The Story Just Keeps Falling Apart

This week E. Jean Carroll was in the news again. She is the person who has accused President Trump of raping her in a department store dressing room although she can’t remember when. She claims the incident took place in late 1995 or early 1996. A defendant has no way of coming up with an alibi if the supposed victim can’t remember when the crime took place. If she could remember the date, the President could show the court his planner from that date. I suspect that is the reason she can’t remember the date.I am amazed that this case even made it to court. Why were there no store clerks or people near the dressing room that heard the commotion?

On Friday, The Federalist posted an article about the case.

Here are a few highlights:

CNN reported that the investigation is centered on whether Carroll committed perjury. Prosecutors, CNN said, are focusing on a deposition Carroll provided in 2022 in which she said she received no outside funding for her lawsuit. Despite her testimony, it turns out billionaire Democrat donor Reid Hoffman paid some of her legal fees and expenses.

…Carroll accused Trump of raping her in a Bergdorf Goodman and then sued him for defamation when he denied it in 2019. Carroll notably declined to press criminal charges against Trump because, according to her, she “would find it disrespectful to the women who are down on the border who are being raped around the clock.” Carroll then filed a second lawsuit in 2022 after the state of New York temporarily changed a statute of limitations law.

…Ultimately, Trump was held liable for merely denying the allegation. After Carroll’s allegations went public in 2019, Trump released a statement in which he categorically denied even meeting Carroll.

“She is trying to sell a new book; that should indicate her motivation,” Trump said. “It should be sold in the fiction section. Shame on those who make up false stories of assault to try to get publicity for themselves or sell a book or carry out a political agenda.”

The article concludes:

To recap: A known anti-Trump Democrat mega-donor financed a lawsuit built on allegations by a woman who couldn’t remember the year of the purported assault, and a state changed its laws to facilitate the lawfare — all to assassinate the character of a sitting president who was punished for maintaining his innocence.

I hope at some point this case winds up in a court where the judge has some common sense and throws the whole thing out.