Two Women Have Told The New York Times That E Jean Carroll Told Them Of Trump Rape Of Her When It Happened
Two women who were friends of E Jean Carroll in the 1990's have spoken to a NYT podcast and told the paper that E Jean Carroll told them at the time it happened that Trump had sexually assaulted her. One of them says she was called on the phone by Carroll minutes after the incident happened.
Their account can be heard on today's episode of the New York Times podcast, The Daily.
https://tunein.com/podcasts/News--Politics-Podcasts/The-Daily-p952868/?topicId=131974509
Tags
Who is online
42 visitors
I think they should see if these women will agree to a polygraph. If they pass, a thorough investigation of Trump should be pursued.
I dont think it is implausible that Carroll is telling the truth, particularly with the additional corroboration from these other people.
No need for polygraphs, sexual assault investigations have been started with much less.
So has the woman filed a police complaint yet? I am kind of sure she could have found the time in the last 20-23 years or so.
Not to mention that the two alleged women were not actual witnesses, thus relegating anything they might have to say to hearsay testimony only. Not too sure how that would hold up in a court of law.
When it comes to sexual assault and rape - I believe when hearsay witnesses are involved, it is different, wouldn't be able to press charges because the statute of limitations have run out, but it would be included along with all the other mounting evidence against the turd.
That is the problem, There IS no mounting evidence.
If there was any real evidence, someone here would have posted it one of the many times I have asked for it.
Since they haven't, it must not exist.
The writer E. Jean Carroll came forward last week with explosive accusations that Donald Trump sexually assaulted her in the 1990s. Today, the two women she privately confided in after the alleged attack discuss it publicly for the first time with our colleague.
On today’s episode:
Megan Twohey, an investigative reporter for The New York Times, spoke with Ms. Carroll, Lisa Birnbach and Carol Martin.
===================================
The New York Times show describes this as the most serious allegation of sexual misconduct yet made against Trump.
Jean Carroll is lying
1 Bergdorf Goodman was a run down store then
2 the lingerie was not on the 7th floor back then as she claims. It was a small section of the 2nd floor
3the idea that Trump would be there, much less force his way into a fitting room with door locks and rape someone is ludicrous
“There's also the details about the lingerie department, which, Carroll says, was probably with the evening gowns and bathing suits. I don't even remember a lingerie department in those years. I bought pretty much everything from Bergdorf - the designer stuff on sale on the 6th floor (man, did I score on the Donna Karan!), and lots of clothes and shoes from the young women's department on the fifth floor, always looking at the sale racks first for bargains. I bought baby clothes on the 6th floor for friends and relatives with new babies (how I loved sending those Bergdorf packages, exquisitely packed, with really fancy baby dresses!) and I bought beautiful notebooks and vases and fancy candies on the 7th floor. But lingerie? The idea that it would be packed with evening gowns and bathing suits sounds like a Macys department store set-up, not a Bergdorf's one. I had to look it up. Sure enough, this retail history shows that the lingerie department barely existed at the time, it was on the 2nd floor with the men's wear. And it was insignificant. A barely there lingerie department for shopping for lingerie? Why would Trump pick such a place to shop for lingerie when there were so many other competitors with far bigger selections, starting with Saks down the street? (Which would have been about as close to Trump Tower (built 1983) as Bergdorf's.)
Next up, the security cameras. Lots of attention on that. One thing is pretty sure though: 1996 was one of the last pre-Internet era years out there, and IP security cameras seen now only came on the market in 1996. Would down-at-the-heels dowdy Bergdorf's have been the first customer? No wonder Bergdorf's has no images as Carroll cites - whatever they would have had would have been nearly worthless, and the nearly useless data very bulky and hard to store. More history of the use of security cameras, particularly on the 'prevent shoplifting' angle (which would have been likely used in more mass market department stores, not Bergdorf's with its locked dressing room doors) is worth looking into. I doubt Bergdorf's had much of any of that.”
Oh, now I'm convinced she's lying
American Stinker is your source?
That's not worth a shit as a source.
This ridiculous passage is in the link you gave
17-20 women have accused Trump, not of "bad talk", but of bad action.
It’s just as credible as msnbc or cnn which have no credibility.
the article provided someone’s personal knowledge of the store where this phony rape accusation is supposed to have occurred
prove their information is wrong
Trump said that he has never met her and doesn't know who she is....
Weird that there is a photo of them together.
Trump is lying.....yet again.
Perhaps, but if you remember EVERY person you've ever met at a party or get together from 20+ years ago, you are a better man than i. That and several hours after Trump said he never met her this picture from over 20 years ago magically shows up?
