Donald Trump’s lawyer on Thursday said new revelations that a major contributor to Democrats helped finance a lawsuit accusing former President of rape is fresh reason to delay this month’s trial for a month. Responding to the development, the accuser’s attorney claims Trump just wants to avoid trial.
The request by attorney Alina Habba is the second time this week that a Trump lawyer has asked to delay the April 25 trial resulting from a lawsuit in which a columnist says Trump raped her in 1996 in a upscale Manhattan department store dressing room.
Earlier this week, Trump attorney Joe Tacopina asked for a one-month delay, saying adverse publicity over Trump’s arrest last week on criminal charges in New York state court made a delay necessary.
Trump has denied that he rapedaccuser and has accused the former longtime Elle magazine columnist and her lawyer of being politically driven after accuser disclosed her claims for the first time publicly in a 2019 memoir while Trump was still president.
In her letter Thursday, Habba said accuser’s lawyers had disclosed for the first time this week that they had received funding from American Future Republic, a social welfare organization funded by Reid Hoffman, the co-founder of LinkedIn.
Habba wrote that the revelation raises significant questions about accuser’s credibility and motives for suing Trump in November after New York state enacted a law allowing victims to sue those who committed sexual abuse against them, even if it happened decades ago.
She said it also goes to the heart of Trump’s defense because he has consistently labeled accuser’s claims a “con job” and a “hoax” and has questioned whether she is pushing a political agenda or being funded by a rival political party.
Hoffman did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Roberta Kaplan, the accuser’s lawyer, responded in a letter to the court Thursday, asking the judge to deny Trump’s latest bid for a delay to the trial.
“One thing is clear — Trump will stop at nothing to avoid having a jury hear accuser’s claims,” she wrote.
Kaplan said her client was preparing for trial recently when she recalled hearing that her lawyers, who were operating on a contingency fee basis, had also secured funding from a nonprofit organization. accuser’s lawyers then notified Trump’s lawyers, who demanded to know the source of the funding.
Meanwhile, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals released a written opinion Thursday providing additional legal insight that the 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals can use to decide if the United States can be substituted for Trump as the defendant in a defamation lawsuit accuser filed before her November rape lawsuit.
The 2nd Circuit had asked the DC court to provide insight into the law addressing when an employer should be liable for the actions of its employee.
The DC court said it lacked facts to recommend whether it believed that allegedly libelous statements Trump made after accuser rape claims became public fell within the scope of his employment as president.
It did attempt to clarify the law, though it noted that most of its case law on the subject pertained to disputes over whether law enforcement individuals could be held personally liable.
The defamation lawsuit eventually will be dismissed if the United States is substituted as a defendant, and a trial might become unnecessary otherwise because the November rape lawsuit also contains a defamation claim against Trump.
