Trump & E. Jean Carroll Verdict

U.S. Media

•

14 days

Summary

sources
13
Narrative Items
14
Bottom Line Up Front

13 sources in U.S. Media are amplifying 14 narrative items relating to the narrative that the Justice Department's intervention in E. Jean Carroll's defamation case against Donald Trump raises questions about accountability and the limits of presidential immunity. This theme connects to broader discussions on justice, power dynamics, and the implications of legal precedents.

Reviewing a number of the most relevant narrative items indicates that Above the Law is portraying the Justice Department's recent action in E. Jean Carroll's defamation case against former President Donald Trump with a sense of skepticism. The article emphasizes the DOJ's "unprecedented" attempt to step in as a substitute defendant, highlighting the negative light cast upon the government's intervention given prior court rulings that dismissed this argument. The language employed is notably critical, using phrases like "government overreach" to suggest a possible bias towards upholding judicial integrity over political interests. In contrast to other sources, which may adopt a more neutral tone regarding the legal complexities, Above the Law focuses on the implications for accountability and justice. This coverage raises important questions for readers about the legitimacy of such moves and the broader implications for the legal system, thus aligning their interests with those concerned about the rule of law and the power dynamics at play in high-profile defamation cases.

About This Module

The U.S. Media module tracks a broad range of American media sources, including major television, cable, print, and online organizations.

View More
View Less

Sources

Sources by Type
Sources of these types represent most of the amplification activity around this narrative
sources by Volume
These sources are amplifying the most items involved in this narrative. Click to see details of each source's narrative activity.
Top sources
Day-by-day volumetric activity of sources amplifying the most items around this narrative
AlterNet
14% of the items in this brief were amplified by this source.
NewzJunky
7% of the items in this brief were amplified by this source.
The 19th News
7% of the items in this brief were amplified by this source.
Raw Story
7% of the items in this brief were amplified by this source.
Above the Law
7% of the items in this brief were amplified by this source.
Business Insider
7% of the items in this brief were amplified by this source.
Chicago Sun-Times
7% of the items in this brief were amplified by this source.
Atlanta Black Star
7% of the items in this brief were amplified by this source.
The Bulwark
7% of the items in this brief were amplified by this source.
Bizpac Review
7% of the items in this brief were amplified by this source.
View More
View Less

Top Items

These narrative items are the most relevant and/or the most amplified. Click to see details and suggested messages.
Amplifiers:
Above the Law
abovethelaw.com
Trump DOJ *Still* Trying To Grab E. Jean Carroll By The Process
The Justice Department is again attempting to substitute itself as the defendant in E. Jean Carroll's defamation case against Donald Trump, claiming he acted within his official capacity. This is despite previous court rulings rejecting this argument and a jury finding Trump liable. The move, if successful, could potentially nullify the $83 million judgment against Trump.
Amplifiers:
Yahoo! News
yahoo.com
Trump’s Justice Department Steps In for Him on E. Jean Carroll Appeal
The Justice Department is intervening in E. Jean Carroll's defamation lawsuit against Donald Trump, arguing the Westfall Act grants him immunity for statements made while president. They claim Trump's 2019 denials of Carroll's sexual assault accusation were within the scope of his duties. Carroll's attorney counters that this immunity doesn't apply.
Amplifiers:
NewzJunky
cbsnews.com
Justice Department effort to step in for Trump in E. Jean Carroll case “nearly 2 years too late,” her lawyers say
E. Jean Carroll's lawyers argue the Justice Department's attempt to shield Trump in her $83.3 million defamation case is two years late, violating the Westfall Act's "before trial" stipulation. They contend Trump missed deadlines to claim immunity and that substituting the government now is unfair. The DOJ claims Trump's actions were within his presidential duties.
Amplifiers:
AlterNet
alternet.org
Here’s how Trump aims to make taxpayers foot the bill for his E. Jean Carroll settlement
The Justice Department is helping Donald Trump appeal a $5 million sexual abuse and defamation judgment, shifting legal fees to taxpayers. This follows a prior attempt to substitute the US as defendant, rejected by a judge who ruled Trump acted personally. The current DOJ argues it must defend the President's actions, even those deemed personal.
Amplifiers:
Bizpac Review
bizpacreview.com
Megyn Kelly points out AOC is setting herself up for defamation suit, suggests Trump ‘pay attention’
Megyn Kelly argues that Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's repeated accusations of rape against Donald Trump are defamatory and could result in a costly lawsuit. Kelly cites a similar case where ABC News paid $15 million to settle a defamation suit. Kelly suggests Trump should sue Ocasio-Cortez to set a precedent, though she acknowledges he may have other priorities.
Amplifiers:
Raw Story
rawstory.com
DOJ intervenes for Trump as he fights E Jean Carroll's civil judgment: report
The Department of Justice is intervening in E. Jean Carroll's $83 million defamation lawsuit against Donald Trump, arguing presidential immunity under the Westfall Act applies to statements Trump made while in office. Trump denies Carroll's rape allegation, and the case is separate from other ongoing legal battles against him.
Amplifiers:
Free Republic
freerepublic.com
Alan Dershowitz Explains Why Central Park Five ‘Will Regret’ Filing Suit Against Trump
Alan Dershowitz believes the Central Park Five's defamation lawsuit against Donald Trump is risky. He argues the case is legally weak, potentially exposing details about their past actions, especially given some plaintiffs' political ambitions. Dershowitz predicts they will regret pursuing the lawsuit.
Amplifiers:
Atlanta Black Star
atlantablackstar.com
‘Why Do You Have to Touch Everything’: Trump Accused of Inappropriate Behavior Toward VP’s Wife as He Looks Her Up and Down and Rubs Her Back In Shocking Video
A resurfaced video shows President Trump touching Second Lady Usha Vance's back, sparking outrage on social media. Critics cite this as another example of his history of inappropriate behavior towards women, connecting it to past accusations and legal battles. The incident reignited conversations about Trump's conduct and its implications for his presidency.
Amplifiers:
Business Insider
businessinsider.com
Diddy's big pretrial win limits testimony about alleged abuse defense called 'far worse' than freak offs
A judge partially barred testimony from two new accusers in Diddy's sex trafficking trial, allowing only one to testify. The judge denied Diddy's request for a trial delay and a longer juror questionnaire but granted him access to a witness's memoir drafts and raw footage from a docuseries. Diddy's defense argued the additional accusers' testimony was inflammatory and irrelevant.
Amplifiers:
The Bulwark
thebulwark.com
Donald Trump Has a Family Policy. Stop Laughing.
The Trump administration's purported family policy, including "baby bonuses" and IVF subsidies, is hypocritical, given its members' disregard for women and family values. Their focus seems less on genuine family support and more on increasing the white birthrate. Past attempts at incentivizing childbirth in other countries have yielded poor results, suggesting the Trump administration's approach is unlikely to succeed and could even be harmful.
View More

