene said...: Good for Carroll. She took a chance, sued and won, mostly because of Trump’s deposition, which torpedoed his case. He apparently thinks that paying her millions is a cheap way to solidify his support among the GOPs who think he can do no, and has never done, any harm, and so he’s continued to libel her, although the only issue at the next trial will be what damages to award her. The last jury awarded hardly any punitive damages; the second jury will not be as forgiving.; 5/23/23, 12:57 AM
Nice said...: No rape, then no defamation. The jury said there was no rape. And then there's her tweets, which were not entered, but they look bad, for her.; 5/23/23, 2:14 AM
wendybar said...: Her lies are defamatory. Every single anchor on TV has said defamatory things about Trump, yet he is supposed to sit back and take it?? Obama wouldn't. And they would say SHIT about that.; 5/23/23, 4:38 AM
John henry said...: Donald trump is worth somewhere between $5 and 10 billion.

$5mm is 0.05 to 0.1% of his net worth.

He probably has that much in his sofa cushions.

John LGKTQ Henry; 5/23/23, 5:57 AM
Brian said...: How does she get new damages without a new trial? I don't understand that part. Trial is over. Damages awarded.

Hypothetical, if Trump talks about his appeal is that further defamation? Does he have to just shut up about this case forever?

Everything about Trump from his enemies appears to be an attempt to get him to shut up and take a loss, but Trump doesn't do that. You can't shut him up.; 5/23/23, 6:32 AM
Owen said...: n.n. @ 8:52: "Hell hath no fury like a woman left with the memory of unrequited rape."

One of your better ones!; 5/23/23, 7:30 AM
Chuck said...: What the heck happened with comments on this page?

As far as I can tell, two of my comments, neither of which were in any way objectionable (and both of which were aimed directly at legal/procedural questions raised in the comments) seem to have been removed. My comments were directly responsive to material raised in the post. Unlike, for example, whether one should vote for Biden or Trump in 2024.

Perhaps I am mistaken; and that my comments were not removed, but simply haven't made it through moderation (which they should) even though they were submitted last evening. If I am mistaken, hopefully a blog administrator can explain.; 5/23/23, 7:35 AM
Curious George said...: Just play this for the jury. Even Anderson Cooper knows she's a fucking whack job.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wUAZ0owelrA; 5/23/23, 7:39 AM
Gahrie said...: Apparently, you didn't read the recent jury's verdict about who did the lying. Have you gone completely misogynistic, Gahrie? Trump is not worthy of your worship.

He was telling the truth about not raping her but lying about sexually assaulting her?

She was lying him raping her, but telling the truth about him sexually assaulting her?

This was clearly a case about finding a reason any reason to punish Trump for having the balls to run as a Republican and even worse, to defeat Saint Hillary. Even in New York the best they could do is a tie.; 5/23/23, 8:05 AM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: Despite Trump's big phat clumsy mouth - he ushered in prosperity - especially for blacks.

The corrupt left had to destroy it all. That includes the mob/Biden cabal of a-holes financially beholden to China.; 5/23/23, 8:08 AM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: Trump didn't rape her. She is the liar.
That said - he really doesn't know how to handle these situations. Sheltered billionaire ego syndrome.; 5/23/23, 8:23 AM
Jamie said...: And there are people who think he should be POTUS…

There are an awful lot of people who apparently think that an accusation against even a nominal Republican is tantamount to that person's guilt. How often do we hear it here: "Look at how many people are suing him! It's obviously disqualifying!" "So-and-so accuses him of [rape, fraud, tormenting kittens]! He belongs in prison!"

In this case, Trump was accused of rape by a woman who didn't bother to bring that accusation until now, many years later, when he happens to be running for president again. She brought the accusation in a jurisdiction rabidly hostile to Trump's presidential aspirations (and, these days, to Trump as a person). She had everything and everyone in her corner. And still a jury of her peers couldn't bring itself to declare publicly that she was telling the truth.

But Inga et al., starting from their emotional premise that he's one of the worst people in public life (I'm trying to avoid hyperbole though my impulse was to say "the worst person in the world"), have been beating the bushes for evidence to support their feelings ever since the golden escalator.

A person can be unsavory and yet not disqualified for office. LBJ, perhaps? Even Kennedy, with his wandering weiner? Clinton ditto? Biden with his inexplicable wealth and decades-long history of reputation-damaging lies? Why is Trump's... shall we say "moral pragmatism" (recall that there's still no evidence nor any judgment that he's committed a crime, besides defaming a woman who was doing a pretty good job of doing that to herself already) uniquely bad?; 5/23/23, 8:45 AM
Drago said...: Flip-side Inga: "That said - he really doesn't know how to handle these situations. Sheltered billionaire ego syndrome"

The most publicly available billionaire ever and the most viciously attacked politician in United States history (apologies to Lincoln) and who has had the entire power of the United States govt and foreign govt's along with foreign intelligence services weaponized against him, his family and his businesses, who takes on opposition media every day.....and who had a successful TV presence for years along with being one of the most socially engaging personalities of our lifetimes......and whose businesses have required him to be front and center in the NYC with all manners of unions and politicians and trades people and contractors, etc., that guy, THAT guy..........is.............."sheltered".

I'm just going to leave that right there.; 5/23/23, 9:13 AM
Drago said...: Douglas B. Levene: "Good for Carroll. She took a chance, sued and won,..."

