Donald Trump Never Raped His Wife And Even If He Did It Was Classy

Not that it's likely to cause even the least hiccup in his campaign prospects, but here's a whole new Donald Trump mess that's actually old:  the Daily Beast reminds us that during his very classy and completely amicable divorce from Ivana, the former Mrs. Trump accused Donald of raping her. This is not entirely unknown, as the incident is discussed in a 1993 book,  Lost Tycoon: The Many Lives of Donald J. Trump,  by Harry Hurt III, which is really not a porn name at all. The details of the accusation, from a deposition in the divorce case, are sordid and gross, and not only because they involve Donald Trump. Also, the Daily Beast piece informs us that one of Trump's attorneys, Michael Cohen, is one huge asshole; his epic hissy-fit at Daily Beast reporters Tim Mak and Brandy Zadrozny is a story in itself. Will any of it hurt the Trump campaign? Why would it? Trump supporters love him because he's a sociopath, and for all we know, a little rape story could actually boost his popularity since the mean liberal media is beating up on him.

[contextly_sidebar id="VAfytaxqCNCklkXqVhxQTFE127EwIkps"]

So, a condensed version of the gross alleged event in 1989:

After a painful scalp reduction surgery to remove a bald spot, Donald Trump confronted his then-wife, who had previously used the same plastic surgeon.

“Your fucking doctor has ruined me!” Trump cried.

What followed was a “violent assault,” according to Lost Tycoon. Donald held back Ivana’s arms and began to pull out fistfuls of hair from her scalp, as if to mirror the pain he felt from his own operation. He tore off her clothes and unzipped his pants.

And then the rape, which Hurt says Ivana told "several of her closest confidantes" about, specifically saying, "He raped me."

The Daily Beast notes that in 1993, Trump denied that he raped his wife, or that he ever had scalp-reduction surgery, both of which appear to be equally distasteful assertions, calling them "obviously false."

Why would anyone trust an unattractive writer, after all? The really cool stuff comes when the Daily Beast reporters ask Michael Cohen -- consigliere for the Trump Organization (who also thinks Mike Hucakbee was dead-on in saying that with the Iran nuke deal, Obama is both Hitler and Neville Chamberlain) -- about the event, and we learn a whole bunch of neat things about criminal law from Donald Trump's attorney:

“It’s not the word that you’re trying to make it into,” Cohen told The Daily Beast, saying Ivana Trump was talking about how “she felt raped emotionally… She was not referring to it [as] a criminal matter, and not in its literal sense, though there’s many literal senses to the word.”

Cohen added that there is no such thing, legally, as a man raping his wife. “You cannot rape your spouse,” he said. “There’s very clear case law.”

Mak and Zadrozny point out that this is not exactly what you could call "true," in that it is completely incorrect, because New York's " marital rape exemption " was struck down in 1984.

 CNN's story on the incident notes as well that "Marital rape today is illegal in all 50 states and non-consensual sex between spouses does in fact constitute rape."

After delivering that bit of flawless legal interpretation, the Daily Beast reporters say that Cohen went on a charm offensive worthy of his boss:

“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.

We have read that story, and after a quick news scan, it does not in fact appear that either Daily Beast writer has yet been stomped into itty bitty pieces. But they'd better just wait, we guess -- as should everyone who knows them.

When Lost Tycoon was published, Trump's legal team managed to persuade the publisher to include a voluntary statement from Ivana in which she backed away from her deposition in the divorce case, saying that at the time that she felt "violated," but did not want her "words to be interpreted in a literal or criminal sense."

Cohen explained to the reporters Monday that they shouldn't write the story at all, because there was absolutely nothing rapey way back in the past, which was a long time ago, explaining, "There is nothing reasonable about you wanting to write a story about somebody’s usage of the word ‘rape,’ when she’s talking [about how] she didn’t feel emotionally satisfied." He added, "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 then challenged the youngster to go ahead and write his stupid little interweb story because he thinks the reporter's "an idiot" and the Daily Beast is "a joke," and "it’s going to be my absolute pleasure to serve you with a $500 million lawsuit."

It is believed that Cohen then bared his incisors and pounded his chest, then emitted a classic "pant-hoot" challenge before flinging feces at the reporters and departing.

 CNN reports that since the Daily Beast report was published, the Trump campaign has carefully pointed out that despite his frequent television appearances as a "Trump advisor," Cohen is employed by the Trump Organization, not the campaign:

"Mr. Trump speaks for Mr. Trump and nobody but Mr. Trump speaks for him," a campaign source told CNN on Tuesday morning.

A second campaign source toed the same line and pushed back against the notion that Cohen is a surrogate for the campaign.

"He is speaking as someone who has great insight into Mr. Trump's skills as an executive," the source said.

Also, too, Ivana Trump issued a statement explaining that she said a lot of stuff 30 years ago, but for heaven's sake, that was 30 years ago (and also she signed a confidentiality agreement about the divorce):

I have recently read some comments attributed to me from nearly 30 years ago at a time of very high tension during my divorce from Donald. The story is totally without merit. Donald and I are the best of friends and together have raised three children that we love and are very proud of. I have nothing but fondness for Donald and wish him the best of luck on his campaign. Incidentally, I think he would make an incredible president[.]

We checked, and the first letter of each word does not spell out a desperate coded message for help, so we guess she's sincere.

And finally, an actual campaign spokesman explained that there was nothing to the claims in the divorce and the book, because it was all just the normal sort of stuff that people say in highly emotional divorces, especially when they are hysterical gold-digging ladies:

A Trump campaign spokesperson said in a statement that the rape accusation "is old news and it never happened."

"It is a standard lawyer technique, which was used to exploit more money from Mr. Trump especially since he had an ironclad prenuptial agreement," the spokesperson said.

Besides, you should have seen the incredible quality of the sheets on that bed where the alleged rape never happened. Highest thread count known to man, gold leaf on the headboard, and authentic Renaissance art on the walls. Nothing but a class act all around. And there was never a bald spot. You punks say there was a bald spot, and we'll rip your fucking lungs out.

[ Daily Beast / CNN ]