Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
Audio readings of TRANSlating Everything content and wacky discussions!
On April 5, 2023, Chris Hayes posted to Twitter: “I don’t think it’s really penetrated everyone’s consciousness that in a few weeks Donald Trump will be the defendant in a civil trial for rape.”
Well, it’s now May 1, 2023, and that trial has begun.
Trump, of course, begged for a mistrial, but Judge Kaplan refuted each point in a response that could politely be called embarrassing, but would more honestly be called humiliating for Trump and his lawyers.
Instead of a mistrial, Trump now faces a civil suit over rape allegations that could topple him as soon as this very merry month of May.
Let’s break down what to expect from the trial and how Trump found himself facing credible allegations of sexual assault.
Breaking down Trump on trial
The NYT reports:
Ms. Carroll in a 2019 memoir, which was excerpted in a New York magazine article, accused Mr. Trump of raping her in the dressing room of a Bergdorf Goodman store in the mid-1990s. Ms. Carroll wrote that he pushed her against a dressing room wall, pulled down her tights, opened his pants and then forced himself upon her.
Mr. Trump denied the allegations in 2019, calling it a “total false accusation.” He denied the allegations again in an October 2022 Truth Social post, calling the accusation a hoax and a lie, leading Ms. Carroll to sue him for both battery and defamation.
ABC News reports:
She added a charge of battery under a recently adopted New York law that allows adult survivors of sexual abuse to sue their alleged attacker regardless of the statute of limitations.
This isn’t the first time Trump faced credible allegations over sexual assault
ABC News reports:
[Carroll] previously sued Trump in 2019 after the then-president denied her rape claim by telling The Hill that Carroll was "totally lying," saying, "I'll say it with great respect: No. 1, she's not my type. No. 2, it never happened. It never happened, OK?"
That defamation suit has been caught in a procedural back-and-forth over the question of whether Trump, as president, was acting in his official capacity as an employee of the federal government when he made those remarks.
If Trump is determined to have been acting as a government employee, the U.S. government would substitute as the defendant in that suit -- which means that case would go away, since the government cannot be sued for defamation.
This month's trial is taking place as Trump seeks the White House for a third time, while facing numerous legal challenges related to the Jan. 6 Capitol attack, his handling of classified material after leaving the White House, and possible attempts to interfere in Georgia's 2020 vote. Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis said last week she would decide whether to file criminal charges against Trump or his allies this summer.
If E. Jean Carroll is telling the truth, why did she wait so long to speak up?
Politico reports from the testimony given at trial:
“Here’s the thing: I was too much in a panic to scream,” Carroll said when Trump’s lawyer, Joe Tacopina, challenged her assertion that she didn’t yell for help during the alleged assault in a department store dressing room.
“I’m telling you: He raped me whether I screamed or not,” Carroll said, raising her voice.
ABC News reports:
Carroll also said she didn't report the alleged attack because, as a woman born in the 1940s, she's a member of the "silent generation" that didn't speak up about such things. The exchange came after Tacopina introduced several of her advice columns for Elle magazine in which she suggested that her readers call police in the event of a sexual assault or threat.
"I was born in 1943," she said. "I am a member of the silent generation. Women like me were taught to keep our chins up and not complain. The fact that I never went to the police is not surprising for someone my age. I would rather have done anything than call the police."
Here’s how the trial is going for Trump so far
The NYT reports:
The judge in the civil trial of E. Jean Carroll’s rape allegation against former President Donald J. Trump sharply criticized comments by Mr. Trump on social media…
Mr. Trump posted twice about the lawsuit, calling it a scam and writing that Ms. Carroll’s lawyer was a “political operative.” He also said that the dress Ms. Carroll wore should be “allowed to be part of the case.”
The posts tested boundaries set forth…by Judge Lewis A. Kaplan, who instructed the parties to “inform your clients and witnesses to please refrain from making any statements that are likely to incite violence or civil unrest.” He said that he was especially concerned for the safety and privacy of jurors.
…the judge said Mr. Trump’s out-of-court statements seemed “entirely inappropriate” and suggested Mr. Trump might be trying to influence members of the jury.
It remained unclear…whether Mr. Trump would testify in the trial in Federal District Court. Mr. Tacopina said the day before that he did not yet know whether Mr. Trump would take the witness stand. Judge Kaplan said that he wanted an answer this week, adding that not knowing was an “imposition” on security and court staff.
Carroll concluded her three days on the witness stand by sharing an email she received last year right after Trump denied her claims on Truth Social.
The email, from a sender Carroll said she does not know, says, among other things, that Carroll is a "disgusting low life liar" who is "going to get hurt very badly." The email concludes, "better end the bulls--t quick b---h."
Trump will face two other women with credible allegations of sexual assault by him
ABC News reports:
Natasha Stoynoff, a former reporter for People magazine, is expected to testify later in the trial that Trump sexually assaulted her when she interviewed him at his Mar-a-Lago estate in 2005.