Something smells rotten in Denmark to me.
So you just gave a perfectly good reason why Trump might have met her despite denying it - even assuming with his greatest memory ever that he wasn't just lying.
And perhaps the picture showed up because he said he hadn't met her - if he had admitted meeting her, there would have been no reason for the picture to have shown up?
Why does that smell rotten? It makes perfect sense.
And what is that?
Nope, it's on you to prove they are correct pastor. Which they are not.
Fair enough... In any case, time for me to get something accomplished today.
Wrong. In this country the responsibility falls upon accusers to prove their accusation.
I bet she believes that for everyone but Trump
Wrong. Your source/you said they lied. It's on you/your source to prove it
A simple google search of Bergdorf Goodman/Neiman Marcus will provide you with plenty of proof as to exactly how full of crappola the author is.
The author also misrepresented the details given by Ms. Carroll in recent interviews. To be more specific, Trump asked for her help in finding a gift for a girlfriend. Ms. Carroll, who admits to being quite smitten and in awe of Trump back then, took him to the hat section and then the purse section. Trump brought up the trip to the lingerie department. Although she may have been thinking, "How great is this! I'm hanging out with Donald Trump!", she had no idea what was about to happen, nor could she have predicted it.
Regardless of how the encounter started, it ended with a sexual assault. It doesn't help Trump's denials that he has bragged openly about sexually assaulting women. In fact, the Inside Edition tape could have been describing the dressing room encounter with Ms. Carroll.
That is freaking hilarious.
The woman made an accusation of rape against the President, and you don't expect HER to prove it, but then demand that someone else prove something?
How hypocritical.
Because you basically said that it's unlikely anyone would remember everyone they met at a party 20 years ago. So clearly he could have met her and forgotten ... or else he could be lying, which fits his M.O. (especially since he has the greatest memory of anyone, ever).
Spin your yarn .... i'm simply saying most people WOULD NOT remember EVERYONE they met decades ago. It's not unreasonable to think that he could have forgotten her no matter how hard you try to spin it.
Did he? Only he and God know for sure.
The whole premise is rather bizarre.
I have met thousands of people during my career. Bet I couldn't name more than a hundred of them, and probably couldn't recognize even 300 of them.
Highly doubtful I could remember someone I met ONE time 20-something years ago.
Just another in a list of excuses because they simply have no proof whatsoever that Trump raped her. I know, because I have asked multiple times for that proof, and all I get is deflection or crap or ignored.
Yeah, it's just based on hatred for Trump. Nothing more, nothing less.
Did you watch her interview with Anderson Cooper.
I'm actually surprised CNN let it air.
What yarn? I'm pointing out that you provided a good reason why he could have met her. I happen to agree with you that most people don't remember everyone they ever met.
Donald Trump told the world he likes to grab the pussies of women he has just met or barely knows. On the bus with Billy Bush Trump was fantasizing about walking up and kissing on the mouth the woman who had been sent ,by the organization staging the event, to meet Trump's bus.
Trump has SAID he likes to grab womens pussies , strangers or virtual strangers. Thus it is NOT far fetched that he could have molested a woman in a store dressing room. I don't think we will see "proof" it happened, but the corroboration of the two friends of Carroll helps her case.
She is just a little strange.
That has absolutely nothing to do with if he met her or not nor is on topic for that matter.
You know John. For a guy who is quick to point out off topic posts you sure like to go off the reservation in you own threads. Is that because you know "off topic" can't be reported in your own threads or because you are just a huge hypocrite?
Your reply is a rather blatant example of commenting incompetence.
When the accused publicly proclaims that he likes to engage in a certain behavior, and that is the type of behavior he is then accused of, you actually think it is "off topic" to point that out? Holy Smoly!
Trump is known to brag about things he’s never done. There is ZERO evidence he’s ever done those things
That you're using the fact that Trump is a known liar as a defense so you can keep on supporting him in the face of so many accusations is just really, really sad.
Well it does seem like there's a group of people who accept what he says as truth if it can make him look bad while rejecting what he says as false if it paints him in good color.
Myself I tend to try to take all that with a grain of salt because I was not there so I do not know the exact truth. Instead I will take his actions and how they impact me (because that's the only real truth we know, how something impacts us). I can have empathy for other people but I do not know exactly how it is impacting them so I cannot take it as gospel truth.
Was she swabbed for DNA evidence?
If not, why not?
Were these friends of her's witnesses to the alleged attack?
She's no more credible than Kavanaugh's accusers.
You and people like you are the very reason many women choose not to report their sexual assaults.
