Recent Posts

About that national discussion of sexual assault

by Dog Gone on October 13, 2016

PBS Newshour did an excellent job of covering some of this.

I have been particularly impressed by Kelly Oxford’s social media discussion where women share their experiences with unwanted sexual aggression from men.

And three cheers to the venerable NY Times for their response to Trump and his attorneys when women complained about his ACTIONS, the ones he apparently lied about in the 2nd presidential debate. Trump, via his lawyers, tried to stop the proverbial ‘gray lady’ from telling the corroborated stories of (alleged) Trump victims. The response to a libel suit threat is purely brilliant. Wherever you are when you read this, stand up and cheer for the New York Times and then again for their representative, David E. McCraw.

Dear Mr. Kasowitz:

I write in response to your letter of October 12, 2016 to Dean Baquet concerning your client Donald Trump, the Republican Party nominee for President of the United States. You write concerning our article “Two Women Say Donald Trump Touched Them Inappropriately” and label the article as “libel per se.” You ask that we “remove it from [our] website and issue a full and immediate retraction and apology.” We decline to do so.

The essence of a libel claim, of course, is the protection of one’s reputation. Mr. Trump has bragged about his non-consensual sexual touching of women. He has bragged about intruding on beauty pageant contestants in their dressing rooms. He acquiesced to a radio host’s request to discuss Mr. Trump’s own daughter as a “piece of ass.” Multiple women not mentioned in our article have publicly come forward to report on Mr. Trump’s unwanted advances. Nothing in our article has had the slightest effect on the reputation that Mr. Trump, through his own words and actions, has already created for himself.

But there is a larger and much more important point here. The women quoted in our story spoke out on an issue of national importance — indeed, an issue that Mr. Trump himself discussed with the whole nation watching during Sunday night’s presidential debate. Our reporters diligently worked to confirm the women’s accounts. They provided readers with Mr. Trump’s response, including his forceful denial of the women’s reports. It would have been a disservice not just to our readers but to democracy itself to silence their voices. We did what the law allows: We published newsworthy information about a subject of deep public concern. If Mr. Trump disagrees, if he believes that American citizens had no right to hear what these women had to say and that the law of this country forces us and those who would dare to criticize him to stand silent or be punished, we welcome the opportunity to have a court set him straight.

David E. McCraw

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: