Politics

By Luc Cohen and Hannah Lang

(Reuters) – Former U.S. President Donald Trump will not testify at a civil trial to challenge claims made by writer E. Jean Carroll that he raped her in the 1990s and later defamed her, after letting a Sunday deadline pass without asking the court to appear.

Trump’s attorney Joseph Tacopina told the judge on Thursday that Trump had waived his right to testify in the trial in Manhattan federal court and opted not to present a defense in the case, gambling that jurors will find that Carroll had failed to make a persuasive case.

In response to a Reuters request for comment, Tacopina said in a statement what Trump’s legal team had already told the court on Thursday, that the former president would not testify in the case.

After the jury left for the day on Thursday, U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan asked Tacopina to inform Trump that he had until Sunday at 5 p.m. EDT (2100 GMT) to tell the court whether he intended to testify.

Kaplan has scheduled closing arguments from the two sides for Monday. Carroll, 79, filed her lawsuit last year against Trump, 76, claiming he raped her in a dressing room at the Bergdorf Goodman department store in Manhattan in 1995 or 1996, and then defamed her by denying it happened. The former Elle magazine advice columnist is seeking unspecified monetary damages.

Trump, who served as president from 2017 to 2021 and is the current frontrunner for the Republican U.S. presidential nomination in 2024, has said Carroll made up the allegation to drive sales of her 2019 memoir.

In a video deposition played for the jury on Wednesday, Trump denied raping Carroll.

“It’s the most ridiculous, disgusting story,” Trump said in the video, hunched over a conference table as Carroll’s lawyers presented documents to him. “It’s just made up.”

(Reporting by Luc Cohen in New York and Hannah Lang in Washington; editing by Diane Craft)

source

(Reuters) – Prosecutors for Georgia’s Fulton County have granted immunity to at least eight people under investigation for conspiring to overturn Georgia’s vote in the 2020 presidential election, according to a court filing on Friday.

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis is expected to disclose this summer whether former President Donald Trump and others will be charged with crimes related to interfering with the 2020 election.

Attorney Kimberly Bourroughs Debrow represented 10 of the 16 suspected fake electors who may have offered to cast electoral college votes for Trump even though Democrat Joe Biden won Georgia and the right to all of the state’s 16 electoral college votes.

Debrow said in a court filing on Friday that prosecutors “made actual, written offers of immunity to these eight electors in April 2023 but not to the remaining two.” That led to the non-immunized clients getting new lawyers, Debrow said in the filing.

Also in the filing, Debrow said, “All eight of the electors who were offered immunity accepted.”

With immunity, those eight would be free to testify against any defendants.

A spokesperson for Willis did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Willis’ probe began soon after a recorded January 2021 phone call in which Trump asked Georgia’s top election official to “find” the votes to reverse Biden’s victory.

Trump, who is seeking the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, has denied wrongdoing and accused Willis, an elected Democrat, of targeting him for political gain.

Trump became the first former U.S. president to face criminal charges when New York prosecutors indicted him on March 30 for allegedly falsifying business records related to hush money payments made to a porn star who claimed to have had an affair with him.

He faces other investigations, including a pair of U.S. Justice Department probes into his handling of classified materials after leaving the White House and his efforts to alter 2020 election results.

(Reporting by Daniel Trotta; Editing by Leslie Adler)

source

By Jacqueline Thomsen and Andrew Goudsward

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. Justice Department asked a federal judge on Friday to sentence Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes to 25 years in prison for his conviction on seditious conspiracy and other charges over the 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol by supporters of former President Donald Trump.

The Justice Department is also seeking a sentence of 21 years for another Oath Keepers leader, Kelly Meggs, who was also found guilty in November of seditious conspiracy by a Washington, D.C., jury.

Rhodes and Meggs are among 10 members of far-right groups found guilty of seditious conspiracy – a plot to oppose the government with force – for their roles in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, which was an attempt to overturn Democratic President Joe Biden’s 2020 election win.

The recommended sentences would be the longest so far for anyone convicted in connection with the Capitol riot. Prosecutors said the defendants “played a central and damning role” in the attack and their conduct was unlike any of the hundreds so far sentenced.