Maybe because we have seen this play out before--especially in politics.
Accuse someone of something decades later, without any proof.
Get mad at anyone asking for proof.
Phffft.
If they choose not to report them, I find it interesting that she waited until now to do it. For full impact, she should have waited until a couple months before the election.
Yup, the victim blamers and shamers.
Somehow I'd bet that you had no problem believing Clinton's accusers. It's all a partisan game for too many people.
I'll gladly take your money on that bet. Just send it to me, okay?
I hate it when crap like this happens DECADES later when no proof other than he said/she said is offered. I consider it bullshit. Doesn't matter if the accused is Democrat, Republican, or pink with purple polka dots.
Show your evidence that Carroll is a "victim".
See, that is the thing.
They simply HAVE no evidence.
I have asked repeatedly, and NOTHING from them in the way of evidence, and yet, some folks STILL believe it because they hate Trump.
That is as simple as it gets--believe anything bad about Trump--whether it is true or not.
Since hearsay isn't evidence, there aren't any victims, blamers, or shamers.
Sexual predators are irredeemable. Just sayin...
Trump told Billy Bush that if you're famous they (women) let you do anything. I think he actually believes that and has acted on that impulse more than once or twice.
Trump’s third response to assault allegation is arguably his worst
The public learned on Friday about new sexual-assault allegations E. Jean Carroll, a longtime writer and media figure, raised against Donald Trump. Her account, published as a book excerpt in New York magazine, described an alleged incident in a department store in the mid-1990s in which the future president attacked her in a dressing room.
Carroll said she told two friends about the alleged incident at the time, both of whom are journalists the writer did not identify by name. She’s the latest in a series of women who’ve accused Trump of misconduct.
As we’ve discussed , the president issued a written response on Friday afternoon, claiming he’s never met Carroll. The New York magazine article, however, included a photograph of the two interacting at an event years before the alleged attack.
His second response came a day later, during a brief Q&A with reporters, when Trump again said he has “no idea who this woman is,” before sharing details about Carroll’s background. He proceeded to dismiss the relevance of the photograph, before comparing himself to Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, which wasn’t exactly helpful .
All of which set the stage for Response #3 .
The president’s “not my type” rhetoric made it sound as if he doesn’t consider Carroll attractive enough to attack.
And while that’s obviously indefensible, it’s also painfully familiar. This report , published just a few weeks before Election Day 2016, comes to mind.
As we discussed at the time, the not-so-subtle implication was that Trump doesn’t find one of his accusers physically attractive, so we shouldn’t believe her claims of sexual assault.
A controversy ensued at the time, though Trump apparently learned nothing from it.
Leeds reported that Rump - on a flight - flipped up the arm rest and grabbed her breast and put a hand up her skirt. (Another pussy grab)
So another couple of nutjobs have come out of the woodwork decades later to accuse the President of something without a scintilla of evidence.
Must be another day ending in a "y".
Yawn.
What does it feel like to constantly defend a pathological liar?
[deleted]
I WOULDN'T KNOW.
What does it feel like to constantly attack your President and believe every scurrilous claim against him--even ones from DECADES ago without a scintilla of evidence?
Sure you do. It's one of your daily activities here.
Hmmmmm. Food for thought.
Gee, John, then why did you even bother to ask if you are going to tell me what I feel?
Why waste your precious, valuable time asking something you claim to already know? That seems rather silly to me.
Why not answer MY questions, John?
[deleted]
I think you are confused as to what you think I
"admitted"
Too bad he was not the President when this allegedly happened.
Which means what?
Well, for one thing, had Trump been President, there would have been WITNESSES, as the President is guarded by SS.
Instead, we have a woman who can't remember when it allegedly happened--year or season-- and has absolutely no proof that ANYTHING ever even occurred.
And still, despite all the CLAIMS, no proof.
Phfft.
......... Breaking news:
Two people come forward, to back up other person coming forward, with decades old accusation of President Trump.
In other news person coming forward with Trump accusations manages to creep out Anderson Cooper when interviewed.
News at 11:00 ......
One of these people was a NY city news anchorwoman and the other was a magazine writer. They are credible people.
Newswoman Carol Martin
Credible? Perhaps.
Hopefully she interviews better than Carroll.
The New York Times says they will have another story on these two women later today, so we'll see what happens.
True, time will tell. All i can say is that the timing of this is suspicious at best.
The weaponization of decades old accusations in todays society is not a good thing. And i'm not saying that only because this is against Trump.
It's bad for everyone.
What's so suspicious about it? What would you consider a better time to be? After he leaves office?
