Shortly after appearing in court for an appeal of a decision that found him liable for sexual abuse, Donald Trump stepped in front of television cameras Friday and brought up a string of past allegations of other acts of sexual misconduct, potentially reminding voters of incidents that were little-known or forgotten.

At times, he seemed to relish using graphic language and characterizations of the case brought by advice columnist E. Jean Carroll, which could expose the former president to further legal challenges from Carroll’s attorneys. His remarks were especially striking given that they came four days before Trump will debate Vice President Kamala Harris, with early voting about to begin in some parts of the country and Election Day just two months away.

Trump’s trying to seize the political offensive by bringing up allegations against him recalled 2016 when, in the weeks before Election Day, he attempted to dismiss as simple “locker room talk” a recording of him bragging about grabbing, forcibly kissing and sexually assaulting women, which triggered subsequent allegations of misconduct by a string of women.

The former president also repeatedly implied he would not have assaulted two of his accusers due to their looks. He said of a woman who has accused him of sexual misconduct on a plane in the 1970s “she would not have been the chosen one,” and of Carroll, “I never touched her. I would have had no interest in meeting her in any way, shape or form.”

    • Maeve@kbin.earth
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      The people to whom he’s pandering see it as a positive.

      ETA: he’s gambling. It’s a calculated risk, and he knows if he doesn’t get appointed by the EC elected again, he may very well have real consequences of charged criminal activity. Intuitive intelligence is a gift, and as much as it may pain some of us to admit it, he intuitively knows how to play his base.

      • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        2 months ago

        Trump couldn’t calculate 2+2, or 1+1.

        He’s not some mad genius pandering to the crowds. This is just who he is. a nacriscistic asshole who sees nothing wrong with raping children.

        and if he were really that calculating, he’d realize that his election is going to be won and lost by the voters that choose not to turn out to vote. On the Harris side, you’ve got the anti-genocide crowd (and a few others,) on the trump side, you got the… uh… well there’s a lot of things to be anti-trump about…

        • Maeve@kbin.earth
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          2 months ago

          Intuitive: Of, relating to, or arising from intuition: synonym: instinctive

          • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            2 months ago

            /golfclap.

            he’s not pandering. this isn’t calculated. this isn’t some grand strategy.

            he’s literally a child-rapist, a thief. a connman. an insurrectionist. a fascist. an ignorant, stupid fucked up asshole. a bigot. there’s more but i think you get the idea.

            This is who he is and his core base love him for it.

            The rest of the world? not so much. and if he were truly calculating it, he’d realize his core base would vote for him no matter what, so there’s no need to pander to them.

      • rayyy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        2 months ago

        he intuitively knows how to play his base

        All con-men know how to play their marks - it’s a skill they hone for years. He has done it with women all his life. Probably works fabulously on all those MAGA men’s minds.

  • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    2 months ago

    Juries now have twice now awarded Carroll huge sums

    Can we please pay someone to copy edit major publications? No? Fine.

    • MirthfulAlembic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      I know. This is one of my major pet peeves, that even major publications seem to skip copy editing. I’ll forgive it in an independent journalist’s substack, but not much more.

  • Valmond@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    So it’s a deflection strategy, think about misogyny (which his base doesn’t care much about) instead of important things that will be debated.

    You know, he’s not stupid he just plays it that way (or if he is, hes staff isn’t), there is always a reason.