Earlier on Friday, Peter Schwartz, a Pennsylvania man with a lengthy criminal history, was sentenced to more than 14 years in prison for storming the Capitol, the longest prison term handed down so far.

Trump, who is now again seeking the Republican nomination to challenge Biden in 2024, continues to falsely claim that his defeat was the result of fraud.

Rhodes’ lawyer is expected to file his sentencing recommendation later on Friday.

The same Washington jury that convicted Rhodes and Meggs cleared three other co-defendants, Kenneth Harrelson, Jessica Watkins and Thomas Caldwell, of seditious conspiracy. But all five were found guilty of obstruction of an official proceeding – the congressional certification of the election results – with mixed verdicts on a handful of other charges.

Prosecutors said they were seeking 18 years in prison for Watkins, 15 years for Harrelson and 14 years for Caldwell.

A lawyer for Caldwell asked the judge to impose no additional prison time and instead credit time he has served on home confinement.

A lawyer for Watkins was due to file a recommended sentence later on Friday. Harrelson was given until Monday to file his recommendation with the court.

The charges of seditious conspiracy and obstruction of an official proceeding each carry a sentence of up to 20 years in prison. Sentences are left to the discretion of federal judges and are typically based on factors like past criminal history and the seriousness of the crime.

All five are scheduled to be sentenced later this month.

Four other members of the Oath Keepers were convicted in January of seditious conspiracy for their roles in the attack. They are awaiting sentence.

Another federal jury on Thursday convicted former Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio and three other members of that far-right group of seditious conspiracy, but acquitted a fifth defendant on that count.

Five people including a police officer died during or shortly after the riot and more than 140 police officers were injured. The Capitol suffered millions of dollars in damage.

Of the more than 1,000 people who have so far been arrested on charges related to the riot, more than 525 have pleaded guilty and more than 65 have been found guilty, according to the Justice Department.

(Reporting by Jacqueline Thomsen and Andrew Goudsward; Writing by Jasper Ward; Editing by Caitlin Webber, Scott Malone and Leslie Adler)

source

(Reuters) – Florida’s Senate on Thursday passed a bill that will allow a tourism board appointed by Governor Ron DeSantis to cancel development agreements its predecessor body signed, the latest salvo against the Walt Disney Co from the conservative leader.

Under the bill, which now goes to DeSantis for signing into law, the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District board, appointed by DeSantis to oversee development in and around Disney’s theme parks, can cancel agreements that were signed up to three months before the board’s creation.

The board was formed by Florida’s legislature in February. It replaced the Reedy Creek Improvement District as the body overseeing the 25,000 acres surrounding the Walt Disney World resort.

Disney did not reply to a request for comment on the bill.

Disney, the largest employer in central Florida, and DeSantis, a Republican, have been feuding since last year, when Disney criticized a state measure banning classroom discussion of sexuality and gender identity with younger children.

DeSantis, who is expected to soon declare his candidacy for U.S. president, has repeatedly attacked “woke Disney” in public remarks.

Disney last month filed a lawsuit in federal court, accusing DeSantis of illegally using state power to punish the company for exercising its free speech rights.

The Central Florida Tourism Oversight District board responded with its own lawsuit in a state court this week, saying it sought to void “backroom deals” favorable to Disney.

(Reporting by Brad Brooks in Lubbock, Texas; Editing by Mary Milliken and Sonali Paul)

source

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -U.S. President Joe Biden sharply criticized ‘MAGA’ Republicans for their refusal to vote in a higher federal debt ceiling, signaling that there would be little compromise from the White House at a key May 9 meeting with congressional leaders.

Republicans are “divided” on the debt ceiling, Biden said, speaking ahead of a meeting on U.S. investment at the White House, and so-called MAGA Republicans are pushing “draconian” cuts in the budget.

“The last thing this country needs … is a manufactured crisis,” he said.

Biden criticized House Republicans for threatening not to raise the debt limit unless Biden and Democrats agree to steep cuts in the upcoming budget. “The two are totally unrelated. When you pay the debt or not it doesn’t have a damn thing to do with what your budget” is, he said.

Republicans and Democrats should be “debating our vision of the future” in front of the American people, he said. The May 9 meeting at the White House, with Republican House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and top Democrats kicks off a frantic few weeks of negotiation before the U.S. runs out of money to pay its bills as soon as June 1.

