If they can do it to Trump, they can and will do it to you.

OR

The treatment Trump gets is an alert to all of us. New York is out of control. If younlive there, leave. If you have assets there, get them out NOW!

The Trump-Carroll Case represents an outright failure of justice on an unmatched scale in current American history.

The grant of almost $90 million to the subpar recommendations columnist E. Jean Carroll will unquestionably go down in history as the most unjust ruling in modern American history. The case of Jean Carroll was not only ridiculous in its nature, but with the judge, the so-called “experts” who provided testimony, and the processes that led to the case, it is impossible for any regular individual in the Western world to view this as anything other than continuation of a series of deceitful schemes aimed at preventing former President Donald J. Trump from returning to the Oval Office in January 2025.

THE ‘RAPE’.
During the latest episode of this trial, Carroll admitted she wasn’t doing very well financially and needed to find a way to sell more books. The testimony appears to be the basis for the very first claim she ever made, in New York magazine’s The Cut, in the summer of 2019. Far from a compelling claim, the 80-year-old writer initially laid out the story that her supposed rape occurred either in 1994, before altering the day to be “in the fall of 1995 or the spring of 1996.” She couldn’t remember the specifics. What she did remember was that she was wearing a “Donna Karan coatdress and high heels but not a coat.” She later refused to produce said coat for DNA testing despite admitting to still owning it, describing it as “unworn and unlaundered since that evening.” It later came to light that the coatdress was not made in 1994 or 1995. It didn’t matter to Carroll, who has accused multiple men of sexually assaulting or raping her throughout her life, including a babysitter’s boyfriend, a dentist, a camp counselor, an unnamed college date, an unnamed boss, and CBS chief executive Les Moonves. Carroll also appeared to remember specifics such as the emptiness of the Bergdorf Goodman department store in the early evening– a detail she called “inconceivable”– as well as admitting that it was her who wanted to sexually harass Trump originally because she wanted a “funny story to tell” about getting the then-infamous New York City developer to put on women’s lingerie. Upon voluntarily entering a dressing room which she claims would “usually [be] locked until a client wants to try something on,” she claims Trump “unzips his pants, and, forcing his fingers around my private area, thrusts his penis halfway– or completely, I’m not certain– inside me.” After apparently struggling free, she says, “I don’t remember if any person or attendant is now in the lingerie department. I don’t remember if I run for the elevator or if I take the slow ride down on the escalator. As soon as I land on the main floor, I run through the store and out the door– I don’t recall which door– and find myself outside on Fifth Avenue.” The story itself beggars belief. If a celebrity had tried to rape me in a public place, I think the first thing I might have done was tell someone. In the words of her own friends, E. Jean Carroll is an “attention-seeker.” It is already difficult to imagine such a scenario unfolding without immediate consequences for the assailant, let alone when the victim is a nationally published attention-seeker.

LAW & ORDER.
But even if your sympathies still lay with Carroll, consider this. Carroll– a self-declared Law and Order TV show fan– first made her allegations against Trump in a 2019 book, just a few years after an episode of the show saw characters discuss a role-played rape in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room.

CNN reported in 2019 that Carroll was “an avid Law & Order franchise fan,” to which Carroll– an ostensibly damaged rape victim responded of the “coincidence”: “It tickled me to death.” She called it “a great, huge coincidence, but … a magnificent one.”

‘RAPE IS SEXY’.
One of the critical pieces of evidence left-wing Judge Lewis Kaplan forbade from being shown to the jury was the now-infamous clip of Carroll on CNN with Anderson Cooper. “The word rape carries so many sexual connotations,” she offered in a live discussion in 2019. “This was not sexual,” she added, to which Cooper replied: “I think most people think of rape as a violent assault.” Carroll’s response stunned Cooper himself. “I think most people think of rape as being sexy … think of the fantasies,” she said before CNN hurriedly cut to a commercial break.

Carroll’s online presence is filled with strange and inappropriate content, including naming her cat after a sexual organ and discussing sexual activities in detail. She has even shared her fantasies about celebrities, including Donald Trump, on her Facebook page. In one post, she posed a question about having sex with Trump for a large sum of money, and suggested that he might not be able to speak in the hypothetical scenario. This information was not allowed to be presented to the jury that awarded her nearly $85 million, in addition to the $5.5 million she was already awarded in her first case.

