Trump Is A Filthy A-Hole. His Lawyers Hope Jurors In Carroll Defamation Case Never Find Out About It.

Donald Trump may be the world’s worst client, what with his propensity to get his counsel sanctioned or forced to testify to a federal grand jury. (Or in the case of Trump’s sparklemagic lawyer Alina Habba, both.) But it’s just possible that the former president may be even worse as a witness. Here are two excerpts from a deposition taken by E. Jean Carroll’s lawyer Roberta Kaplan on October 15, 2022.

This is one regarding the “Access Hollywood” tape:

KAPLAN: And you say and again, this has become very famous in this video. “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 them by the pussy. You can do anything.” That’s what you said; correct?

TRUMP: Well, historically, that’s true with stars.

KAPLAN: True with stars that they can grab women by the pussy?

TRUMP: Well, that’s what if you look over the last million years, I guess that’s been largely true. Not always, but largely true. Unfortunately or fortunately.

KAPLAN: And you consider yourself to be a star?

TRUMP: I think you can say that, yeah.

And this is Trump discussing his reaction to similar sexual assault allegations made by a woman named Jessica Leeds:

KAPLAN: When you said in that video that Ms. Leeds would not be your first choice, you were referring to her physical looks; correct?

TRUMP: Just the overall, not […] I looked at her. I see her. I hear what she says. Whatever. You wouldn’t be a choice of mine, either, to be honest with you. I hope you’re not insulted. I wouldn’t under any circumstances have any interest in you. I’m honest when I say it. She — I would not have any interest in.

KAPLAN: Well, other than her looks, did you know anything about … withdrawn. I’m an attorney in cases suing you.

A moment later Trump added, “Even if you weren’t suing me, I would have no interest, okay?”

Ain’t he a peach? Let’s take a wildass guess that Trump’s lawyers will not be putting him on the stand in April when E. Jean Carroll’s defamation and sexual battery claims against Donald Trump are set to go to trial in New York federal court.

Remember, there are two lawsuits here: Carroll I, filed in 2019 after Trump denied the advice columnist’s claim that Trump had raped her in a department store dressing room two decades ago, said she was participating in a Democratic hoax to destroy his presidency and sell books, and called Carroll not his “type”; and Carroll II, filed in 2022, which adds a battery claim under the newly enacted New York Adult Survivors Act and a second defamation count, after Trump repeated his original defamatory statement last year on Truth Social. Carroll I is currently before the DC Court of Appeals to determine if Trump was acting within the scope of his “employment” as president when he shit-talked her the first time, and will disappear if the court finds in the affirmative, since the government will be substituted as defendant, and you can’t sue Uncle Sam for defamation. If the DC court says Trump was just being a jackass as a private citizen, Carroll I will return to federal court, and will almost certainly be consolidated for trial with Carroll II.

The parties are currently kicking the shit out of each other in dueling evidentiary motions on how the cases can be presented. Carroll wants to introduce the infamous “Access Hollywood” tape, depositions from two other women who accuse Trump of sexual assault in similarly public places, and Carroll’s own contemporaneous statements to her friends about the attack. She would like to exclude Trump’s belated offer to test his DNA against male genetic material found on the dress she says she wore the day of the assault, since it was made approximately five minutes ago, long after discovery was closed, and was denied by the court. Unsurprisingly, Trump would like none of the above. Those motions are still pending.

They’re also locked in a dispute over Trump’s expert examination in Carroll II, where Trump’s lawyers seek to subject the plaintiff, who is 79 years old, to 16 hours of examination using a battery of potentially 40 tests to determine whether she is “malingering” when she claims to have suffered lasting emotional damage from the attack. The court has now ruled that Trump’s experts can examine Carroll this week, but that they must confine themselves to the extent of her claimed injuries and cannot record the interview or force Carroll to sign a weird consent form.