(Reporting by Trevor Hunnicutt; Writing by Heather Timmons; Editing by Andrea Ricci)

source

By Joseph Ax and Brad Brooks

(Reuters) – Florida Governor Ron DeSantis on Friday signed a bill into law that gives a new board he controls the power to void development agreements its predecessor body signed with Disney – the latest episode in a feud between the conservative governor and the entertainment giant.

Under the bill, which passed the Republican-controlled legislature largely along party lines, the Central Tourism Oversight District Board – whose members are appointed by DeSantis – can cancel any deals signed up to three months before the board’s creation.

The legislature formed the board in February to replace the Disney-controlled Reedy Creek Improvement District to oversee development in the 25,000 acres (10,120 hectares) surrounding Walt Disney World, effectively wresting control from the company and handing it to DeSantis.

The Walt Disney Co, the largest employer in central Florida, and the Republican governor have been battling since last year, when Disney criticized a new state law banning classroom instruction of sexuality and gender identity with younger children.

DeSantis, who is expected to declare his candidacy for U.S. president in coming weeks, has repeatedly attacked “woke Disney” in public remarks, characterizing it as liberal.

Before DeSantis’ appointees took over the board, the company pushed through changes to the special tax district agreement that limited the new body’s action for decades.

The new oversight body in April said Disney’s plans for potential expansion of Disney World did not comply with state law, and declared that agreement void.

Disney filed a lawsuit in federal court the same day, accusing DeSantis of illegally using government power to punish the company for exercising its free speech rights.

The Central Florida Tourism Oversight District board responded with its own lawsuit in a state court, saying it sought to void “backroom deals” favorable to Disney.

(Reporting by Brad Brooks and Joseph Ax; editing by Jonathan Oatis)

source

By Richard Cowan

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – A fresh push for a bipartisan immigration overhaul, coupled with enhanced border security, is emerging in the U.S. Congress, as thousands of migrants amass across the border in Mexico ahead of the end of COVID-era border restrictions next week.

The latest among those efforts is a last-minute legislative push that would grant U.S. border authorities similar expulsion powers allowed under the expiring COVID restrictions – known as Title 42 – for a period of two years, according to a congressional office involved in the talks.

Title 42 began under Republican former President Donald Trump in 2020 at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic and allows U.S. authorities to expel migrants to Mexico without the chance to seek asylum. The order is set to lift on May 11 when the COVID health emergency officially ends.

But many Republicans and some Democrats, particularly in border areas, fear the end of the order will lead to a rise in migration that authorities are poorly equipped to face. A top border official recently told lawmakers that migrant crossings could jump to 10,000 per day after May 11, nearly double the daily average in March.

Senators Kyrsten Sinema, an Arizona independent, and Thom Tillis, a North Carolina Republican, are leading the effort to temporarily extend border expulsions. The pair view it as a short-term fix while they work on broader immigration reform, Sinema spokesperson Hannah Hurley said.

“This is squarely about the immediate crisis with the end of Title 42,” Hurley said.

Separately, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives plans to pass a package of border security measures next week to place tougher constraints on asylum-seekers, resume construction of a wall along the southwest border with Mexico, and expand federal law enforcement.

Many are seeking more sweeping change – but their hopes have been dashed in the past.

It has been 37 years since Congress passed significant immigration reform, but a persistently high volume of migrants and an acute labor shortage have galvanized lawmakers. Republicans also cite the flow of illegal drugs into the United States through ports of entry as reason to harden border security.

While some Democrats characterize the House border legislation as inhumane, several Democratic and Republican senators said they eagerly await such a bill.

Tillis, who is pushing both the short-term legislative fix for Title 42’s end and a wider package of reforms, said a House-passed bill would be “something we can build on.”

“It gives us some room to gain the support we need in the Senate” for broader legislation, he said, adding it could take two to three months to construct a compromise. But senators had no illusions this would be an easy task.

Dick Durbin, the No. 2 Senate Democrat, said the House bill would provide clues on Republicans’ intent. He added that in conversations with fellow senators, “One of the first things they say is ‘well if the House starts the conversation I think we can get somewhere.’ We’ll see.”

Since a 1986 immigration reform package, which resulted in some 3 million immigrants winning legal status, Congress repeatedly has failed to update the nation’s policies.

