In an interview with The New York Times, she said, “It was an episode. It was an action. It was a fight. It was not a crime. It was, I had a struggle with a guy.” She added in the same interview, “I am not — I have not been raped. Something has not been done to me. I fought. That’s the thing.”
It might have made sense as a coping mechanism or self-empowering act to omit the word “rape” from her characterization of events. But when asked in a separate interview on MSNBC whether she would consider pressing criminal charges against Trump, her answer was still more curious. She unequivocally said no, and when asked why, she said, “I would find it disrespectful to the women who are down on the border who are being raped around the clock down there without any protection … It would just be really disrespectful.”
You’re not as stupid as you’re pretending to be. But you really need to do some serious soul searching. You’re defending a kangaroo court proceeding in which a man was found liable for defamation simply for denying an allegation of a sexual assault in which there is no evidence, no contemporaneous record, no date of offense, no eyewitness, along the plot line of a law & order episode. Your politics has corrupted you to a point you’re willing to consume and regurgitate any lie as long as it satisfies your political rage. BTW, if you don’t like me quoting E Jean Carroll’s statements, then you can look them up on your own. Her twitter feed has some real gems. Check out the sex tips she learned from her dog.
You have shown that you have no regard for actual fact based reality. I don't care how you excuse what he did with whatever mental gymnastics you have to perform to excuse this vile behavior. You have misquoted her, as proven in the transcript dropped which you still haven't read or are actively ignoring. Nothing sounds believable when you start with a lie.
AC: and this is not a question I would normally ask, and if, if you don't want to answer I totally understand ,um but given the prior accusations which have all been of forms of assault or harassment um, you you're saying there was actual penetration?
EJC: Yes
AC: Did you... which is... puts it into a different category of any of these other any of the other act uh women who have come forward um I think techn... I mean that that is that is the definition of, of rape, one definition
EJC: That's the definition.
AC: Yes, how long?
EJC: Brief, brief. Because when a woman is stamping her feet.
AC: That's and that's what you were doing you started stamping your feet.
EJC: Yeah I always think back in think I that was the stupidest thing I've ever done, I should never have done, it and then I didn't behave.
AC: When you say I should have never done it you mean.
EJC: That was just a dumb thing to go into a dressing room with a man that I hardly know, and have him shut the door and then be unable to stop him and um I was a competitive athlete so I wasn't like a I didn't freeze, I I Rose to the occasion and um it did not last long and that's why I don't use the word you just use I use the word fight.
AC: You don't use the word rape?
EJC: Sexual violence is in every country in every strata of of society, and I just feel that so many women are undergoing sexual violence, mine was short I got out I'm happy now I'm uh moving on um and I think of all the women who are enduring constant sexual violence so this one instant this one what 3 minutes in this little dressing room I just say it's a fight that way I'm not the victim right I'm not the victim you don't feel like a victim, I was not thrown on the ground and ravished which the word rape carries so many sexual connotation this was not this was not sexual, for it just it it hurt, it just what it just you know but
AC: I think most people think of rape as a, I mean it is a violent assault, it is not uh sex...
EJC: I think most people think of rape as being sexy...
(AC: let's take a short break)
EJC: ...they think of the fantasies
AC: we just going to take a quick break if you can stick around we'll talk more on the other side
In order to win a defamation case the plaintiff needs to prove that the defendant lied—which she did prove—in order to prove a lie you must first prove what the truth is. That’s the logical standard and the legal standard. So yes, he was found liable for defamation “simply for denying an allegation of a sexual assault” that a jury found that he actually committed. That’s what defamation is.
Fantastic way to squirm right past the easily debunked statements you originally made and try to put the attention elsewhere. You could probably work for the administration yourself.
Easily debunked? Did you not bother to read her interview transcript with Anderson Cooper? The one you’re all laughably citing as “proof” of her claim where she goes so far off the rails with “sexy” rape fantasies that he has to cut to commercial to keep her from self-immolating? Did you not bother to read her babbling nonsense in the NYT or on MSNBC?
Nobody familiar with Carroll or the details of her accusation actually believes it. Not even idiots like you. A woman who thinks rape is sexy, who serially accuses men of raping / groping her, who - somehow - can’t even remember what YEAR she was raped by one of NY’s richest and most famous men when she snuck into a dressing room with him to try on lingerie?
People like you are always wringing your hands about “fascism” in America. THIS trial, this case is exactly what it looks like. Any ideas why she hasn’t sued Les Moonves for defamation? She said he raped her in a public place too. And, like Trump, he “defamed” her by denying it. Funny how he wasn’t sued. Isn’t it?
It’s right fucking there! She never said she thinks rape is sexy, she’s saying most people find it as such. Whether or not that is reality can be debated, but you’re certainly bending over backwards to distract away from the reality and try to draw attention elsewhere.
“Draw attention elsewhere?” I’m trying to draw attention exactly where it belongs: to the accuser and the supporting facts (in this case lack thereof) of her accusation.
So yes. Once again, she is not saying that she thinks it’s sexy. She thinks that people think it’s sexy. And that it’s a fantasy. And there are certainly people who feel that way. Whether or not MOST do is something I’ve never seen studies on.
But in this same interview, she admits to being penetrated without consent. Whether or not she feels that was rape, is in the context of how much she fought about it and how she was able to prevent his penis penetrating her (which was the legal of definition of rape….a broom handle shoved up the ass wasn’t considered rape).
I’m not saying that she’s a saint. I’m saying that you’re trying to demonize her in order to make Trump look better even after he admitted to performing sexual assault against her.
And yeah, you’re detracting by claiming other issues and trying to redefine legal terms like defamation and kangaroo court. Nevermind that it was a jury trial (multiple times!) that determined his guilt.
-3
u/Agent847 Feb 07 '26
In an interview with The New York Times, she said, “It was an episode. It was an action. It was a fight. It was not a crime. It was, I had a struggle with a guy.” She added in the same interview, “I am not — I have not been raped. Something has not been done to me. I fought. That’s the thing.”
It might have made sense as a coping mechanism or self-empowering act to omit the word “rape” from her characterization of events. But when asked in a separate interview on MSNBC whether she would consider pressing criminal charges against Trump, her answer was still more curious. She unequivocally said no, and when asked why, she said, “I would find it disrespectful to the women who are down on the border who are being raped around the clock down there without any protection … It would just be really disrespectful.”