Oh, no, nothing suspicious about some claim decades old being brought up at the start of campaign season, without one scintilla of evidence.
Nope, nothing suspicious about that, no-sir-ee!
LMFAO!
Are you saying that Lisa Birnbach and Carol Martin are liars?
Look at my post again.
Does it look like I stated that to you?
If you have evidence that Trump assaulted and raped the woman, please, please, please provide it.
Yes
Perhaps the first time he ran for President?
Ya think?
Nothing suspicious about a man being accused of sexual assault or rape after having been credibly accused of sexual assault by at least 19 other women and who said himself on tape "You know I'm automatically attracted to beautiful—I just start kissing them. It's like a magnet. Just kiss. I don't even wait. And when you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab 'em by the pussy. You can do anything."
What's really suspicious are the number of his supporters who seem to readily believe accusers of Democrats and immediately call for their removal even when there is no evidence other than the accusers accusation, but they just ignore the preponderance of evidence that has piled up against Donald Trump showing a clear pattern over the last forty years of, at best, adultery, secret affairs, sexual assault, sexual misconduct. At worst, we now have multiple accusations of rape against the President. Trump makes Bill Clinton look like a choir boy in comparison, and I didn't even vote for Bill because of the handful of accusations against him in the 1990's that I believed and the nearly two dozen Trump accusers are far more credible.
The fact that this didn't come out sooner is suspicious. No doubt about it.
Credible?
because you say so?
Just like I told John, please, please, please show us any evidence you have that Trump raped anyone.
If all those women are so credible, surely you can come up with something?
All those accusers disappeared after Trump won. No civil suits, no criminal actions
many were paid by the left to make those false allegations
Yes, but her book wasn't ready then. There were all of those other women- who have since disappeared- taking up the spot light. And most importantly Trump wasn't supposed to win!
Give that man a ceegar!
Prove it.
That was already done and the same accusations happened then.
That statement is a lie. There are still civil suits happening.
[deleted]
Well unless i missed it back then ..... not hers.
Really? All those women came forward, and in response Trump paid for the 6 Clinton accusers to appear at the debate and sit in the front row. You really don't remember that?
None of them disappeared. None of them were paid to make any of the accusations. In most cases the statute of limitations had expired so they were unable to pursue civil or criminal action. I really can't imagine what it would feel like to defend such an obvious slime ball like Donald Trump and how anyone could take his word over so many women. And the fact is, we can take his word when he doesn't know he's being recorded as he admitted "I don't even wait" for their permission.
Hmmm, let's see. Maybe 1995, 1996 ... or 2005? Ok, even 2010-2015.
Why did a registered Democrat who donated to Obama's and Hillary's campaigns and has blatantly said she hates that Trump is in the WH wait until the 2020 election cycle and the upcoming release of her book to trash Trump? Kinda creepy that she flirted with Anderson Cooper, too. He's young enough to be her son.
That is a totally false statement.
Nothing in the world prevented any one of these oh-so-credible accusers from filing police report in a timely manner, or from filing civil suits in a timely manner.
The fact that they CHOSE not to do so is their own fault--not Trump's or the law's fault.
I will. They're lying.
Prove they are not, or better yet, provide better evidence that this alleged encounter is nothing more than an old woman's "sexy" fantasies.
And his real mom just died.
I think you are in the wrong thread. This one is about Jean Carroll and her recent accusations against Trump. Unless i missed it, she did not make those accusations the first time he ran for POTUS. It IS very suspicious that she decides only now to make the accusation. What you are talking about is off topic but it won't get reported because i guess in some way it supports the narrative the author is pushing here.
I do feel sorry for Carroll though. She'll be cooked, cleaned and used by the Democrats just like Dr Ford was. Sad but here it comes ..... i wonder how many more are to follow ,....
I am responding to you, are you in the wrong thread? Or did you suddenly remember?
Lol .... the old PeeWee Herman " i know you are but what am i" gambit ... sad that you need to resort to that.
Its either that or you're having a stroke. Perhaps you should call someone .....
I watched the interview and I have to admit, she is one strange bird. I can't say one way or another if she is telling the truth or not because she doesn't interview well at all. My gut tells me something may have happened, but probably not to the extent that she claims. She does have a motive to embellish her story; she is selling a book and she clearly doesn't like trump at all.
So I am on the fence here.
I agree.
Stranger things have happened ..... in both directions.
Overall, I agree with your comment.
This reminds me of Christine Blasey Ford. I really believe that something happened to her, but it wasn't done by the man she accused.
