Trump’s threat to sue women fits his litigious pattern
At a speech in Gettysburg, Pa., over the weekend that was supposed to be a “closing argument” for his campaign, Donald Trump lit into the women — about a dozen now — who have accused him of sexually predatory behavior, vowing to sue them after the election.
This followed Trump’s recent threats to sue The New York
Times for publishing accounts by some of the women, and for disclosing a portion of his 1995 tax returns that strongly suggested he has avoided paying federal income taxes for years.
Don’t hold your breath waiting for these threatened lawsuits to materialize. Litigation against the women would open up a discovery process that Trump would undoubtedly want to avoid. And legal action against the Times would run up against significant First Amendment protections that news organizations have in publishing matters of public interest involving public figures, not to mention that truth is a defense against libel claims.
But for Trump, lawsuits and threats of lawsuits are a way to deflect negative publicity and certainly fit a pattern. The Republican presidential nominee’s multidecade business career has featured a remarkable amount of litigation, some of it as a tactic for avoiding debts and some of it as a way to intimidate, or retaliate against, his critics in the news media and elsewhere.
A series of USA TODAY Network investigative articles published in June found that Trump has been involved in at least 3,500 lawsuits over the past three decades. No other presidential candidate has had so much entanglement with the courts.
The best known case is the class action suit brought against him by disgruntled former students of Trump University, which prompted Trump to castigate the judge in the case, Gonzalo Curiel, who was born in Indiana of Mexican heritage. But more typical are the many cases brought by people who claim to not have been paid by Trump, and the counter suits that Trump files.
The USA TODAY Network report found at least 60 lawsuits, along with hundreds of liens, judgments and government filings, that involved very small businesses and contract employees who said they were not paid and had little ability to fight back against a Trump litigation machine. These included a glass company, a carpet company, a plumber, multiple painters, real estate brokers, 48 waiters, dozens of bartenders and — ironically — several law firms that had represented him in these suits.
Just as the sheer number of sexual misconduct allegations make it hard to imagine that all of the women are lying, the sheer scope of lawsuits is too great to plausibly argue that all these cases were brought by disgruntled workers or contractors who had done shoddy work. The more likely explanation, which happens to dovetail perfectly with Trump’s six corporate bankruptcies, is that not paying certain bills has long been a part of his business model.
Voters should consider many things when evaluating Trump’s fitness for high office. One is whether he’s an outstanding businessman, or merely someone adept at working the political and legal system to his advantage. Another is whether his claim to be a champion of working men and women rings true.