For weeks we’ve been wondering how the 9 member jury convicted Donald Trump of defamation in a 30 year old incident. The original $5 million settlement award from that jury seems to have been based on Ms. Carroll’s testimony, the corroboration of two friends who were informed of the incident about the time it happened, and Mr. Trump’s attitude toward women–in general. (We’ve all heard the famous TV quote and his deposition comments.) But that seems to be the sum of the “evidence” presented. And that seems to us as inadequate. First, Ms. Carroll could have been one of thousands of people Trump met briefly and maybe didn’t even know her name. Second, he could not ID her because the event–if it really did occur–happened 30 years ago. Very few of us look like we did 30 years ago. Third, there is no proof that Mr. Trump was even in New York City the day of the alleged “attack”. Fourth, no proof exists that he even entered that department store EVER. No DNA, no video camera footage, no eye witness to anyone involved actually being in that store…To sum up, we see nothing substantial to convict Mr. Trump on the sexual assault charge. In fact, we wonder why Mr. Trumps’ lawyers did not countersue Ms. Carroll for alleging an event that had virtually no proof. If you consider objectively what the Carroll lawyers proved it might be said that she proved very little. In writing her 2019 book Ms. Carroll admitted that she was assaulted by Mr. Trump–was this a name dropping stunt to sell her book? Mr. Trump is notably disliked by New Yorkers and his name associated with a potentially dynamite sex scandal was surely worth a few thousand sold copies. Fast forward to the last few weeks and the second Carroll trial. Mr. Trump talked himself into a follow up defamation award. What is amazing is that–despite several weeks of lawyer prep during the first trial where he was warned repeatedly NOT to say certain words that would damage his case–he exploded after the first verdict on public TV and on his “Truth Social” account (a misnomer if we ever saw one). This is a man who, for four years, had his finger on the nuclear trigger, presided (poorly) over the worst pandemic potential in history, abandoned his own intelligence community when Putin denied election meddling, stole 300 boxes of classified documents and incited a riot at the US Capitol. And what’s most important, is the Republican Party’s best choice for President in 2024. Our point: Mr. Trump has proven himself to be arrogant, a liar, incompetent, larcenous, and a lot of other negative adjectives. But the Carroll case is, in our opinion, a farce unless some evidence is being repressed. The first trial was–to be blunt– a joke. But the Trump reaction to that first trial compounded the joke. We believe that Trump is appealing the decision because he feels he was persecuted unfairly and we think he will have a good case. We’re sure he hopes to find a judge (s) who will see it his way. In the meantime the Trump campaign sees this whole event as a (very expensive) ad that shows how he’s a victim just like his supporters are victims. We predict he’ll beat this wrap. E. Jean–don’t spend all that money yet; it’s fate is yet to be determined.
Comments are closed