Astonishing.

Carroll was given the swooning red carpet treatment by the media, book deals, TV appearances, the list of accolades have been endless.

Carroll was guided by all sorts of lawyers and politicos.

Billionaire Reid Hoffman funded the entire effort.

The entire NY legislature was weaponized to work directly with Carroll to pass a clear anti-Trump "bill of attainder" that allowed a year window for old news fake accusations, like Carroll's, to be resuscitated for new hoax efforts, and the democraticals dragged the effort before a corrupted dem judge in a corrupted dem city with a corrupted dem jury.

Oh my goodness. Poor little old Carroll! What a "chance" she took!!!!!!!

Is that anything like the "chance" Blasey-Ford took which paid off handsomely? Is that anything like the "chance" Anita Hill took which paid off handsomely?

Gee, I think that pattern is so obvious even Levene might be capable of noticing it.

Yes indeed, it was Carroll, all "alone", in the arena, against all the forces backing Trump.....which are.......none.

Talk about a Profile in "Courage".; 5/23/23, 9:39 AM
Drago said...: Levene: "He apparently thinks that paying her millions is a cheap way to solidify his support among the GOPs who think he can do no, and has never done, any harm,..."

This is the lie the supposedly "respectable" types have to tell themselves to justify their continued support for the dems Sovietizing our courts against their domestic political enemies, and in particular Trump.

The "respectable" types tell themselves over and over again its just about Trump and once Trump is removed by corrupt means, why, then we can all just return to normal....right? The genie will go back into that bottle, won't he? Meanwhile, every normal person sees what is happening across the board and our nation and instinctively sees this for what it really is.

There is no time left in the day to discuss actual reality-based disagreements the normals might have with Trump because the dems/left/"respectable"-squish types spend far too much time every single day making up new lies and hoaxes and weaponizing them against Trump and corrupting every "norm" to do it. And they do it gleefully.

If Trump was only 1% the bad guy the dems/left/"respectable"-squish make him out to be, they wouldn't have to make up all the lies and hoaxes.

But they just keep doing that, don't they?

This isn't 2015 anymore Levene. The collapse of so many hoaxes and the exposure of such rampant and unrestrained corruption of all our institutions informs any honest person's view of more-of-the-same "accusations" in 2023.

There are some things so transparently false and stupid only an "educated" person can be made to believe them....or the "educated" person simply wants to believe them.; 5/23/23, 9:53 AM
Douglas B. Levene said...: @Drago: Sorry, I look at each case involving Trump and evaluate it on the merits. Reason and evidence matter to me, if not to you. That’s why I can condemn the Russia hoax and the Bragg indictment, and can condemn Trump for sexually assaulting Carroll. That’s what a jury found in a case where Trump’s own words from his deposition sealed his loss. The fact that the jury found for Trump on the rape claim but for Carroll on the sexual assault claim, shows that they carefully analyzed the evidence and voted accordingly. It does not show a reflexive or biased vote against Trump. I will continue to evaluate any claims against Trump based on the evidence and the law. If you prefer tribal or political loyalty to a careful analysis of each case, well, you’re not alone, but count me out.; 5/23/23, 10:37 AM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: E Jean reminds me of all those a-hole women who cry "rape" - as a way to punish a boyfriend who either broke their heart or perhaps became disagreeable in the relationship.

The left love to trash men they hate and use lies to do it.

This happened to a friend's young son. (early 20's) He and his girlfriend moved in together - and they would fight all the time. She would often, as a way to WIN the argument/punish -threaten to call the police and say he raped her. It was a total lie - but it worked wonders and a manipulation tool. yay girls!; 5/23/23, 10:40 AM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: Drag show- - Trump can do no wrong. Ever. He is a deity worthy of your unyielding worship.; 5/23/23, 11:00 AM
Nice said...: Once again, for all the E. Jean fans, read her tweets !!! It's all there, Twitter makes it easy. You can search her site and type "Trump" in search. She made all kinds of disparaging comments about him, and this was after she cried rape. Lots of bawdy jokes about the male species, Trump belongs in a cage, women like it rough etc etc. She, a non-rape victim who failed to prove rape, can disparage him all she wants, but he can't respond or it's defamation....on what planet?

If you go through her sexually-charged tweets with a fine-tooth-comb, (Lofty Pursuits)--- it's hard to see how a Civil Court could say that Trump should've kept quiet about all of that, during or after the proceedings.

If we were talking about a Criminal rape case, then yes, the woman's reputation and her bawdy, blowsy reputation shouldn't be applicable, perhaps, and nobody should be discussing or making public comments.

This. Was. Not. Criminal. It. Was. Civil. And. There. Was. No. Rape.; 5/23/23, 1:40 PM
Mutaman said...: Mr. Majestyk said...

"He should repeat his denial in Alabama and then sue her there for a declaratory judgment that he did not defame her."

Obviously a graduate of Trump University Law school; 5/24/23, 1:37 AM
Drago said...: Mutaman does not appreciate his lefty kiar heroes being called out for their lies.

Lesson for conservatives: call them out for the transparent liars they so clearly are every single day despite the threats represented by the democraticals Sovietized corrupted court system which is fully supported by all the GOPe-ers..; 5/24/23, 11:25 AM