"The evidence will show that Ms. Stoynoff—Mr. Trump led Ms. Stoynoff to an empty room, claiming that he wanted to show her something there. As soon as they got inside, Trump closed the door, grabbed Ms. Stoynoff's shoulders, pushed her against the wall, and started kissing her," Carroll's attorney Shawn Crowley said during opening statements.
Stoynoff is one of two women, in addition to Carroll, who have been allowed to testify about alleged sexual assault by Trump, who denies all of their claims. The other, Jessica Leeds, is expected to testify that Trump assaulted her on an airplane in 1979.
How good is Trump’s defense?
Further tweets from Mystal
Elie Mystal, a justice correspondent for The Nation, broke down Trump’s best defense strategy. In a thread of four tweets, they said:
I tried to explain this on [Chris Hayes], but what really stands out to me: If you think that Bragg has a weak case, THEN TRUMP SHOULD BEAT IT. And THAT should be your white wing talking point. “Let the process play out, our MAGA King will beat the rap.” That’s a “rule of law” take
Trump has OVERWHELMING resources to defend himself. He’s not, and never will be, “railroaded” by the system. His corporate media sycophants could just say “I’ll see you in court” and be done with it. INSTEAD, all they want to do is this pro-authoritarian rending of garments.”
The whole point of having a legal process is that, THERE IS A PROCESS. And the process is NOT “oh no the prosecutor should be JAILED for trying to hold a white man accountable for anything less than murder 2.” People are OFTEN charged with this crime. Let’s see if this one sticks.”
Put another way: Trump, his supporters, and his media spokespeople at the New York Times have decided that Trump is weaker and less able to defend his own actions in a normal court process than Gwyneth Paltrow.”
What are Trump’s chances of overcoming credible allegations that he raped three women?
The NY Daily News reports:
As the evidence now stands, this is not the classic case of “he said, she said.” Rather, it is a case of “he said, she said, she said, she said,” all supported by Trump’s own “Access Hollywood” words and Carroll’s witnesses. Trump appears to be left with no witnesses to call to rebut these charges other than himself.
Trump is faced with a conundrum — the only way he can rebut Carroll’s case is to testify in his own defense. That will subject him to a blistering cross examination concerning his predatory history. That coupled with his propensity to lie puts him in a real bind.
Commentary
People across the world are facing consequences for their sexual violence, even if it’s just public awareness of who that person was all along.
“Women don’t come forward,” Carroll told the courtroom. “One of the reasons they don’t come forward is because they’re always asked, why didn’t you scream? Women are told,” she said, “you better have a good excuse if you didn’t scream.”
Despite Trump facing credible allegations of sexual violence, E. Jean Caroll is not guaranteed that Trump will be given a guilty verdict. But that does not mean that her actions will have been empty.
Politico reports that when giving her recent testimony at trial, E. Jean Carroll explained her reasons for coming forward, saying she was prompted by revelations about film producer Harvey Weinstein’s sexual predation in The New York Times in 2017.
“When that happened, across the country women began telling their stories, and I was flummoxed [and thought], wait a minute, can we actually speak up and not be pummeled?” Carroll testified. “I thought, well this may be a way to change the culture of sexual violence. The light dawned. I thought, we can actually change things if we all tell our stories. And I thought by god, this may be the time.”
“It caused me to realize that staying silent does not work. It doesn’t work. If women speak up, we have a chance of limiting the harm that happens.”
Just so, Carroll coming forward helped me find peace in letting go of any hope that the sexually violent perpetrator from my own family will ever face any consequences.
Trump has set the example that sexually violent men can not only get away with it. They can get elected President.
There is no vengeance, just as there can never be justice. But by bringing light to each other’s stories, we empower each other to grow, to heal, and to live full lives that do not depend on grace ever coming from the ungraceful.
We will have to provide that grace for ourselves and each other.
BONUS
Graphic by Stephenie, elements from Triggered (Center Street Publishing) and the SOTU when Nancy tore apart Trump’s speech
MSNBC: Trump loses bid for Carroll mistrial after lawyer's literary fumble
…one of the items on Tacopina's laundry list of unfairness stood out as especially absurd. It dealt with literature, a controversial subject in the book-banning GOP these days. And it provides a lesson about one work that Republicans might want to keep on the shelves.
Tacopina pointed to an exchange with Carroll on cross-examination about a reference in her book to sending all men to Montana for retraining. When the Trump lawyer pressed her, Carroll pointed out that it was satire, suggesting that the lawyer was an idiot if he didn't understand that. Then Kaplan interjected to note that Carroll's satire comes from Jonathan Swift's "A Modest Proposal," a satirical essay from the 18th century that "proposed" poor Irish parents sell their children as food.
Indeed, Carroll's 2019 book is titled, "What Do We Need Men For?: A Modest Proposal."
If you like my work and want to support it, send me a tip or become a paid subscriber for Translating Everything