CONWAY, JONG-FAST, EPSTEIN, HALEY, HOFFMAN.
Carroll has admitted that she first considered bringing a suit against Trump during a house party hosted by far-left blogger Molly Jong-Fast. Jong-Fast, a writer for the viciously ‘Never Trump’ publications the Atlantic, the Bulwark, the Daily Beast, and Vanity Fair, is the daughter of feminist activist Erica Jong and anti-gun author Jonathan Fast. She is also the granddaughter of communist author Howard Fast. On one evening in 2019, Jong-Fast celebrated Kathy Griffin at her New York home. Griffin had recently been in the news for holding up a bloodied, severed prop head of President Donald Trump, suffering public backlash which she claimed “broke” her. But while Griffin was being pieced back together by Jong-Fast and company at the “Resistance Twitter come to life” party, lawyer George Conway, once married to Trump’s pollster Kellyanne Conway, was convincing Jean Carroll to sue Donald Trump. Conway has form in this area, once being involved with an effort to sue Bill Clinton. According to reporter Byron York: “Conway even suggested a lawyer, Roberta Kaplan, who had co-founded a #MeToo legal defense nonprofit group called Time’s Up. Kaplan was apparently deeply committed to helping victims of sexual abuse but deeply committed to politics, too: In August 2021, she resigned from Time’s Up over sexual misconduct allegations against New York Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo. The problem was Kaplan was not standing up for victims but was “involved in an effort to discredit one of Mr. Cuomo’s alleged victims,” according to a New York Times report. The E. Jean Carroll case would be a mix of sex and politics but with a Republican villain.” In other words, Kaplan was using Carroll as a means by which to repair her reputation, having attacked Governor Cuomo’s alleged victims. Kaplan– supposedly no relation to Judge Lewis Kaplan, who presided over the Trump case– indeed became E. Jean Carroll’s lawyer. So, who would fund the case? Perhaps someone else looking to do damage control as it was emerging that he visited disgraced sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein’s notorious island. Enter LinkedIn founder Reid Hoffman, who Carroll even initially lied about, when she was asked if someone was funding the operation against Trump. “Is anyone else paying your legal fees, Ms. Carroll?” she was asked during a deposition, responding: “No.” This lie soon fell apart, and Roberta Kaplan was forced to write a letter that stated: “During the course of preparing for her testimony at trial, Ms. Carroll has recollected additional information … While Ms. Carroll stands by that testimony about this case being a contingency case, she now recalls that at some point, her counsel secured additional funding from a nonprofit organization to offset certain expenses and legal fees.” That funding was from Hoffman’s American Future Republic group. But the coincidences don’t stop there. Recently, Reid Hoffman was found to be a major donor to the primary campaign of Trump’s only remaining competitor: Nimarata ‘Nikki’ Haley. What a small world. Hoffman even bragged to New York Magazine’s Kara Swisher: “I will spend as much as I possibly can … [to beat Trump]”.

Roberta Kaplan sought the opinion of Ashlee Humphreys, who was presented as an expert, to assess the alleged harm inflicted on E. Jean Carroll due to Trump’s consistent denial of the rape allegations. However, during cross-examination, Humphreys confessed to lacking practical experience in reputation repair. Furthermore, an investigation conducted by the National Pulse revealed that Humphreys has a lengthy history of donating to Democratic political groups. Her contributions were made through platforms like “ActBlue,” which facilitated funds for Black Lives Matter, and “Swing Left.” Federal Election Commission records demonstrate her support for candidates, political action committees, and initiatives such as “Stop Republicans.

During the trial, it was also revealed that Carroll had deleted evidence of the alleged death threats she had received. The same death threats that formed part of the jury’s rationale for awarding her nearly $100 million. When Trump lawyer Alina Habba moved for a mistrial on this basis, she was rudely fobbed off by Kaplan. The judge. Not the lawyer. Such behavior was commonplace in the Manhattan courtroom for the trial. Even when it was revealed that Carroll illegally owns a firearm in New York State, the global media paid no mind. Trump, for his part, was barely allowed to say a word when he took the stand. The judge ordered no new evidence be admitted, and no new testimony was allowed. Just as is the case with Trump’s inability to defend himself from rape allegations in public, the judge insisted he was not able to make that claim in court, either. In which case, you might ask, what was the trial’s point? You would be correct to ask the question. The answer, of course, is “show.” Show trials like this are not commonplace in the Western world. But it happened in New York in 2024. And everyone should be wary. If someone can accuse Trump, without evidence, of a crime committed 30 years ago. If the judge demands Trump may not defend himself. If they can get away with a wildly arbitrary number concocted by a lawyer trying to repair her own reputation, and an overtly partisan “expert” who admits no real-world experience in her supposed field of expertise– all against one of the wealthiest and most powerful men in the world. Well, then, think about what they can do to you.