Entities

Tap or click for details
These entities are mentioned most frequently in the narratives highlighted in this brief. Click to see details of narrative activity related to each one.
People
E. Jean Carroll
The plaintiff in the defamation case against Donald Trump.
Donald Trump
The former President of the United States and defendant in the defamation case.
Justice Department
The U.S. federal executive department responsible for enforcing the law and administration of justice.
Decisions
Substitution of Defendant
The Justice Department's decision to attempt to substitute itself as the defendant.
Appeal of Court Rulings
The potential for the Justice Department to appeal previous court rulings.
Events
Defamation Case
The legal case brought by E. Jean Carroll against Donald Trump.
Judgment Nullification Attempt
The Justice Department's attempt to substitute itself as the defendant to nullify the judgment.
Reactions
Court Rulings
Previous decisions by the court rejecting the Justice Department's argument.
Jury Verdict
The jury's finding that Donald Trump was liable in the defamation case.
People
E. Jean Carroll
The plaintiff in the defamation case against Donald Trump.
Donald Trump
The former President of the United States and defendant in the defamation case.
Justice Department
The U.S. federal executive department responsible for enforcing the law and administration of justice.
Decisions
Substitution of Defendant
The Justice Department's decision to attempt to substitute itself as the defendant.
Appeal of Court Rulings
The potential for the Justice Department to appeal previous court rulings.
Events
Defamation Case
The legal case brought by E. Jean Carroll against Donald Trump.
Judgment Nullification Attempt
The Justice Department's attempt to substitute itself as the defendant to nullify the judgment.
Reactions
Court Rulings
Previous decisions by the court rejecting the Justice Department's argument.
Jury Verdict
The jury's finding that Donald Trump was liable in the defamation case.

Context

The ongoing legal battle involving E. Jean Carroll and Donald Trump highlights significant social and political dynamics in the United States. The case revolves around allegations of defamation stemming from Trump's public statements regarding Carroll's accusations of sexual assault. This situation underscores broader societal issues related to gender, power, and accountability, particularly in the context of high-profile figures.

Demographically, the case reflects the ongoing challenges women face in seeking justice and recognition in instances of sexual misconduct. The legal proceedings have sparked public discourse on the treatment of survivors and the implications of defamation laws, especially when powerful individuals are involved.

Economically, the potential nullification of the $83 million judgment against Trump could have ramifications for public trust in the legal system and its ability to hold influential figures accountable. This situation may also influence political landscapes, as Trump's actions and the Justice Department's involvement could affect public perception and voter sentiment ahead of future elections.

Geographically, the case is situated within a broader context of American legal and political frameworks, where the intersection of law and politics often leads to contentious debates. The Justice Department's attempt to intervene raises questions about the separation of powers and the role of government in private legal matters.

From a national security perspective, the implications of this case extend to the integrity of democratic institutions. The perception of justice being served—or thwarted—can impact public confidence in governance and the rule of law, which are essential for maintaining social order and stability. Overall, this case encapsulates the complexities of American society, where legal, social, and political issues intertwine.
View More
View Less
World Events
Tap or roll over dots to see representative headlines
Stock & Crypto Dynamics