All those accusers disappeared after Trump won. No civil suits, no criminal actions
many were paid by the left to make those false allegations'
Proof pastor?
If you have any evidence of criminal proceedings, please, SHOW IT.
Trump said he was going to sue "all of those women" after the election....he didn't.
Perhaps that constitutes "proof" where you live, but for the rest of us, it does not.
Just proves that trump is all talk, and a liar to boot.
So once again (sigh*), no proof for what was asked of you, and a deflection into another tired old Hate Trump screed.
If they had it would be on CNN and MSNBC every week
I keep asking, and still haven't seen any evidence.
Wonder why they won't prove it?
Just because the bible says that a rapist only has to buy his victim from her father if he is caught, doesn't mean most sexual assaults have witnesses. Assaulters are generally not going to assault someone with witnesses around.
If you would do a little research before making your claims, you would know the statements would be lies.
List of Trump's accusers and their allegations of sexual misconduct
Lists and lists and lists.
How about a list of credible EVIDENCE that Trump assaulted or raped ANYONE?
I wasn't talking about the Bible.
I was talking about any evidence.
You know what that is, right?
Seems like lots of people like to make claims, and then, when asked for PROOF, suddenly can't come up with any.
Why is that?
You have accusations, lie detector tests, testimony under oath, witnesses, and Trump's own recorded statements. It is pretty obvious that you would not accept any evidence.
So the usual no real evidence.
Figured anyways--I have asked MULTIPLE times here for evidence, and all I get is deafening silence, deflection, or just plain crap instead.
I wonder if these two women know about the Law and Order Special Victims Unit (Season 13, Episode 11) program that is astoundingly similar to Ms. Carroll's rape fantasy. Start video at 42:15.
I also wonder if these women know that Ms. Carroll is a registered Democrat, has donated to both Obama's and Hillary's campaigns and hates Donald Trump.
Season 13 of SVU was 2012.
Lisa Birnbach and Carol Martin told the NYT that Carroll told them that she was sexually assaulted by Trump AT THE TIME IT HAPPENED, twenty some years ago.
Even if Carroll made up the story, she made it up 15 years before a similar story aired on a television show.
Got anything else Jasper?
How quickly we've forgotten how many nutjobs with incongruent accusations regarding Justice Kavanaugh crawled out of the woodwork. Where are they now, John?
I certainly do have more; thanks for asking.
This will suffice for now.
[deleted]
Just to cease the endless arguments, can anyone anywhere please provide any proof whatsoever that Trump raped this woman anywhere at any time?
Seems I have heard that if you make accusations, the burden is on you to prove it. They are easy to make--hell, anyone can say anything.
So prove it please, as has been asked repeatedly and ignored repeatedly.
Why does the burden of proof go out the window when it comes to Trump?
Still not one bit of credible evidence for Trump raping anyone.
I guess unfounded accusations sans proof is now the modus operandi of some folks.
What will it take to get to see the evidence instead of wagging tongues?
19 accusations of rape or sexual assault is enough for me.
So if I could find 19 women to say Bernie Sanders or Joe Biden raped them, you would believe it.
Pretty interesting but I bet good money you wouldn't believe a word of it without real proof--you know--the kind lacking from Trump accusers.
Fuck "IF." Either get busy and find something or admit you're constantly covering for a sexual predator.
Is Gloria Allred involved ?
She's helped so many accusers to disappear after "Claiming" something.
Don't forget Avenatti. He's another one.
Trump Haters are such a JOKE !
I'm just curious, but how many conservatives would be leaping to the defense of Hillary Clinton if she had been accused by 19 different men of inappropriate groping and/or sexual assault and there was audio tape of Hillary saying "You know I'm automatically attracted to handsome — I just start kissing them. It's like a magnet. Just kiss. I don't even wait. And when you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab 'em by the dicks. You can do anything."?
Now, there is no other evidence other than the accusers word and the fact that there is some evidence that they did interact with Hillary during the times they claim the assaults happened, but no other corroborating evidence.
So, do you believe the accusers or do you continue to proclaim "She was a high profile target, none of those guys have any actual evidence she assaulted them and politicians are known to be liars so when she said 'Grab 'em by the dicks' she was just engaging in fantasy locker room talk, that wasn't an admission of actual conduct..."?
I just have a very hard time believing that would be the reaction of most conservatives, yet if it's not, then it gives substantial evidence as to some serious, monumental levels of hypocrisy.
You do know you won't get a real answer to your question, don't you?
Sure would be nice if someone would provide proof of what Trump is accused of instead of GUESSING what conservatives MIGHT have done if Hillary had been accused of the same things.