Around 11 million unauthorized immigrants in the United States could have a stake in the outcome of this latest effort, along with U.S. businesses hungry for workers.

To succeed in the Democrat-controlled Senate, it would need 60 senators from across both parties to back it, as well as win the support of the Republican-controlled House.

“A high-wire act,” is how Republican Senator John Cornyn from border state Texas portrayed it, adding it was “the only path forward.”

STARS ALIGNING

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the nation’s largest business association, has launched a campaign urging Congress to act. It was endorsed by 400 groups, ranging from the American Farm Bureau Federation to the U.S. Travel Association.

Republican-controlled states see their farming, ranching, food processing and manufacturing businesses begging for workers, a void that immigrants could fill if not for Washington’s clunky visa system.

Finally, passage of an immigration bill coupled with beefed-up border security could boost President Joe Biden’s re-election campaign and give Republican candidates something to cheer, too.

The House bill would deal with some of the five “buckets” in the Tillis-Sinema effort, according to a Senate source familiar with their work.

Overall, they include a modernization of the plodding asylum system, improvements to how visas are granted, and measures to more effectively authorize immigrants, be they laborers and healthcare workers or doctors and engineers, to fill American jobs.

There is also the fate of 580,000 “Dreamers” enrolled in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, who were brought illegally into the United States as children.

Republicans have blocked their path to citizenship for two decades, arguing that would encourage more to take the dangerous journey to the border.

Senators acknowledge some of their goals might have to be abandoned to achieve a “sweet spot.” But which ones?

Democratic Senator Chris Murphy, who won passage last year of the first major gun control bill in about three decades, did so in part by recognizing that a too ambitious bill is a recipe for failure.

Murphy was asked how the difficulty of winning immigration legislation stacks up to other recent battles, such as gun control, gay marriage and infrastructure investments.

“It’s an 11 on a scale of 10.”

(Reporting by Richard Cowan; additional reporting by Ted Hesson; Editing by Mary Milliken, Mica Rosenberg, Diane Craft and Rosalba O’Brien)

source

By Jason Lange and Nathan Layne

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – A group allied with Donald Trump’s bid for the 2024 Republican nomination is setting records for outside political spending early in a U.S. presidential campaign as he looks to box out his nearest rival Ron DeSantis before the Florida governor even launches a campaign.

The Trump-aligned Make America Great Again Inc group, known as MAGA Inc, spent more than $7 million in the first four months of 2023 on television ads attacking DeSantis, disclosures to the Federal Election Commission show.

That is far more than the roughly $4 million that all outside political groups, known as super PACs, spent in support of presidential candidates at the same point in the 2020 election cycle and vastly higher than the less-than-$1 million spent at the same point of the 2016 cycle.

The heavy spending shows the threat the former president’s camp sees in DeSantis, who is expected to launch a run for the Republican nomination in the coming weeks. A Reuters/Ipsos poll last week showed Trump leading DeSantis 50%-24% among Republican registered voters.

“They’re trying to crush anybody who gets some momentum,” said Mike DuHaime, a Republican strategist.

So far this year, super PACs have spent more than $12 million, about three times as much as four years earlier, according to public disclosures.

The outlays suggest an aggressive cycle ahead for spending by super PACs, who helped drive about $1 billion in independent spending in the 2020 presidential contest. By comparison, the campaigns of Trump and Democratic President Joe Biden spent about $2 billion combined.

TRANSFERS QUESTIONED

Registered as a super PAC, MAGA Inc is allowed to raise and spend unlimited sums supporting candidates as long as it doesn’t coordinate spending with their campaigns.

Some campaign finance law experts accuse the former president of breaking laws by funding MAGA Inc’s spending with at least $60 million he raised for a separate group called Save America that by law is barred from financing any Trump campaign.

“Trump’s camp has a clear motivation to spend early and spend quite a bit,” said Saurav Ghosh of the Campaign Legal Center, a nonpartisan watchdog. “I don’t think they would be able to do that without the illegal transfers.”

The watchdog in November filed a legal complaint with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) arguing that MAGA Inc was not independent of Trump’s campaign after taking money from Save America, the fundraising group Trump created after losing the 2020 presidential election.

