No Presidential campaign is complete without an opponent of a Presidential candidate deciding to bring up a rape charge, and attempting to get it into the media spotlight to hurt him, and this campaign cycle is no different.
E. Jean Carrol, a columnist for The Atlantic, apparently highly interested in writing about Trump, went on a media blitz in 2019 to promote her articles, and to accuse Trump of rape that she claims happened in 1990 in an upscale department store dressing room and Trump responded to the allegations, denying the charges.
Upscale Department stores have numerous attentendents who are constantly at the door selling clothing, checking on sizes and so on, so many women are uncomfortable with the timing of Carrol’s story, the details of the story, and with the idea that she waited almost 30 years into Trump’s presidential run, to say anything.
In responding to the allegations, with Trump denying the event happened, and saying that he wasn’t attracted to her, Carroll says she was defamed, and so now she wants to sue him for defamation.
Bill Barr of the US Department of Justice stepped in saying his job is to protect the President, and Carroll took issue with that, wanting her day in court, and posting her outrage at Trump all over social media. Tuesday a Federal Judge ruled that Trump is not entitled to that protection, leaving Carroll to continue her public rampage against Trump.
ABC News 7 reported Tuesday of the developments:
“A federal judge on Tuesday rejected the Justice Department’s attempt to be the defendant in E Jean Carroll’s defamation lawsuit against President Trump.
Carroll, a former Elle columnist, claimed Donald Trump raped her in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room in the 1990s.
“While the president possesses all of the executive power of the United States, he is not an ’employee’ within the meaning of the FTCA,” Judge Lewis Kaplan said, referring to the Federal Tort Claims Act, which shields federal employees from individual damages claims. “The FTCA’s definition of that term does not include presidents.”
Carroll has described the Justice Department’s attempted intervention in her case as part of a pattern of the Justice Department acting as President Trump’s personal law firm.
“There is not a single person in the United States – not the president and not anyone else – whose job description includes slandering women they sexually assaulted,” Carroll’s attorney, Roberta Kaplan, wrote earlier this month in a legal brief.
Judge Kaplan, no relation, appeared to agree.
“The government thus asserts that this case is virtually identical in principle to a lawsuit against a Postal Service driver for causing a car accident while delivering the mail,” he said in the decision. “But the word ‘virtually’ in the last sentence is necessary because there is an important difference between this case and the case of the hypothetical mail driver.”
After Carroll made public her allegation, President Trump said in June of 2019: “No. 1 she’s not my type. No. 2 it never happened.”
Carroll sued Trump in 2019, accusing him of defaming her with his denials.”
The question becomes how the lawyer for Carroll can make statements that cement their idea that Trump is guilty of sexual assault, and make public statements that she was in fact sexually assaulted. There has been no trial to determine any sexual assault.
Are statements like that dangerous to the office of the president? Could Barr have a point? Is there no end to the tactic of the mysterious and often decades-old “rape” charges against the president, in an attempt to political opponents to discredit him?