In a heated courtroom showdown, President Trump’s legal team, led by attorney Will Scharf, made compelling arguments before the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit regarding E. Jean Carroll’s case against the former president.

Scharf questioned the credibility of Carroll’s claims, asserting that her allegations were unsupported and implausible, and criticized the introduction of so-called propensity witnesses, whose testimonies, he argued, should have never been allowed to influence the jury’s decision.

“Good morning y’all. My name is Will Scharf. I’m one of President Trump’s attorneys,” Scharf began. “Today we presented oral argument before the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in one of two cases brought against President Trump by E. Jean Carroll. Now it’s really important to remember that E. Jean Carroll’s story at its heart is an utterly implausible he said, she said, story. There is no corroboration for anything she has ever claimed about President Trump… There are no corroborating witnesses.”

Statement from President Trump's Attorney @willscharf: pic.twitter.com/CnO8B8xJu2

— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) September 6, 2024

Trump Fighting For America Collectable Gold Coin - Fight! - Must See

Scharf further criticized the use of testimony from Jessica Leeds and Natasha Stoynoff, claiming these stories were unreliable and unfairly influenced the jury.

“This story should have never been allowed to be presented to the jury… We think that absent that propensity evidence, no fair jury could have reached the verdict that was reached in this case.”

In addition to disputing the evidence presented at trial, Scharf highlighted what he referred to as political motivations behind the lawsuit.

He pointed to the involvement of Democratic donor Reid Hoffman and the alleged coordination with long-time Trump adversary George Conway. “This is a lawsuit that was funded by Reid Hoffman, a key political ally of the Biden-Harris administration,” Scharf explained. “We were prevented from cross-examining E. Jean Carroll on aspects of that dynamic… and that too unfairly corrupted the jury’s deliberations.”

Scharf stressed that the case was an example of the weaponization of the legal system against Trump, alleging, “What we have seen in the last few years is a weaponization by the Biden administration and by their political allies of our legal system and of our courts to unlawfully, unconstitutionally interfere with President Trump’s core First Amendment right to run for president.”

Meanwhile, Trump himself expressed disbelief at the accusations, particularly regarding Leeds’ claims that he assaulted her on a plane. “So many years ago, and I think it would be 1979… maybe the art of the deal was out… but I was well-known, and passengers are coming into the plane, and she said I was making out with her. And then after 15 minutes… she changed her story a couple of times.”

BREAKING: President Trump just nuked one of the women accusing him of sexual assault and dismantled her entire accusation at his press conference in New York

MSM does NOT want you to hear this pic.twitter.com/NA6oEiyrWy

— Drew Hernandez (@DrewHLive) September 6, 2024

Trump was blunt in his assessment of the situation: “I’m famous. I’m in a plane. People are coming into the plane, and I’m looking at a woman, and I grab her and I start kissing her and making out with her. What are the chances of that happening? What are the chances? And frankly… it couldn’t have happened. It didn’t happen. And she would not have been the chosen one.”

With both Scharf and Trump vigorously defending their positions, the case underscores a fierce battle not just in the courtroom, but in the political sphere, as Trump’s legal team continues to push for a reversal of the jury’s decision, arguing that political motivations and improper evidence swayed the trial’s outcome.