The FEC has not yet acted on the case, and with its leadership split evenly between Republicans and Democrats, experts consider it unlikely to do so.

Steven Cheung, a Trump campaign spokesman, dismissed the Campaign Legal Center’s arguments, calling the organization “a Democrat group.”

MAGA Inc spokesman Alex Pfeiffer declined to answer questions about the group’s independence from Trump, saying it was not a party in the FEC complaint.

Save America gave MAGA Inc $60 million ahead of the November midterm elections. But some $40 million of Save America’s transfers were made after the super PAC had largely wrapped up its midterm spending, and MAGA Inc reported having $54 million in cash as of Dec. 31.

It has not yet disclosed details on its income or cash balance this year.

MAGA Inc’s commercials hammer DeSantis for votes he cast a decade ago as a U.S. representative in favor of reducing spending on Social Security pensions and Medicare health insurance for the elderly, and poked fun at him over an unsubstantiated rumor he ate chocolate pudding with his fingers.

“Voters need to understand Ron DeSantis’ past support for cutting Social Security and Medicare benefits,” Pfeiffer said.

Asked about the commercial’s latter attack, DeSantis said in a television interview, “Is that really the best you’ve got? OK, bring it on!”

DeSantis has a roughly $85 million political war chest, currently held in a state account that federal law would block him from spending on a presidential run. Campaign finance law specialists say they fear DeSantis could emulate Trump by transferring some of those funds into a federally registered super PAC to support his expected presidential campaign.

“It’s deeply concerning when we have these anti-coordination rules on the books and, election after election, people walk right up to that line and walk over that line,” said Michael Beckel, research director at Issue One, a nonpartisan campaign finance reform advocacy group.

(Reporting by Jason Lange in Washington and Nathan Layne in Wilton, Connecticut; Editing by Scott Malone and Mark Porter)

source

By Andy Sullivan and Moira Warburton

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -A Republican plan to cut federal spending in exchange for lifting the U.S. government’s debt ceiling would lower employment, slow economic growth and “meaningfully increase” the likelihood of a recession, Moody’s Analytics’ chief economist told a Senate committee on Thursday.

Mark Zandi told the Senate Budget Committee that U.S. GDP growth would be 1.61% in 2024 if the Republican plan were enacted, compared with 2.23% otherwise, and lead to 790,000 fewer jobs.

Republicans are pressing Democratic President Joe Biden to agree to spending cuts as a condition for raising the United States’ self-imposed $31.4 trillion debt ceiling. Biden and his fellow Democrats insist Congress should raise the cap without conditions.

The United States could run out of money to pay its bills as soon as June 1 if Congress does not act, according to Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen.

Zandi said the government is most likely to hit that limit on June 8, though he said it could happen any time between June 1 and Aug. 8.

“We need to end this drama as quickly as possible. If we don’t, we’ll go into a recession and our fiscal problems will be made even worse,” Zandi told the committee.

The hearing is the first of several planned by Senate Democrats, who say legislation that passed the Republican-controlled House of Representatives last week on a party-line vote would undercut child care, education and other government programs.

Republicans say the cuts are needed to slow the growth of the U.S. debt, which has jumped sharply as Washington spent trillions on COVID-19 relief.

Biden is due to meet with House Speaker Kevin McCarthy and other top lawmakers at the White House on Tuesday. The standoff is worrying investors, who have pushed yields on as much as $650 billion of Treasury securities maturing in the first half of June to record highs after Yellen’s announcement.

The Senate so far has not played a role in the standoff. Republicans have lined up behind the House proposal. Democrats say they might try to pass a “clean” debt ceiling hike, but that would be unlikely to win enough Republican votes for passage.

Still, the hearings will provide the sort of legislative scrutiny that did not take place in the House, where the package was quickly passed after being assembled by its leadership behind closed doors.

The centerpiece of the House Republican plan would scale back a wide swath of annual government spending to last year’s levels, a cut of about 8%, and cap its growth by 1% each year after that.

The Republican plan does not specify how individual programs would fare. Democrats have argued that domestic spending would take the biggest hit, as Republicans would try to protect military and veterans programs.

