People in glass Trump Towers shouldn’t throw stones — or, perhaps, throw around accusations of rape, as one Donald Trump did recently in his now infamous remarks suggesting that Mexican immigrants are a bunch of rapists.
A must-read story yesterday in The Daily Beast points out that Trump is not only a rape accuser of sorts, but someone who was once very publicly accused of rape — by his now-former wife Ivana Trump, who, in a deposition in her divorce case against the Donald in the early 90s, said that she’s been attacked one night by her then husband in a fit of rage, screaming at her and pulling out her hair before ripping off her clothes and raping her.
The Beast reports that, according to Lost Tycoon, a 1993 book about Trump by journalist Harry Hurt III, Ivana told her closest friends that “he raped me.” Later, though, in a statement she provided through Trump’s lawyers, and that was reprinted in the book as “A Notice to Readers,” Ivana backed away from the R-word, saying that
[a]s a woman, I felt violated, as the love and tenderness, which he normally exhibited towards me, was absent. I referred to this as a ‘rape,’ but I do not want my words to be interpreted in a literal or criminal sense.
Make of that what you will.
At the time, the Daily Beast notes, Trump declared the account in the book
incorrect and done by a guy without much talent … He is a guy that is an unattractive guy who is a vindictive and jealous person.
Very Trumpian.
But even more remarkable than this bizarre denial was the even Trumpier response that Michael Cohen, one of Trump’s lawyers, gave to the Daily Beast writer who asked him about the allegations:
You’re talking about the front-runner for the GOP, presidential candidate, as well as private individual who never raped anybody.
Evidently one cannot be a rapist if one is polling better than Jeb Bush.
Cohen continued:
And, of course, understand that by the very definition, you can’t rape your spouse.
As the Beast points out, Cohen is completely wrong here. Not only is marital rape illegal in New York state now; it was illegal in New York state in 1989, the date of the alleged rape.
Perhaps sensing he wasn’t getting anywhere with the “you can’t rape your spouse” angle, “Trump’s lawyer then changed tactics,” the Beast reports,
lobbing insults and threatening a lawsuit if a story was published.
“I will make sure that you and I meet one day while we’re in the courthouse. And I will take you for every penny you still don’t have. And I will come after your Daily Beast and everybody else that you possibly know,” Cohen said. “So I’m warning you, tread very fucking lightly, because what I’m going to do to you is going to be fucking disgusting. You understand me?”
“You write a story that has Mr. Trump’s name in it, with the word ‘rape,’ and I’m going to mess your life up…for as long as you’re on this frickin’ planet…you’re going to have judgments against you, so much money, you’ll never know how to get out from underneath it,” he added.
Someone’s a bit grouchy.
Cohen continued, telling the Beast that
there is nothing reasonable about you wanting to write a story about somebody’s usage of the word ‘rape,’ when she’s talking [about] she didn’t feel emotionally satisfied.”
“Though there’s many literal senses to the word, if you distort it, and you put Mr. Trump’s name there onto it, rest assured, you will suffer the consequences. So you do whatever you want. You want to ruin your life at the age of 20? You do that, and I’ll be happy to serve it right up to you,” he added.
Given that the Beast ran the story, and we’re talking about it now, it kind of, sort of, appears that Cohen’s Trumpian lawyering backfired a little bit. And that’s a very good thing, because this is a story that needs to be re-aired.
Well, not surprising, given Trump’s personality. Definitely a man who should not ever be with human beings ever.
This is a story:
Donald Trump may have raped his wife. It sounds very believable to me.
Come at me Cohen.
This kind of sounds like a rape threat itself. What part of him thought this would be good way to make himself and his client look good? Also, what kind of lawyer doesn’t understand that journalists have 1st amendment protections and you’re not really going to be successful at winning any kind of case against them unless you can prove that they were outright purposely lying. Printing some quotes publicly available in a book doesn’t meet that standard. Not by a long shot.
If she didn’t consent, that’s rape. But a lot of women, especially women who a little bit older don’t really process spousal rape as a rape. We’re socialized to look at rape as a stranger jumping out of the bushes. Or maybe someone drugging your drink or a date that won’t take no for an answer. People don’t want to believe someone they loved and trusted can do that. Obviously, she knows what happened better than I do, but just because she walked it back a little, doesn’t mean she wasn’t raped. Chances are, she knew pursuing any kind of rape charge would be worse than the rape itself considering what kind of press it would get.
“He is a guy that is an unattractive guy who is a vindictive and jealous person.”
So we should disbelieve him on the basis that The Trump claims he’s unattractive? How does that work? Should we only believe the words of unattractive people if they’re also racist, shit-spewing, ultra right-wing, arsehole billionaires?
Looks like somebody‘s about to lose his license.
Hey Alan, exactly how against the lawyerin’ rules is that? Am I correct in assuming “Very”?
So Trump is full on MRA. Another reason to hate him and the people who continue to willingly support him*.