(Reporting by Andy Sullivan; Editing by Scott Malone and Jonathan Oatis)

source

By Jonathan Stempel and Jack Queen

NEW YORK (Reuters) -E. Jean Carroll, the writer accusing Donald Trump of rape and defamation, on Monday denied making up her claims to drive publicity for her memoir.

Testifying in Manhattan federal court after the judge denied Trump’s request for a mistrial, Carroll said she wasn’t seeking attention through appearances on TV and podcasts, while acknowledging they were an important driver of book sales.

Carroll also resisted efforts by Trump’s lawyer Joe Tacopina to show she experienced no suffering because, as Trump has claimed, the rape did not happen.

She said she hides her inner suffering in her role as an advice columnist, and that going to parties related to her lawsuits against Trump and stating publicly she was doing “fabulous” didn’t mean she was lying about him.

“In this courtroom, I’m being forced to tell the truth,” she told Tacopina on her third and final day of testimony, including two under cross-examination.

Carroll, 79, says Trump, 76, raped her in a Bergdorf Goodman department store dressing room in late 1995 or early 1996, and then tarred her reputation and career by lying about it online.

Her defamation claim concerns an October 2022 post on Trump’s Truth Social platform, where Trump called the former Elle magazine advice columnist’s case a “complete con job” and “a Hoax and a lie.”

Carroll used to write for Elle magazine, and is now at Substack.

The rape claim was included in her memoir, “What Do We Need Men For? A Modest Proposal,” excerpts of which were published in New York magazine in June 2019.

Carroll is seeking unspecified damages in her civil lawsuit.

She is suing Trump separately for defamation after he denied her claims, using similar language, after the book excerpts were published.

Trump has not attended the trial, now in its fourth day. On Monday, he was in Scotland to visit his golf courses there.

TRUMP LAWYER SEEKS MISTRIAL, ACCUSES JUDGE OF BIAS

In seeking a mistrial, Tacopina sent an 18-page letter early on Monday accusing U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan of bias against Trump.

Tacopina said several “unfair and prejudicial” rulings by Kaplan reflected a “deeper leaning” toward Carroll, including comments where the judge “openly expresses favoritism.”

Trump is leading the Republican field in the 2024 presidential race.

Tacopina said Kaplan, an appointee of Democratic President Bill Clinton, should have let him question Carroll about why she did not seek security camera footage of the alleged rape.

He also challenged Kaplan’s statement that Trump might be “sailing in harm’s way” after his son Eric Trump discussed on Twitter how LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman was helping fund Carroll’s case.

Kaplan ruled last Wednesday that Trump’s lawyers could not mention Hoffman at the trial, calling it “unfairly prejudicial.”

Requests for mistrials often fail, but form a basis for eventual appeals.

Because Carroll’s case is civil, she must establish her claims by a preponderance of the evidence, meaning more likely than not, and need not meet the tougher criminal standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

ASHAMED AT FIRST TO COME FORWARD, CARROLL SAYS

Carroll had told jurors last Wednesday that Trump put his fingers into her vagina, which she called “extremely painful, extremely painful,” and then inserted his penis.

In Monday’s cross-examination, Carroll acknowledged not following her own advice to readers that they tell police if they are crime victims, after Tacopina questioned why she did not after encountering Trump.

“Listen, I was ashamed of what happened,” Carroll said. “I thought it was my fault.”

She said it was not until 2017, when the #MeToo movement began, that she finally began to “realize some really terrible things that I did not want to face.”

Tacopina asked why Carroll did not sue former CBS chief executive Les Moonves for defamation after he publicly denied her claim in her memoir that he once tried to sexually assault her.

Carroll responded that Moonves’ denial was more straightforward than Trump’s.

“He didn’t grind my face into the mud the way Donald Trump did,” Carroll said.

Trump’s lawyers have not said publicly whether he plans to testify. They have identified only one possible defense witness, the psychiatrist Edgar Nace, other than Trump.

Testimony is expected to resume on Tuesday.

Carroll’s witness list includes two friends with whom she spoke shortly after the alleged rape, two other women who have said Trump assaulted them, and a professor who could help jurors estimate Carroll’s damages.

Several women have accused Trump of sexual misconduct. He has denied their allegations.

(Reporting by Jack Queen and Jonathan Stempel in New York, Editing by Nick Zieminski and Howard Goller)

source