So not only has he pissed off many immigrants and veterans, he now is well on his way to pissing off half the population of the country. The GOP really needs to completely disassociate themselves from him. They should have after his first Mexican comments. not doing so now after his third strike just makes it look like they support him and what he is saying.
I assume the next thing we will see is a press release saying that Trump does not agree with what they lawyer was saying and the lawyer acted on his own without the approval of Trump or something similar that throws the lawyer under the bus.
*I want to note: I do not consider working for Trump as supporting him. I consider the folks who publically try to rationalize his actions and help/aid him.
If I was a shareholder for one of his companies I would be selling my stock and getting off his board as quick as possible.
You know who I really feel bad for? Everyone who now works for a Trump property or business. His actions place them in league with him just because they have his name on their building.
Trump may want to replace his current lawyer with one that actually knows laws.
That is one creepy-as-heck lawyer. O_O
Okay, any interview with Trump that doesn’t ask about the lawyer’s comments, at a minimum, should be considered officially softballing him.
“Mr. Trump, your lawyer recently claimed that a man cannot rape his wife, stating that it was a matter of case law–this despite the fact that marital rape laws are on the books in all 50 states, and most states treat marital rape like any other sexual assault. Will your appointments as President show the same sort of grotesque incompetence and appalling ignorance of their alleged areas of knowledge?”
Here’s hoping that the lawyers comments have a Streisand effect on this story.
@ SFHC
Funnily enough I was pondering the different approach to lawyering in the US as opposed to here before this Trump matter arose; I’ve been looking at that Cosby CNN piece.
The rules over here are quite different. Barristers generally cannot make *any* comment about cases. There’s a mild exception in that, once a case has completely concluded (i.e. no chance of further appeals etc.), we can do learned articles or lectures for law students and the like and mention individual cases we were involved in. Generally though it’s considered in bad taste to comment about the merits of a case although technically we can say things like “that particular law might need reform”. Saying something like “It was a complete stich up” though is very much frowned upon.
Solicitors can comment on ongoing cases but only in very neutral terms “My client denies the allegations” etc.
The US system is very different. Attorneys seem to be advocates both in and outside the courtroom. They’re more akin to PR reps a lot of the time.
I had a look at the New York Bar Code of Conduct. What surprised me was there was no general “bringing the profession into disrepute” clause. Now had the lawyer’s comments been made during or before actual proceedings there are some restrictions. He could say his client denied the charges but he wouldn’t be allowed to make any comment actually disparaging any witnesses.
In this case though it seems that he probably hasn’t actually breached any professional ethics rules!
That’s the First Amendment for you I suppose.
SFHC
If you fancy trawling through 196 pages of professional conduct rules 🙂
https://www.nysba.org/professionalstandards/
Oh, how very redpillian. Will the manuresphere elect The Donald as their Honorary Alpha? Cos dude sure knows how to handle wives ‘n things.
This revelation will likely increase Trump’s popularity among his fans.
Michael Cohen sounds like a thug.
@Alan:
I gotta say, I chuckled at your expectation of the ‘bringing the profession in disrepute’ clause in the rules of conduct for American lawyers.
@ Aunt Edna
He, yeah; I can be quite naïve at times 🙂
Can you imagine if you were a high-profile individual whose lawyer started spouting off like this?? What a nightmare.
@kellyrtillson
Thankfully, it happened to someone who profoundly deserves a lawyer like that.
Not only does Trump deserve this lawyer, he chose him for those very qualities we’ve seen. The lawyer is perfect for his client.
The Lawyer’s apology
an inarticulate comment which he doesn’t believe?
I would call that comment a lot of things, but not inarticulate. He was pretty clear about what he meant and seemed to believe.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/28/politics/donald-trump-adviser-michael-cohen-rape/
I have such contempt for this bully and his ilk. The fact that the GOP polls are so high for him just confirms my long held belief that republicans are just sexist bigots. Of course this guy turns them on.
Ugh, reading the Daily Beast article, it states that the marital exemption to rape in New York was not repealed until 1984…that is just ridiculous.
Nitram: Honestly, there’s some comfort to be had in Trump’s poll numbers. Unlike almost everyone else in the GOP Presidential Clown Car, Trump has nigh-universal name recognition. If only 20-25% are actually supporting him now, there’s almost no way he can hope to increase that–everyone knows who he is, and even among Republicans, 3 out of 4 reject him. that doesn’t mean they aren’t sexist and racist asshats, but it does suggest that there’s a line too far for many of them. We can work with that, slowly and with time, just as we’ve always done.
His lawyer is only doing what Trump himself has been modeling. So Trump’s got no one to blame but himself.
In my profession, we often say “you get the clients you deserve.” We usually say it to mean you get the clients that will challenge your practice and will make you improve.
In this case, Cohen has certainly got the client he deserves, they are both total arseholes. I hope Cohen isn’t married!